Scavenger hunt. List of things you had to do and film for points. Winning team got $1000. Didn't win though.
Part of the reason this story has been so widely shared is that Mr Smith's attitude is just so perfectly representative of the angry left. They are arrogant, condescending bullies who want to limit free speech and promote intolerance. Robert Gibbs, David Plouffe, David Axelrod are all perfect examples... and the sad reality is that these guys have BrokeB'ackObama's ear.
wrong again. but there are some great representatives who oppose same sex marriage in the Chick Fil A thread (which this should be posted in)
Maybe it's because I've read the story a couple of times before actually watching the video, but I'm having a hard time seeing what is so bad about what this guy did? He wasn't confrontational. Frankly, he wasn't even rude. He was extremely calm, and calmly expressed his position. I think this is as much a part of this guy's point as just being upset about the company supports "hate". This being that if you work somewhere that supports the anti-gay movement, and you don't, you've got to stand up and not be a hypocrite. I have no idea what this lady's beliefs were. And I certainly respect the fact that employment is a nice thing. But if I worked somewhere and they came out with an announcement in effect that said they hated black people, or Jews, etc. well I'd quit... immediately. Which gets to the fundamental issue about this argument - is it a choice or a fundamental genetic characteristic. Because it it's the later, as I think it is, or even if it's 90% the later but people can still influence the ultimate decision, than it is akin to working for that organization that hates a random group. I'm not saying this guy didn't portray a fair amount of a-hole behavior here. He was in his process. Drive-thru, video taping, etc. Though to be fair, it did ultimately get him the most media coverage (if that was a goal). And he was somewhat in his message, but not completely far off. But it is completely ridiculous that this guys seems to be getting so much media coverage and flack, and that he was fired. Given the press release with his firing, it would seem like he might have a legal case. He was doing no more than exercising his 1st amendment right as Truett was.
He goes off on a girl that works at a drive-thru. You'd quit you job because the owner of the franchise that that your boss franchises from believes that marriage is between a man and a woman? Interesting. My best friend worked at Chick-fil-a in high school and college. My sister started working at Chick-fil-a last year. Both loved working there.
Professional positions, especially executive usually include a professionalism clause in your employment contract.
Does it say anything about saying completely stupid **** like "gay marriage is inviting god's wrath"?
#1) He's the boss #2) You can't be fired for religious views #3) You can't be fired of political views Dan Cathy was responding to a question, from a religious publication.
Presidents and COO's aren't the owners of public corporations (not majority any way), but the Cathy family owns the company, they answer to themselves. Dan Cathy also didn't do anything unprofessional. He carried himself in a professional manner when expressing an opinion that was requested. Very different than forcing an opinion upon somebody who tells you that you are making them uncomfortable while they are stuck there because their job is to be there. If I was working with her, I would've gotten fired when I went over and punched the guy in the face. Would have been worth it.
For once I completely agree with you. Enough of this s**t about "I'm straight and I love gay rights, but I'm NO WAY GAY" or "you hate gays, you must be gay." Really, it shouldn't matter at all if someone is homosexual or heterosexual. And if you're comfortable enough defending the idea of different strokes for different folks, you should be comfortable enough with the first idea.
A. CEO does not equal the Company. The views of the CEO aren't always synonymous with the entire company. B. That woman works for minimum wage to try to make a living. Maybe she doesn't have a the luxury of walking away from a job and a paycheck because she may or may not agree with the CEO. C. This guy was torturing and making the employee feel uncomfortable. She HAD TO PUT UP WITH IT. Kudos to her for the way she handled it. But he is badgering her and also preventing people from getting their food. There's a line between protesting and harassment. This guy was harassing this woman. It's one thing to ask the PR guy or a VP for a quote. It's another thing to badger someone who is just trying to do their job and has no involvement in anything the company decides. Guy is douchebag, and his employer was in every right to fire him.
Well then, I just kicked some companies to the curb for you. Don't ever use these products again. http://www.11points.com/News-Politics/11_Companies_That_surprisingly_Collaborated_With_the_Nazis
Fanta was Coca Cola's underhanded way to sell Coke products to Nazi Germany, so in actuality you should boycott Coca Cola. The stories of Germany and German brands are filled with little funny stories. Merck is an especially good one. The original German company, to this day, cannot use the Merck brand in North America, and Merck has to operate as MSD outside of North America.
You also shouldn't drive a Volkswagen, Audi, Bentley or Porsche, since the first Volkswagen was designed on Hitler's demand and the original factory used slave labor from concentration camps.
I just don't see the "torturing" that people are implying. I read articles, come on here and see "jackass", "douchebag", "torture" and expect to hear a really loud, pompous dickwad. He didn't have to do what he did, but I can't even characterize it as loud. He didn't even raise his voice. He barely pestered her. It was give and take. And he expressed his opinion. You may disagree with that opinion, just as many disagree with Truett, but it wasn't exactly a "f'you, you're a piece of *****, I hate" rant. Clearly everybody's position is different. But yes, if I worked for a company that came out against gay marriage the way Chick Fil A effectively has, I'd look for another job asap, and quit if possible. Is that weird to people? You wouldn't at least make some type of effort to live your life in line with your beliefs? Also, I think people are making some strange comparisons. Chase Bank today in no way compares to Chick Fil A. Chick Fil A is, for all intents, a Cathy company. It is family owned and heavily influenced by Cathy beliefs. Does Chase Bank's history wrt to WW2 disappoint me? Sure, but its an entirely different company today, different owners, different everything. When Chick Fil A is sold and the corporate culture, beliefs and philosophies change, I will reassess my view of them. We should all just move because we just stole our land from Native Americans anyway. Not to mention much of our economic strength being built on the backs of slavery. /sarcasm
