In this case it seems the customer reaction has been quite positive. Being openly supportive of marriage being defined as man/woman only may be a new marketing trend. Let the gheys have their legal civil unions for benefits. It is like high fructose corn syrup wanting to be known as sugar. HFC, you are a corn sweetner you aren't sugar.
The mayor has launched a full assault against freedom of speech. That in and of itself is just cause impeachment. He should resign immediately.
So you're defending the mayor of the 3rd largest city in the country as he advocates discrimination against those who choose to speak their mind? I guess you'd be OK with a republican mayor refusing to do business with a gay business owner, just so long as he doesn't introduce legislation.
My main thrust in this argument has been regarding the surge in... Uhh, let me restart. I will only defend the mayor to the opposite but equal extent that you defend the flapping hole at CFA. Let's face it, if CFA were public he'd be fired. But then, if CFA were public he'd either have not said anything about his personal opinions in a public forum, or he would not be the right fit to make CEO to begin with. The strict business point of view will be vindicated. Unless the homophobes plan to make extra purchases a permanent part of their life, then the simple inaction of the boycott will hurt CFA's sales. Everyone in business understands this, which is why other public companies are either distancing themselves, or keeping their mouths shut.
So everyone who supports this guys freedom to make the statement he did is a homophobe? This is exactly what's wrong in this country. You can't support freedom without being labeled something or another. I don't care if the guy comes out and say's he hates queers and niggers, and say's it just like that, he has the right to say that, and my defending that right does not make me a homophobe or a racist. Furthermore, mayor dipshit of Chicago has no business telling me where I can and can't eat my lunch. If it's a legal establishment, his opinion of ownership is of no concern to me. It ain't his job to opine on the subject. Maybe if he would get busy doing his f'n job the murder rate might come down a little in what's now the murder capital of the country.
So from that you support Dan Cathy's freedom to make the statement he did, but not Rahm's freedom to make the statement he did?
Mr. Cathy is a private citizen and the Mayor is an elected official who does not have the right to abuse his position of authority over private citizens.