Chick-fil-A Ban

I think Dave is right on the money with his assessment that most people don't care. In fact, I think that is why our country is in the condition it is. Our politicians count on the fact that most people don't care. And by that I don't mean to imply that they are without feeling. It is just that they are not impacted enough by the issue to take a side one way or the other...let alone advocate on a position.

I'm not gay. I was never a gay basher but through high school I didn't really consider the issue one way or the other. Several of my best friends turned out to be gay and as I've matured in life I have befriended more gay people, have been exposed to gay relatives, etc. One of my closest coaster loving friends is gay. If not for my exposure to some of those people perhaps I never advocate on the issue at all. Even with the exposure I'm sorry to say that I'm not an active advocate for gay rights not because I don't care but because my life revolves around other things and it can't be a priority.

If my gay friends or family asked me not to support Chik-Fil-A or any other company I would try to honor that request. But, I have to be completely honest and say that if I was in the park, the kids were annoying me about being hungry and they yanked my arm to buy them something at Chik-Fil-A, I'm not certain that it would register that this issue is being talked about because it isn't MY issue. Not that it isn't important...but on my personal list of priorities maybe it is something that would slip my mind.

So, I guess I could classify myself as womewhat more in tune than the average guest and I still cannot guarantee that I wouldn't inadvertently eat at the restaurant.

Long story short...while this is a significant issue to the gay community I don't think it is significant enough to apply enough pressure to Cedar Point to make a change.

Completely off the topic...is the CP Chik-Fil-A open on Sundays? Just curious.

Is not open on Sudays

Chief Wahoo said:
I think Dave is right on the money with his assessment that most people don't care. In fact, I think that is why our country is in the condition it is.

Couldn't agree more. And that's why I find some people's response toward this issue so completely nauseating to the point I'm embarrassed to be of the same species.

Even worse, some here think it's funny to point out that they care more about eating mediocre chicken than they do about their fellow human's civil rights.

It's not funny, and it doesn't make you cool. Furthermore, pointing out that people who eat there are supporting oppression and bigotry shouldn't be considered tantamount to "calling people names". It's calling it like it is.

I agree that chicken is not more important than civil rights; however, gay marriage is not a civil right in this country.

Promoting the idea that marriage should be between only a man and a woman is neither oppression nor bigotry.

Ah, good point. I had no idea we had completely changed the definitions of "civil right", "oppression", and "bigotry". My bad. I guess I haven't had a chance to pick up the most recent edition of the English dictionary yet.

Except Marriage, at it's most basic secular level, is a contract between two consenting adults.

Unless of course those two adults are the same gender. Then for some reason, they aren't allowed to enter into a legally binding, mutually agreed upon contract.

That's the problem.

Dave, I do see what you're saying, but I don't know about this one.

I'm a coaster nerd and an academic, so I'm not sure what category that puts me in. :)

Regardless, you may be spot on when you say people don't care. They most likely know about the issue, but don't care enough to do anything about it. But a change can't happen unless the people that do care enough keep trying to influence others. Chick-Fil-A wants, I'm sure, this issue to just go away quietly in the night.

What could happen, that could make an impact, is people writing enough letters, or even a civilized, organized protest inside the park. Cedar Point has a lot of gay employees. If I was there I would organize some type of sit-in at the restaurant.

It may not be "your" issue, but it could be your daughter's issue, your son's, your neighbor's, etc...

Civil rights is everyone's issue.

Kevinj said:
... If I was there I would organize some type of sit-in at the restaurant...

It seems like you just made Dave's point. If you feel so strongly about it why do you make an excuse for not doing something about it? Why aren't you there organizing the sit-in?

Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. Its not.

Well I just came up with the idea just now while drinking my coffee, Shades.

I'm very comfortable with what I have done, what I do, and what I will continue to do with regards to this issue.

And GoBucks, you and Dave are right; do enough people care?

djDaemon said:

It's not funny, and it doesn't make you cool. Furthermore, pointing out that people who eat there are supporting oppression and bigotry shouldn't be considered tantamount to "calling people names". It's calling it like it is.

Except that's not what you've been doing. "Supporting bigotry" and calling someone a bigot are two very, very different things.

Further, I don't see anyone on here making light of the issue, or trying to be "funny" or "cool". Sometimes I wonder if you are reading the same thread as the rest of us, because your "arguments" seem to contain a lot of false statements.

I really am not trying to come across as a jerk and I admit my post likely sounded jerky.

I do applaud your efforts, whatever they may be.

It just struck me as odd that someone who is passionate about this issue, would say this issue is everyone's issue and even come up with a suggestion as to how to get the issue in front of everyone at the park but then not follow through with it, and then respond by asking if enough people care.

djDaemon said:
Ah, good point. I had no idea we had completely changed the definitions of "civil right", "oppression", and "bigotry". My bad. I guess I haven't had a chance to pick up the most recent edition of the English dictionary yet.

I did not change the definitions. No amount of your snarky sarcasm is going to will gay marriage to be a civil right. A law needs to be enacted to make it a civil right.

A right is a right, regardless of whether a law is in place to protect that right.

Just because a law doesn't exist to keep a person from being violated doesn't mean the right doesn't exist.

Joel_D said:
I did not change the definitions.

So you just don't know the definitions? :)

OK, no problem. I can help! John helped with civil rights, so here's the rest...

oppression: the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner

bigotry: intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself

Bring back the Pizza Parlor!

Well, I'll say this: Cedar Point is going to have to make a move before Chik-Fil-A does. Here is a company...a fast food company at that...that puts principal before profits. I mean...imagine the amount of revenue they lose every single weekend for not being open on Sundays.

Show me something comparable in today's corporate climate and it too is uniquely rare.

I'm not saying it is something to admire, just saying any efforts to change Chik-Fil-A are going to be rebuffed because money doesn't seem to be a significant motivator.

Kevinj said:
And GoBucks, you and Dave are right; do enough people care?

There are two separate but related issues here. One is same sex marriage. Seems to me that most people are aware of ths issue. Though to date, everywhere that the issue has come up for a vote on a statewide basis, same sex marriages have not been supported by a majority of voters. California, which has historically been very liberal on social issues, bans them in its constitution. Earlier this year, North Carolina voted against same sex marriages and civil unions. So at this point, a majority of the people in the states who have voted on this issue do not support same sex marriage. The majority can be wrong but under our system, the majority does carry a lot of weight.

The second issue is Chick Fil A's stance/support/advocacy on the issue (as it relates to the restaurant chain itself and specifically the location at Cedar Point). If I had to guess, I would say that the majority of people who go to Cedar Point do not know about the company's stance/support/advocacy on this issue. So there are some educational opportunities there. But as polls and surveys often show that many people do not know a lot of very basic general knowledge things that everyone should know (like who is the vice president or the name of at least one supreme court justice -- though those same folks can typically tell you the name of every American Idol winner and what Kim Kardashian had for breakfast last Friday), there is an element of being able to lead a horse to water at play.

Hard to know how many people who if educated about CFA (assuming they are willing, or care, to learn) would care enough about the issue to do anything about it (write letters, boycott CFA or CP, etc.). But it seems to me that those who are against same sex marriages are not likely to take any of those steps. Though you do not need to see a majority of people taking action for change to result. If Cedar Point saw a meaningful reduction in visitors in the park that could be tied to CFA or money from CFA (assuming Cedar Point gets some share of profits or fees based on revenue at the CFA location at CP), then it seems likely that CP would look to make a change.

In an ideal world, we would all actively and aggresively pursue all of the causes that we support and seek to end any injustices/oppression that we encounter. But its not an ideal world. We all have limited amounts of time, energy and money so we have to prioritize. As a general rule, people will be more willing to do more with respect to issues that are very important to them. And they will be more likely to do things that are easier for them to do. Its easy for someone who doesn't like CFA to boycott the restaurants. Its a little less easy for someone who likes CFA but is willing to eat at other places at CP (or who brings their own food). If CFA is your favorite place to eat and a trip to CP isn't complete without a CFA meal, you will be a lot less likely to boycott CFA. Just like someone who goes to CP once every several years will be more likely to boycott CP over this issue than a pass holder who goes 30 or 40 times a year and has every year of his/her life. That is just reality.

JuggaLotus said:
A right is a right, regardless of whether a law is in place to protect that right.

Fail.

So you're saying I have a right to do anything I want, so long as my own beliefs justify it, regardless of any laws allowing or disallowing it?

You can't have it both ways.

Joel_D said:
I did not change the definitions. No amount of your snarky sarcasm is going to will gay marriage to be a civil right. A law needs to be enacted to make it a civil right.

From a legal stand point, the right at issue is not marriage itself but equal protection. The Constitution provides a right to equal protection under the law.