Yes, he has a right to his opinion, but the fact of the matter is that I resolutely refuse to hand over my money to an organisation that funds anti-gay groups like Exodus, which actually
successfully worked to establish a death penalty for homosexuality in Uganda. I just don't want any part in it. That said, I have a right to my opinion as well, and will not be eating there. Where we eat has always been political: no In-'n'-Out Burger, no Chick-fil-a, and no anywhere else that thinks "supporting traditional marriage" means actively destroying the lives of those who seek any other kind.
You're right that the government leaders can't make that sort of call about whether an organisation is allowed in their city, but they're allowed to discourage it, voice their opinions, recommend other locations, et cetera. The Chicago alderman has the right ideas [as far as I'm concerned], but appears not to be going about pursuing them in the right way, if he's making demands.
You know what makes Chick-fil-a awesome? Mostly that they marinade their chicken in pickle brine the day before, if my sources are accurate. A link to a video for the "Chick-fil-gay" sandwich
here, fnotor anyone here who happens to not want their money to go to a company that sponsors such bigoted causes, but still likes a good chicken sandwich.
The LGBT community has to put up with a lot of shit from Christians across the world, and when a wealthy business owner comes along and decides to make things even worse for them, they, too, have a right to be pissed off. In fact, if you couldn't tell, I'm pissed off that anyone is so arrogant that they think they have the right to force their "
traditional" views on marriage on anyone who doesn't want them.
Here's traditional for you.
In truth, my views on marriage are something more like
Hank's and
John's views, if anyone cares.