Posted on 04/25/2019 5:54:39 PM PDT by Mount Athos
San Antonio, a predominantly Hispanic city named for a Catholic saint, has persisted in its crusade against the popular fast-food chain Chick-fil-A. In reaction to the conservative religious beliefs of its owners, the city council has barred Chick-fil-A from operating at San Antonio’s airport. So far, advocates against the restaurant have the upper hand, though that could soon change. Voters will soon have an opportunity to weigh in on the controversy in a local election.
Last month, the San Antonio City Council voted to exclude the privately owned company as a concessionaire at the city-operated airport on the grounds that its owners’ opposition to same-sex marriage—mainly expressed years ago, prior to the Obergefell decision—amounts to “a legacy of anti-LGBTQ behavior.” The company has no record of discrimination against employees or customers on the basis of sexual orientation; the objection is that disagreeing with a political agenda for religious reasons justifies a government boycott.
The city council’s action against Chick-fil-A was apparently prompted by a campaign led by activist group ThinkProgress, as punishment for the views of company founder Dan Cathey, a devout Christian. City councilman Roberto Trevino, who sponsored the motion to ban Chick-fil-A, boasted afterward that blacklisting a company for its owners’ religious beliefs “reaffirmed the work our city has done to become a champion of equality and inclusion.” Only in the Orwellian language that progressives often use could suppression and exclusion be celebrated as “equality and inclusion.”
But the left-leaning officials who spearheaded the boycott may have underestimated the backlash it would trigger in both the national media and among the city’s many religious residents. On May 4, San Antonio voters will elect a new mayor, and the election has become a proxy contest for the Chick-fil-A controversy. Incumbent mayor Ron Nirenberg, who supports the blacklisting, faces city councilman Greg Brockhouse, who wants to reverse it.
Barring Chick-fil-A from the San Antonio airport generated negative national publicity and drew the ire of the state’s Republican officials. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that he had opened an investigation regarding the decision, and Paxton also requested that the U.S. Department of Transportation look into the matter. Citing the First Amendment, Paxton stated that he had “serious concerns” that religious liberties were “under assault at the San Antonio airport.” Paxton declared that “the city’s discriminatory decision is not only out of step with Texas values, but inconsistent with the Constitution and Texas law.” Texas Governor Greg Abbott added that “the ban has the stench of religious discrimination against Chick-fil-A.” Senator Ted Cruz joined in, calling the city council’s decision “ridiculous.”
Accordingly, when Brockhouse made a motion last week to reconsider the exclusion of Chick-fil-A, calling it a “defining moment” for the city, hopes were high that the city council would reverse itself. “I want to bring it back up because it’s the right thing to do. It’s the right thing for our community,” Brockhouse said. Dozens of businessowners and pastors showed up at the city council hearing to express their support for the retraction, but they were not allowed to speak. The council rejected Brockhouse’s motion by a 6-5 vote. Councilwoman Shirley Gonzales stated that the decision on the airport concessions contract had been made; it was “time to move on.”
Nirenberg, a progressive who cast the deciding vote against reconsideration, accused Brockhouse of trying to exploit the issue for political gain. “To make up for his complete lack of vision for the future, Councilman Brockhouse is fixating on a fast food subcontract to try and pump up his personal political ambitions,” Nirenberg said. Brockhouse is certainly trying to leverage the issue in his campaign; he tried to set the vote on reconsideration for May 2, two days before the mayoral election. But to Nirenberg’s surprise, the controversy is emerging as a major issue in the race—and according to some reports, it has become the “defining issue.” Even the city’s liberal daily newspaper, the Express-News, opposes the boycott and favors reconsideration of the decision, calling the move to exclude Chick-fil-A a “slippery slope.”
The blacklisting of Chick-fil-A has provoked strong emotions in San Antonio. City councilman Clayton Perry supported the motion to reconsider because the discrimination against the restaurant is “the number one issue” among his constituents. Early voting is underway in the mayor’s race. We’ll know soon whether San Antonio voters share their city council’s contempt for traditional religious beliefs.
It’s nearly impossible to defeat a liberal in San Antonio.
Cathey's view is that marriage consists of a union between a man and a woman. For that view in twenty-first century America, the tolerant left wants to put a company out of business, costing who knows how many jobs. Not to mention that the company's products are very popular with consumers.
I ate Chick-fil-A today.
The drive through was packed.
Every Chick-fil-a store in my town has waiting lines frequently a block long from 7:00AM until 8:00PM. I really dont think they need any rescues that normal market forces wont fix. BTW, University of Tennessee Knoxville has several stores inside the campus buildings. Hardly a need for a safe space.
I have never been to a Chik-Fil-A anywhere here in The States that has not been crowded and busy. And clean I would also add. And with nice courteous employees.
San Antonio needs to be more concerned about the wrath of God coming down on their city than a restaurant full of chickens. Unfortunately no Chick-fil-a restaurants in our area. I would be a regular customer. I guess San Antonio doesn’t need the tax revenue from a popular chain.
San Antonio needs to be more concerned about the wrath of God coming down on their city than a restaurant full of chickens. Unfortunately no Chick-fil-a restaurants in our area. I would be a regular customer. I guess San Antonio doesn’t need the tax revenue from a popular chain.
Wasn’t this banning/disagreement over the fact that Chic closed
on Sunday and the council used that as a way to ban them from
the airport.
It’s delicious too.
Their slushy coffee drink is dee-licious.
The drive through was packed.
**********
That’s why I don’t go thru the drive thru. I go get food to
bring home but I park and go in.
I was dressed like a hobo. I didn’t want to take a chance on seeing someone I know, or a hot chick.
I usually go in as well.
And I'll eat chick-fil-A tomorrow.. :) Spicy Chicken Deluxe.. mmmmmm.!
All this grief because of its general Christian cachet and because its founder once said he believed in the bible idea of marriage.
If that was it, there wouldn’t be this kind of fuss. CFA could take a rule that “All concourse businesses must be open seven days a week.” If they can’t do it they can’t, and just look for other venues.
It was because CFA got smeared with talk about its “values” not reflecting those of the community that there is now such a fuss.
San Antonio needs to be more concerned about the wrath of God
coming down on their city than a restaurant full of chickens.
********
There are other Chic-fil-A locations in San Antonio. The question
was regarding city facilities and operating hours. They disagree
so move on. Chic will do just fine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.