Front Page
NMJ Search
International
Islamofascism
Government & Politics
National & Local
Progressivism
Culture Wars
Editorials
Commentary
Archive
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
Islamofascism
Progressivism
Books
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Facebook
Twitter
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House
  Anti-Google




"Chick-fil-A may have a pretty good case under the First Amendment if the city uses their religious or political beliefs as a basis for denying a business license or ability to do business in the city," Hans von Spakovsky, a Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow and former Justice Department attorney to the assistant attorney general for civil rights said.
Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
Complaint Filed Against
Rahm Emanuel Over Chick-fil-A Flap

The Washington Times
The Chicago Republican Party announced last week it would file a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights and Attorney General Lisa Madigan over the discriminatory action by Alderman Proco (Joe) Moreno against the food chain Chick-fil-A.

The party is now expanding their complaint to cover Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel as well. According to a press release, the Chicago Republican Party says that "the complaint states that the Alderman and the Mayor have broken civil rights laws pertaining to religious freedom and the First Amendment in denying Chick-fil-A a permit to operate its business in the City of Chicago."

Following Chick-fil-A's CEO Dan Cathy's support of traditional marriage, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, and San Francisco liberal politicians spoke out against the food chain and threatened to block Chick-fil-A from opening any business or further businesses in their cities.

Mayor Rahm Emanuel said that Chick-fil-A's values were not "Chicago values."

WBEZ reported last week that Chicago's Moreno now wants Chick-fil-A to put into writing that it “won’t support any groups with a political agenda, including those with an anti-gay marriage stance” before he’ll consider allowing zoning rights to a Chick-fil-A restaurant in his ward.

"If they’re serious about that, and they’re willing to put that in writing and they’re willing to adopt that. I think those are the grounds where we can move forward," Moreno said.

"Chick-fil-A may have a pretty good case under the First Amendment if the city uses their religious or political beliefs as a basis for denying a business license or ability to do business in the city. That is the kind of thing that happens in fascist states," said Hans von Spakovsky, a Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow and former Justice Department attorney to the assistant attorney general for civil rights.

READ FULL SOURCE ARTICLE

Editor's Note: It is stunning that a group that demanded tolerance for their belief system is denying that same demand of those who do not hold views not in sync with theirs. Bully activism is about to hit a huge wall for its gross overstep and trampling of First Amendment rights. Bottom line: When people coerce others for what they think, no matter how offensive the perceived stance is, we cease being a free society. Think about it.


The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...


The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on tax deductible donations from our readers and contributors. Please make a tax deductible donation today.


The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on tax deductible donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a tax deductible donation today.







Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of The New Media Journal, BasicsProject.org, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to The New Media Journal.  The New Media Journal is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations.  The New Media Journal is not supported by any political organization. The New Media Journal is a division of BasicsProject.org, a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) research and educational initiative.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org is copyrighted. Basics Project's goal is the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


The Media Journal.us © 1998-2013    Content Copyright © Individual authors
A Division of BasicsProject.org
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server