Off-topic discussions about regional news, issues and politics. Pretty much everything goes here, but keep it polite: Flaming and spamming aren't welcome.
no avatar
User

Brian Curl

The Chick-Fil-A/Libertarian/Gay Marriage thread ;)

by Brian Curl » Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:10 am

Image

They completed demolished the newly constructed Taco Bueno (built a few yrs ago) to erect this brand spanking new:

Image

Big News can you say suburbanite party on S. Hurstbourne when they open?

:lol:
no avatar
User

Adrian Baldwin

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

363

Joined

Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:29 pm

Location

Louisville, KY

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Adrian Baldwin » Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:17 am

Meh, if you ask me, there can NEVER be too many Chick Fil A's.

I avoid chains as much as anyone, but not CFA. There isn't a chicken sandwich/biscuit I'd rather have ANYWHERE than theirs, True Story. Clean place, great service, great food.

Spicy Chicken Sambo/Biscuit (w/ Cheese) would probably be on my 'last meal' menu if I were on Death Row. :)
User avatar
User

Robin Garr

{ RANK }

Forum host

Posts

21125

Joined

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:38 pm

Location

Crescent Hill

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Robin Garr » Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:45 am

Let's have an offline! On a Sunday! :twisted:
User avatar
User

Steve H

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

1406

Joined

Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:27 pm

Location

Neanderthals rock!

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Steve H » Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:06 pm

Speaking of Sundays...

This is a interesting test case of the whole chain vs. local debate. Here's a chain that is still owned by the founding owners, who have never compromised their integrity (as far as I know) and whose employees are guaranteed Sundays off every week. .

So, where do they rank in pantheon of eateries?
no avatar
User

Brian Curl

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Brian Curl » Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:10 pm

Probably one of the best run chains out there, their strategy seems to include rapid expansion, hopefully that will not comprimise their operations.
no avatar
User

Megan Watts

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

631

Joined

Thu Jun 19, 2008 9:44 am

Location

Louisville

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Megan Watts » Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:11 pm

I love CFA. I feel like I can always get a variety of healthy options there. But my son is terrified of the person in the cow costume. I can see why it would scare him! :shock:
no avatar
User

JohnS

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

149

Joined

Wed Jun 09, 2010 3:13 pm

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by JohnS » Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:47 pm

Chikin Minis may be the greatest fast food breakfast creation on the planet. Those things are like little breakfasty morsels of crack.
User avatar
User

Robin Garr

{ RANK }

Forum host

Posts

21125

Joined

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:38 pm

Location

Crescent Hill

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Robin Garr » Tue Jul 26, 2011 1:29 pm

Steve H wrote:Speaking of Sundays...

This is a interesting test case of the whole chain vs. local debate. Here's a chain that is still owned by the founding owners, who have never compromised their integrity (as far as I know) and whose employees are guaranteed Sundays off every week. .

So, where do they rank in pantheon of eateries?


They've had a lot of objection from gay-rights groups over discriminatory hiring practices, and I believe some with minorities.

Here's an article from Forbes, hardly a leftie journal, raising some issues that I, at least, find troubling.

The Cult of Chick-fil-A
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2007/0723/080.html

Here's a pertinent section:

Loyalty to the company isn't the only thing that matters to Cathy, who wants married workers, believing they are more industrious and productive. One in three company operators have attended Christian-based relationship-building retreats through WinShape at Berry College in Mount Berry, Ga. The programs include classes on conflict resolution and communication. Family members of prospective operators--children, even--are frequently interviewed so Cathy and his family can learn more about job candidates and their relationships at home. "If a man can't manage his own life, he can't manage a business," says Cathy, who says he would probably fire an employee or terminate an operator who "has been sinful or done something harmful to their family members."

The parent company asks people who apply for an operator license to disclose marital status, number of dependents and involvement in "community, civic, social, church and/or professional organizations."

But Danielle Alderson, 30, a Baltimore operator, says some fellow franchisees find that Chick-fil-A butts into its workers' personal lives a bit much. She says she can't hire a good manager who, say, moonlights at a strip club because it would irk the company. "We are watched very closely by Chick-fil-A," she says. "It's very weird."

Is it legal? There are no federal laws that prohibit companies from asking nosy questions about religion and marital status during interviews. Most companies don't because it can open them up to discrimination claims, says James Ryan, a spokesman for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Chick-fil-A has more freedom to ask whatever it wants of franchisees because they are independent contractors and not necessarily subject to federal employment discrimination laws. (Employees, however, may sue under those laws.)

Chick-fil-A, the corporate parent, has been sued at least 12 times since 1988 on charges of employment discrimination, according to records in U.S. District Courts. Aziz Latif, a former Chick-fil-A restaurant manager in Houston, sued the company in 2002 after Latif, a Muslim, says he was fired a day after he didn't participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program in 2000. The suit was settled on undisclosed terms.

The company might face more suits if it didn't screen potential hires and operators so carefully. Many Chick-fil-A job candidates must endure a yearlong vetting process that includes dozens of interviews. Ty Yokum, the training manager for the chain, sat through 7 interviews and didn't get the job. He reapplied in 1991 and was subjected to another 17 interviews--the final one lasted five hours--and was hired. Bureon Ledbetter, Chick-fil-A's general counsel, says the company works hard to select people like Yokum, who "fit." "We want operators who support the values here," Ledbetter says.
no avatar
User

Alison Hanover

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

675

Joined

Tue Apr 22, 2008 2:27 pm

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Alison Hanover » Tue Jul 26, 2011 1:39 pm

So, as an atheist I wouldn't get a job huh.
Alison Hanover (the random Englishwoman)
Owner A.J.'s Gyros To Go
Facebook: A.J.'s Gyros
no avatar
User

Derrick Dones

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

278

Joined

Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:02 am

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Derrick Dones » Tue Jul 26, 2011 2:01 pm

I don't agree one bit with CFA's "religios-ness", but I will say that to some extent it works. I've never been in any fast food place with more courteous, polite or more "presentable" employees.

DD
no avatar
User

Brian Curl

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Brian Curl » Tue Jul 26, 2011 2:58 pm

America is quicky becoming a country that has no boundaries and few common values - freedom, equality, liberty that is being utilzed to breakdown all of our past, more liberal values is sooner rather than later going to be the downfall of this country.

It's good to see a company that has values and sticks to them.

The US won't make it near this long, maybe 300 to 500 more years if we're lucky, based on the path we are on.

At first they were ruled by divine kings, then they became a republic (perhaps their greatest period) before finally becoming an empire. How a group of farmers, who started off fending wolves to protect their livestock, eventually became the greatest empire in all history is the stuff of legends. Coupled with an excellent military and administrative system, the Roman Empire, or rather ancient Rome, is also one of the longest-lasting. Counting from its founding to the fall of the Byzantine empire, ancient Rome lasted for a whopping 2,214 years!

Ancient Rome contributed greatly to the development of law, war, art, literature, architecture, technology, religion and language in the Western world. In fact many historians consider the Roman Empire to be a perfect empire – influential, fair, long-lasting, big, well defended and economically advanced. The influence of the Roman Empire is felt to this day, if for no other reason than the influence on the Catholic Church, which took much of its administrative nous and pageantry from it.


From: http://listverse.com/2010/06/22/top-10-greatest-empires-in-history/
Last edited by Brian Curl on Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
User

Robin Garr

{ RANK }

Forum host

Posts

21125

Joined

Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:38 pm

Location

Crescent Hill

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Robin Garr » Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:30 pm

Brian Curl wrote:It's good to see a company that has values and sticks to them.

Ah, those good old Bible Belt values: Keep the blacks, the women and the gays in their place. Make sure everyone knows his or her place, and don't even think about organizing to bargain collectively. Traditional values they are, Brian, and Chik-Fil-A does seem to live by them. And I'll tell you what: If the US must stick to values like those or fail, then hello, China.
User avatar
User

Antonia L

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

880

Joined

Fri Sep 19, 2008 10:28 am

Location

Cherokee Triangle

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Antonia L » Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:38 pm

Lots of nostalgia for The Good Ol' Days lately.

Truth is, "The Good Ol' Days" weren't so darn good for a lot of people, i.e. women, African-Americans, you name it. I like that we've progressed past a lot (but by no means all) of the crap from "good ol' days." I don't know about you, but being able to vote is cool!
no avatar
User

Susanne Smith

{ RANK }

Foodie

Posts

399

Joined

Mon Apr 02, 2007 5:55 pm

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Susanne Smith » Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:48 pm

It is exactly policies like the ones mentioned in the article from Forbes that make Chic one of the last places I go when craving fast food. They also run religious retreat camps for the faithful, and I'm not that big a fan of their food, though it is decent, and the service staff courteous to be sure, it is still fast food and lacking in some essential uniqueness that is easily found in local establishments.
no avatar
User

Brian Curl

Re: NEW RESTAURANT - Big News! S. Hurstbourne Pkwy

by Brian Curl » Tue Jul 26, 2011 4:20 pm

Just for the sake of discussion, it's hard to be politically correct these days but there are many theories on the breakdown of the family in the US and it's social impact. I'm not sure what is right or what is wrong, I do however believe that for whatever reason, the breakdown of the family in the last 30yrs is not going to make the US a stronger country. If anyone can argue we are headed in a good direction, I'd like to hear your reasoning.

There are tons of excerpts, most all from women about feminism and the breakdown of the family, this is just one from the link. I agree with most, if not all of the logic on this page.

If you believe our country is strong and getting stronger and that the breakdown of the family is not having an impact and is good for our country, please support your arguments instead firing judgements or personal attacks based on my opinion.

http://sami119.tripod.com/shemaisrael/id29.html
Feminists have largely gotten away with these deceptions because the widespread and highly-successful inculcation of male guilt allows feminists to claim that any critical scrutiny of their dubious claims amounts to "blaming the victim." Additionally, chivalrous feelings make most men feel it is somehow unfair to "attack women," even if those same women are spouting bizarre nonsense in the process of vigorously attacking men. (The fallacy in this logic is, of course, the assumption that the agenda promoted by feminists is actually in the best interest of most women.

A pro-woman agenda would promote harmonious relations between the sexes, and strengthen the family; the feminist agenda, doing the opposite, harms most women as much as it does men.) The result has been that a great deal of selective truth, half-truth, and even untruth has been unquestioningly accepted by a large portion of the educated public. In Plato's Utopian state, the rulers would have a monopoly on the right to tell lies; through the enforcement of "hostile speech" codes on campus (and in some instances questioning feminist doctrine has been construed as "hostile speech"), modern day academic feminists seek the same privilege."

Now if the feminist 'society-is-responsible' hypothesis were true, sex hormones would have no effect on behavior, and transsexuals could presumably be trained into their new roles just by reading a book. The reason that the feminist theorist attempts to force us to ignore the powerful role of male and female hormones as determinants of behavior is that we would then have to acknowledge that sex roles are not only not arbitrary, but are in fact permanent and ineradicable (short of radical medical intervention).

Contemporary Politically Correct feminists, like Marxists, feel obligated to postulate a purely environmental explanation for all sex-related differences in behavior, because as soon as biological differences are admitted as relevant factors, the presumption that women are "victims of discrimination" cannot be supported.

Should any male/female differences in behavior and career choices be admitted as innate and real, then the "null hypothesis" - the assumption that in the absence of discrimination, no differences in the two groups would be observed - is no longer tenable. The feminist would then be placed in the position of needing to separate the effects of so-called "discrimination" from those of biology, a clearly impossible task. Hence, male/female differences in biology must be declared ipso facto to have no possible observable consequences.

If it were really true that women were being paid 59 cents (or whatever number you choose to believe) for every dollar that men make, for doing the same work at the same level of skill, then no business could possibly be competitive if it employed any men... That differences in career choices might arise from mutual preferences and independent choices made by two groups having significant innate psychological differences is not a permissible hypothesis.

In order to defend the employment conspiracy hypothesis, feminists must argue either that there are no genuine, innate differences in the skills, attitudes, and abilities, of women and men, or else that such differences may exist, but have absolutely no observable effect. As soon as such differences are admitted as a meaningful factor influencing career choices and performance, the case for the supposed omnipresent "discrimination" vanishes.

Most feminists will reluctantly admit that, at least in sports, the difference in performance between women and men is a result of innate factors, and not social conditioning. No amount of political indoctrination will transform a female athlete into a respectable linebacker for the National Football League. This then places the feminist in the curious position of arguing that innate factors account for the profound difference in male/female performance in every sport, but in absolutely nothing else.

In no other countries has Politically Correct feminism gained such power as in the Anglo- American world, especially in the U.S. and Canada (which is itself interesting: why have European women largely declined to fight in the War Against Men?). As a consequence, we have here what is almost certainly the highest divorce rate in the world, a crumbling educational system, and a seemingly unstoppable spiral of rising crime and related social pathology. Recent studies demonstrate a powerful correlation between this social pathology and the children of fatherless families [14]. (14.see "Dan Quayle was Right" Atlantic Monthly, April 1993.).

One can try to argue that the U.S. family died of natural causes at precisely the same time feminists began shooting at it, but after examining the depth and ferocity of the feminist attack against womens' roles as wives and mothers, such an argument fails to convince."

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign