Assault On Free Speech

[Reforged]

Please go and look up the definition of business ethics before dismissing an informed statement from someone who has an applied business qualification as a biased opinion.
I am rather sick of you shifting our discussion onto the mayor. We are not discussing the mayor. I am neither defending or attacking the mayor and he has very little to do with the fact that a business was used as a platform for a political and religious viewpoint to be forced onto the public. Morality, opinions, legality, none of this has to do with the fact that this is a textbook example of a direct violation to business ethic.
This is the only point I have made and it is backed by years of study. The fact of the matter is Cathy used what should of been a PR opportunity for his business as a means to promote his religious and political views. He has put his business at extreme risk as a result as well as its reputation.
This *is* bad business ethics. Its a textbook example. If you don't believe me then look it up and if you still disagree state your reasons why and back them up with your researched knowledge of business.
Don't go "yeeeeeah... you're wrong. Anyway about the mayor...".
Thats just lazy.

Actually, this topic is about the mayor and the assault on free speech by elected office holders. You can start a new thread if you want to discuss your subjective arguments about business ethics.

No matter how you feel on gay marriage or any other subject, should an elected official be allowed use his position of authority in public office to assault and threaten people whose speech disagrees with their own personal and political beliefs?

"I am rather sick of you shifting our discussion onto the mayor."
Our discussion, as in the one you and me were having about the point I brought up. If you did not want to discuss the point I brought up you should of said so instead of wasting my time.

He announced intentions to, he didn't go through with them as he was unsure of the legality. Your point in this case is completely redundant as is the entire topic unless you would shun him purely for his vocal opposition of Chick-Fil-A. This would be problematic for you as you would be discouraging free-speech, something which your topic supposedly seeks to defend.

In an ideal world it would depend entirely on how the people of Boston feel about Chick-Fil-A, this is evidently not the case.