• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New York Bill to force Chick-Filet to stay open on Sunday's

VySky

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 12, 2019
Messages
48,970
Reaction score
19,471
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Lets call this what it is. And coming from NY it is of no surprise.

This is a straight up attack on God and Christianity. They can wrap it and call it what they want, but it is an attack.

Lindsay Graham says he will fight to protect CF's rights.

=============================


Some NY Chick-fil-A locations could be forced to stay open on Sundays under new bill

New York lawmakers have introduced a bill that would require restaurants in state highway system rest areas to operate seven days a week, a measure apparently aimed at interfering with a policy at the fast food chain Chick-fil-A of staying closed on Sundays.
www.nbcnewyork.com
 
This bill seems to be aimed at food services being available at certain facilities on a mandated schedule without any language that specifically speaks to chick fil a.
 
Slartibartfast said:
This bill seems pretty specific and is aimed at services being available at certain facilities without any language that specifically speaks to chick fil a.
Click to expand...
You didn't read the bill.
 
VySky said:
You didn't read the bill.
Click to expand...
Yup it uses chick-fil-a as an example, which has lead to a PR issue, but ultimately it could have just as easily cited any other restaurant that doesn't adhere to the proposed schedule to serve travelers.
 
Slartibartfast said:
Yup it uses chick-fil-a as an example, which has lead to a PR issue, but ultimately it could have just as easily cited any other restaurant that doesn't adhere to the proposed schedule.
Click to expand...

"mentions Chick-fil-A by name in its justification for the proposed law"

But they didn't cite any other restaurant as it doesn't impact others as they are not closed on Sundays.
 
VySky said:
But they didn't cite any other restaurant as it doesn't impact others as they are not closed on Sundays.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned, they invited a PR issue and could have assuaged that by mentioned two or three restaurants.

Ultimately though, in terms of religious freedom. The bible doesn't mention corporations, so I don't see how this could possibly apply in a Christian context.
 
maquiscat said:
Then provide a link to the bill, since it wasn't in the article.
Click to expand...

Google

Search the world's information, including webpages, images, videos and more. Google has many special features to help you find exactly what you're looking for.
www.google.com
 
On the one side, I would oppose any bill that tried to force a private business to adhere to any hours other than what the business wanted. The basis would not matter. I would doubly oppose any law that made any imposition on a private company based upon religion.

With that said, this bill, as I understand it in the article, does not do this to any private business. What it does is lay out the requirements for a business to be a part of a transportations facility. Religious freedom does nothing to guarantee having a place in another's facilities, especially since they are not forced to be in said facility. They can either comply with the facilities rules, or they can not be there. Their religious freedom is intact and they can run their business any way they want outside of that facility. IF they want in the facility, they have to be willing to abide by the facility's rules. This bill would also apply to say a Jewish business that would normally be closed during their Sabbath's hours, again from what I could glean from the article. Further, the bill does give the exemption to any business already in place at these facilities. So any current Chick-fil-a would not have to stay open on Sunday. It would only apply to any newly opened location within those facilities.

There is no violation of rights here.
 
Your assertions, your responsibility to support. I will not do your work for you. If I then want to bring up other references as counters to yours, that would be my responsibility to cite them.
 
Nobody is disputing what the law does. Just why they feel the law needs implemented.

I'm sure they will say to increase tax revenue etc, but what the bill does accomplish is the complete disregard of a business religious principles over that of the financial interest of the state.

I fail to see the need of why 'travelers' deserve a higher priority than Joe Citizen who finds establishments closed on certain days.

What's next, no stores can close on Sundays because of impacts to the public?
 
If that comes about then we will have to fight it because that is outside the bounds of the government. However, as it is government facilities (unless you can show where this affects private owned rest stops and transportation facilities), then said government can set the restrictions on when businesses within them operate. Again, no business, religious or not, has a right to be there. It falls under the same principle of why people can't force government offices they work for to adhere to their personal religious beliefs. As long as the policy is not religious in nature (either for or against), then it is legitimate within the government's powers. This would be a whole different situation if they required Sunday but allowed either Friday sundown to Saturday sundown, or Saturday (7th day Adventists). Then you would have a case of religious discrimination.
 
I think it will apply to businesses only doing business on the rest stops on Nys Truway...

On 1 hand i can understand why the state would want businesses to stay open 7 days a week on the Truway.. On the other hand I have no idea why the state would give a permit to a business to operate on the Truway that they know isn't open on Sunday's...
 
This proposed nonsense seems like a reverse blue law designed to punish those deemed to be too religious (not ‘woke’ enough?).

Meanwhile:


 
The sky is falling, the sky is falling!
Please.
It’s New York City.
Who cares.
 
So what
 
Yep.. Just rest stops... So yet again the RW lies, goes nuts, but only tells 1/2 the story.. In this case it is the NYS Truway.. Does not affect any stores, restaurants, etc. anywhere else... Malls, etc...

If it were to become law, proposed bill A08336 would require that food services at rest stops and other transportation facilities "owned and operated by certain public authorities" remain open seven days a week.
 

Only any new ones, thus avoiding ‘taking’ (their existing 7 locations?) which would require compensation.
 
Last edited:
And the obvious is stated again. Awesome.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Only any new ones, thus avoiding ‘taking’ which would require compensation.
Click to expand...

Not quite.

If NY was requiring ALL establishments to be open 7-days a week, that could be an argument. As it would involve forcing operations in a totally private enterprise.

However that's not the case. The case is that the establishments are operated on Thruway property and are leased to the establishment for a contracted period. The facilities are not owned by the establishment. No one is "taking" property as before the lease the property is owned by NY, during the lease the property is owned by NY and the establishment allowed to operate, after the lease the property is still owned by NY and can either be renewed or not.

Not saying I support the bill or not, I'm pointing out that the establishments providing services are doing so as renters on NY State owned property. They have not made any changes to existing leases, and the new rules only apply upon lease expiration and as a condition of renewal.

WW
 

Bill Search and Legislative Information | New York State Assembly

News and Information from the New York State Assembly
nyassembly.gov

For anyone that cares to read the actual bill text. Chick-fil-A was not cited in the changes to the law, it was mentioned in the Memorandum in Support of the Legislation.

And yes, it only applies to establishments renting space on specific NY state property (Thruway and Port Authority).

(I will say it was pretty dumb of the legislator to mention by name any establishment even in the Memo.)

WW
 
So far the discussion is the mechanics of the law. They are not in dispute.

What needs discussed is what's the intent behind the law? I argue its a way to punish Christianity in the name of States rights to raise revenue via taxation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…