>>> It's when they start applying the corporation money and resources to their causes that I disagree with that I start to have a problem.
>>>
>>>I don't care what you say, I care with what you do.
>>
>>Why? it is the companies money - shareholders are free to kick CEO or sell their shares.
>>Or will those actions generate tax breaks, making you pay for their views ?
>>
>>curious
>>
>>thomas
>
>Just to be clear, Chick-Fil-A is a privately owned company. Even their franchises are owned by the company not the franchisees. The "shareholders" as they were are primarily family members.

And I think that is an important point. Unlike a coorporate CEO of a public company or a Union official they are not making a political statement or moral judgement *using someone else's money*.

Free speech is good. Abuse of power is not.

Believe the Chick-a-fil family is wrong on this but they have a right to be wrong.

If they discriminate against gay people in any way in their business they are penalizing themselves in regards to talent and customers and they have a right to do that too.

The government however does not have to right to tax equally and dispense public access to contract law unequally.

A church has a right to define marriage however it likes and recognize or not recognize any kind of union. The state must grant all citizens access to what is essentially a contract in law, not a religiously sanctioned sacrament.

The Catholic church can deny Catholic marriage to divorced persons ( who do not buy an indulgence ) whereas the state must allow remarriage to persons who are legally divorced.