Chik-fil-A is apparently food option that Denver airport passengers want most behind Chipotle. And the restaurant chain has a tentative deal to open there. But the Denver City Council may block the deal because of the chain’s views on same sex marriage.
Readers may know that I’m in favor of marriage equality. The fast food restaurant chains views on the matter notwithstanding, now that the Supreme Court has ruled on the issue it’s rather been decided. And in my limited experience with the chain I’ve never been preached to when ordering a chicken sandwich.
Indeed, it’s not even the Chik-fil-A corporation that would be operating the restaurant. It’s Concessions International and Delarosa Restaurant Concepts that will operate the restaurant on Denver’s B concourse (replacing ‘Steak Escapes’). Chik-fil-A gets a 7% royalty.
Denver didn’t block Alaska Airlines from flying there even though they passed out prayer cards on their meal trays (a practice they only stopped three and a half years ago, years after inaugurating Denver service).
But somehow this is all an issue because, Trump.
Lopez compared Chick-fil-A’s past politics to divisive remarks made this year by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump about immigration and other issues, saying: “I would throw up in my mouth a little bit if we did business with Trump.”
I actually think that many airports should refuse to lease to Chik-fil-A but not because of their stance on same sex marriage — instead because of their refusal to open on Sundays.
- There’s limited retail space on airport concourses. They need to use that space to provide the most effective service possible to passengers, seven days a week. Indeed, Sunday is a heavy travel day. Choosing a restaurant chain that will provide food on Sundays makes sense.
- Chik-fil-A may find they do enough business without opening on Sundays, perhaps people will go to Chik-fil-A a certain number of times during a week or month and will simply shift their patronage to the days that the restaurant is open. But people patronize airport food establishments on whatever day they’re passing through the airport.
- Major airports usually charge rent plus a percentage of proceeds and giving up Sunday proceeds means less revenue for the airport authority. They could charge Chik-fil-A a correspondingly higher rent to compensate not generate revenue one day a week, but they’re still left not providing service to passengers in the terminal one day a week.
That would be a viewpoint neutral and perfectly valid reason, in my view, for choosing to lease to restaurants other than Chik-fil-A.
However it concerns me that a government body would refuse to lease space at a government-owned facility to a business because of the political views of its owners.
not a question of political views, it’s a question of suborning bigotry. no different than blocking a lease to a brand associated with open racism. nothing wrong with saying we don’t want your hate in our town.
@ivk5
Chik-fil-A has a right to refuse anyone on Sunday. PERIOD. Too bad, Gary. Eat somewhere else, like at McDonalds.
Sure they should just as soon as we become socialism country
Sad times we live in when someone cannot express their own personal views and treated intolerably. At no time did the owner ever express non willingness to hire, serve or respect anyone with an different view. I guess intolerance is acceptable only among certain groups. It’s a restaurant…if someone does not want to eat there, don’t.
@Nottingham You’re just trolling right? When has anyone suggested that chik-fil-a doesn’t have a right not to serve food on Sunday? They can do what they want. The question is whether an airport should give up valuable real estate to restaurants that — whether for religious reasons or any other reasons — don’t want to serve food on busy travel days. Seems like that one is as easy to answer as the first question.
From the Washington Post, back when Chick-a-fil made his statement in 2012:
“It’s not every day that the leader of a big business steps into a national debate that has the potential to offend many of its customers.
“But Dan Cathy, president of the popular fast food chain Chick-fil-A, has done just that, saying on a radio show that “we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage. And I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude that thinks we have the audacity to redefine what marriage is all about.”
Following backlash after those remarks, Cathy then told the Baptist Press in an article posted July 16 that he is “guilty as charged” and is very “supportive of the family — the biblical definition of the family unit.””
So if Cathy said blacks couldn’t marry whites (which was barred by law in our not so distant past) or Christians couldn’t marry Jews because he views such acts as reflecting prideful, arrogant redefinitions of marriage, the Denver airport should still host his restaurants, Gary?
At long last, equal rights for gays are being recognized in the United States. There’s nothing wrong with Denver deciding that a company whose CEO favors discrimination against gays can’t open an outlet in the airport, just as it could bar such a company if its CEO favored discrimination against Asians, Hispanics, blacks, Jews, women or (for that matter) whites.
Ok, just for the record, I’m a different Larry than “socialism country” Larry — in case that wasn’t obvious. I think I’ll go by Larry2 from now on.
Very right about the Sunday situation.
But on the other issue: I always like to consider what the opposite viewpoint might be like.
What if an airport in a very Christian community refused to rent to a tenant that supports gay marriage or even openly hires gays. Being too PC is a double edged sword.
Sorry, in my previous post I meant to say “when Chick-a-fil’s CEO made his statement…”
Regardless of the personal motivations of the councilmen, the article states that they’re consulting their attorney, who will undoubtedly tell them that (a) refusing them because of the religious beliefs of owners: bad, (b) refusing them because of the political beliefs of owners: bad, (c) refusing because they fail to meet a contractual requirement to serve customers at specified days/times: okay.
I totally agree with refusing their lease because of not opening Sundays. What if every business decided that “we’ll open when we feel like it”?
If that is their philosophy then let them own their own building and set their own rules.
Political correctness and religious tolerance has gone way too far.
The gays owe the straights their lives, thus they should do our bidding. Doubt me on that? Send all the gays to an island and we will check on th ereproducti in 50 years.
Let me refocus my comment. This isn’t about CFA breaking the law. It’s about speech. A government agency is considering action against a corporation based on the speech of one of it’s officers. Is that legal? Even if it is, is that a good idea?
The bottom line is that if the restaurant does not want to serve passengers on a Sunday they should not be considered for an airport concession. It’s their right to determine their own policies like being closed on a Sunday however airports are open 7 days a week and passengers have a right to expect concessions that sell food or merchandise be open 7 days a week. No exceptions period! With regards to marriage equality as long as they don’t refuse service to anyone or do not promote their religious views that should not disqualify them from being considered as a concession. I’m not a fan of theirs and I can decide when I am in the airport whether or not I would like to support them by either eating there or going somewhere else.
I would and will eat at Chick-fil-a because in America they have a right to free speech. Don’t like what he said? Eat somewhere else! Liberal whacks only want it one way as usual.
Gary,
Your 3rd argument doesn’t hold much water. You may not know this, but Chik-Fil-A is the highest grossing fast food chain per store. In fact, according to a Forbe’s article in 2014. Chick-Fil-A earned 2.85 mil while McDonald’s earned 2.5. While airport locations may be different, food for thought.
I think the not opening on Sundays, is the Denver City Council’s easy way out of this dilemma. No other questions have to even be considered. Your restaurant isn’t open on Sundays? We think that is a problem, so we will find a restaurant that will be open on Sunday. End of story!
“not a question of political views, it’s a question of suborning bigotry. no different than blocking a lease to a brand associated with open racism. nothing wrong with saying we don’t want your hate in our town.”
Suborn – verb [ with obj. ]
bribe or otherwise induce (someone) to commit an unlawful act
So allowing a CFA to open will induce them to commit a hateful and unlawful act? Can you point to anywhere else that’s happened that should make Denver authorities worried?
The owner who made the statement you [presumably] object to is dead. Many CFA restaurants employ openly gay people. I’ve eaten at CFA maybe a dozen times this year and I’ve never heard so much as a single political comment from any member of management. A company that is not CFA stands to make 93% of the profit. What exactly is the problem?
“Political correctness and religious tolerance has gone way too far.”
I agree 100% on the PC side, but religious tolerance, you would have to be living under a rock to think there is too much christian religious tolerance…unless you are talking about muslims, then I agree.
@DCFinance in Flight I realize that Chik-fil-A per store averages are especially high but as I say without Sunday service they aren’t helping the airport meet the needs of travelers.
Gee, last time I checked it was called: Freedom of Speech – Some people actully hold that dear, IIRC and defend that principle, even if they do not neccessarily agree with what is being said. Isn’t that what sets America apart from many other places in the world? As JohnB said, the only reason not to consider a lease for them is if the hours of operation do not meet with what the airport authority wants in it’s operation. Since when should politics and gay marriage have anything to do with that business decision? Whether you agree with the CEO’s personal opinions or not, PC should never take precedence over the entrenched concept of Freedom of Speech. If it does, America is dead as a democracy.
I assume, Gary, that you think that all airport restaurants should be open for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Because if an establishment isn’t open all day the way Chik-Fil-A is, it isn’t serving the needs of passengers.
I think these spaces should be auctioned off every few years to whoever will pay the most for them, but I do see Gary’s point that 7-days-a-week operation should be a requirement. But I guess if a Chick-fil-a could make enough money six days a week that they could afford to pay more than somebody operating seven days, then that would show that people really really liked their fried chicken.
That said, if they are *not* going to do the economically efficient thing and auction the spots, then we shouldn’t be surprised if a company’s politics affect politicians’ decisions about whom to choose.
@Justin: “The owner who made the statement you [presumably] object to is dead.” That’s not correct. The founder of Chick-fil-A is dead, but Dan Cathy, his son, is the one who made the statements, and he’s still alive and still chairman, president, and CEO.
Should Chick-fil-A be able to operate restaurants? Of course! Go patronize them if you want part of your money to go to someone who opposes equality. Should a taxpayer-funded entity award a concession–a limited resource–to a company that opposes equal treatment for some of its taxpayers? Should a government entity I am forced to support lease space to a company that will use some of its profits to oppose my equal treatment under the law? Not so clear to me.
It’s absurd to think that in our socialist country we still allow private business to dictate their operating hours.
I find it humorous (not really) and quite ironic when our friends on the far left, particularly those who are so quick to espouse “open-mindedness” and “tolerance,” can’t seem to extend those same ideals to individuals whose viewpoints aren’t in lock-step with theirs.
“”Major airports usually charge rent plus a percentage of proceeds and giving up Sunday proceeds means less revenue for the airport authority. They could charge Chik-fil-A a correspondingly higher rent to compensate not generate revenue one day a week, but they’re still left not providing service to passengers in the terminal one day a week.”” This makes no sense? if they make more money than the other options 7 days a week then it is what it is. Stores close at all different times in the airports. it only matters it is making more money than the next best option. Its also NOT all about money, it’s about the best experience for the flyers. You think airports were all designed with just the all might dollar in mind? of course not or they would all be big square block buildings with no architectural features and fold up lawn chairs. One of the dumber comments you have ever made Gary and I usually agree with you 100% of the time.
Couple comments on this hot topic.
Its not so much a “political “statement as a religious viewpoint by Chic FIL A
I’ve been to airports plenty of times when restaurants are closed. Most aren’t open 24/7, 365. Also there are a ton of food choices at DEN. I don’t think this would kill the airport for them to be closed on Sundays. It certainly hasn’t hurt the company financials.
Sorry Gary but your wrong on this one.
CFA agreed to cease financial support for anti- LGBT organizations 3 years. I am gay and married, and we won. I resumed eating at CFA last year!
It’s not all about auctioning off the concession spots. Airports for the most part are run by local governments and besides making money they also are looking for concessions that serve passengers needs while the airport is operational. An airport is just like a mall which typically requires stores to be open 7 days a week. It’s very rare to walk into a mall and find a retail store closed on a Sunday. Granted some malls do make exceptions for Chick Fil A but they are the exception not the rule. If I were on the council making this decision I would tell them if they can’t serve passengers 7 days a week it’s not appropriate for an airport. They can open across the street but the airport is open 7 days a week and so are the concessions. End of story. For those who feel the need to bring into the conversation anti-gay remarks it’s not necessary to make your point. The right and the left need to be a little bit more civil when it comes to this discussion. Thanks.
It’s hard to believe this is even being questioned. So you don’t agree with Chik-Fli-A’s founder’s view on the LGBT lifestyle. Who cares? They still serve all customers equally and without discrimination. Not celebrating someone else’s choices does not equal hate. No controversy here. Move along.
Yes Larry, I do believe there is way too much religious tolerance. Religion is the biggest cause of wars, as every religious nut insists that their god is the only god, whether it is allah, jesus, mohammed, god, buddha or the sacred cow.
For some reason churches don’t pay taxes, the public is often forced to listen to opening prayers, hymns, or swear on an old book in court. Why?
Christians sound nuts when someone dies. They always say (he) she “went to a better place.”
In other words everybody is better off dead?? But we tolerate their rants.
Sorry, slightly off the holy Sunday topic, but not too far off.
Two things.
1) It’s the responsibility of leaders to act in accordance with the desires of the communities they lead. Here in Denver, most of us don’t think it’s ok to hate people because they’re gay, so it would make sense to reject an enterprise that spends money to support hate from doing business in a publicly owned space.
2) The reason concessions exist in airports is to serve travelers. Allowing a business that’s not open 1/7th of the time doesn’t serve travelers.
Truth is, Chick Fil A franchises are present throughout the Front Range and they’re well patronized. Some people are ok with hate (or are either ambivalent or unaware), but granting them access to a community owned space is different than conducting business in the regular world. It says that we here in Denver are OK with bigots. We’re not.
@Juan: Christians sound nuts when someone dies. They always say (he) she “went to a better place.” In other words everybody is better off dead?? But we tolerate their rants.”
What if you’re wrong? You’re going to spend eternity……..somewhere.
Their chicken sandwiches are delicious. I hope they don’t get blocked for that reason alone. Nuggets are tasty too. Plus, waffle fries.
The comments on this thread have become filled with misinformation and intolerance. First, Chick-fil-a does not have a corporate “stance” on homosexuality or gay marriage. Dan Cathy (one of the co-owners of the company) was asked in a radio interview about his personal opinion on the topic, and he gave it (something that we once allowed in the United States of America). Chick-fil-a as a company does not discriminate against gay people in hiring, serving, or in any other way. If the Denver City Council decides to discriminate against a company because of the personal opinion of one of their owners (a view held by the majority of committed Evangelicals, Catholics, Muslims, Mormons and others), they are acting in a profoundly un-American and intolerant way.
Eternity, Bill? Do you have the slightest proof of that? Of course not.
My ashes will be scattered wherever the wind blows them. That’s the end, and it doesn’t bother me in the least.
A big AMEN to Juan
(the pun is only slightly intended)
Congratulations, Gary. Appears you are getting more interactions on “politics” than travel issues these days.
Maybe you should change the title of your blog to:
Views From The West Wing
I’m a vegetarian and could care less if CFA is sold at Denver or any other airport!
Stick to travel issues.
Quick thoughts:
1. Thoughtful post by Gary.
2. Amazing lack of thought (on all sides) in the comments.
3. Too many commenters named Larry.
4. While the not-open-on-Sunday argument sounds reasonable to me I think it would fall afoul of Reagan error anti war-on-Christians legistlation. Is the no Sunday business rule a restriction on franchisees, or only on company-owned stores?
5. Absent any actual discrimanatory practice (including establishing a hostile work environment) the personal beliefs of the owners should not form part of the concession-granting process.
@LarryInNYC – the restriction applies to franchisees as well.
@brteacher – many airports have precisely that requirement, so restaurants that do not serve breakfast outside of airports do offer breakfast at their airport outposts.
I think it’s pretty likely there are dozens of other places to eat at the Denver airport, so one restaurant closing one day a week probably wouldn’t inconvenience the traveling public much. The economic question would be whether they generate the revenue in six days to match what someone else could do in seven. Probably so. If there’s a lease provision that says they must be open seven days a week, that’s a reason they wouldn’t qualify.
On the religious issue, it’s obvious in this country that expressing a non-P.C. view on gay marriage (a matter which legally has been settled by the Supreme Court, so that people with dissenting views are no threat to anyone’s opportunities) will make anyone the target of widespread vilification by the intolerant who demand 100% obedience in thought as well as action.
Stop with the hypocracy Denver city council. So everyone is guilty by association, then the Denver city council member should ban American Air from landing at DEN because AA is partners with Qatar and Etihad and I am quite positive counties in the middle east counties don’t treat gays and lesbians. Wait Air China is partner with UA.. Chinese Gov’t aren’t so keen on gays either. hang on. Delta is partners with Saudia.. why let them use the airport?? OMG, Lufthansa.. Germans were horrible people in WWII…. It’s ridiculous to bring in such nonsense. Wait.. I eat at Chik-Fil-A.. so am I a gay basher? utter nonsense.
@Doug said it well. Denver’s thought police don’t have a legal leg to stand on. Unless the franchisee has stated they intend to not follow labor laws or not serve certain classes of people, there is absolutely zero legal basis for the city council’s position. The personal opinion of one owner of a corporation is irrelevant.
Too many people are forgetting what tolerance is. It is not being forced to agree, or say you agree, with a viewpoint or actions. It means that, notwithstanding the fact that you DISagree – and even make such disagreement known, you tolerate the existence of the viewpoint or actions. For example, this is how people of differing religions, or atheists & theists, for example, can work together, be friends, even be married to each other.
All that said, though….despite it obviously bringing more traffic, I’d also prefer you keep with true “travel” topics, not social and political issues with only a tangential relationship to travel!
The initial poster, ivk says:
“not a question of political views, it’s a question of suborning bigotry. no different than blocking a lease to a brand associated with open racism. nothing wrong with saying we don’t want your hate in our town.”
I say
WRONG
WRONG
WRONG
DIA may make being open for business at certain hours a lease condition on the theory that airport concessions are a sort of utility providing, for a price, a public good.
But no matter how odious the viewpoints of a business, a public license to operate may never be denied on the grounds of that viewpoint.
Perhaps IVK should be denied some public benefit on account of his or her views.
“Freedom of Speech”, legal definition: The right, guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to express beliefs and ideas *without unwarranted government restriction*.
(emphasis mine)
What a bunch of silly comments…on both sides. The airport, not the city council, should be making the decision. I say that with admittedly no knowledge of how the airport is managed. And the decision should be made based on revenue to the airport, and nothing else. This is the same city council / airport that has the smoking lounges right? Are they doing that for the well-being of the passengers? Oh, it is money isn’t it…that’s right. So apply the same test here. If we’re going to apply some test on religious views, I’d like to see Denver look into some of the magazine shops in the airport that employ almost exclusively middle-eastern workers. My guess is that some of that money lands in the hands of some far more repressive groups than what we’re talking about here. And finally (disjointed comments I know), if there is some standard about being open 7 days a week, make it official so the discussion never has to come up. And also have set times that every single outlet must be open. My guess is that there are other options for the poor, poor, bitter PC travelers for food on a Sunday than just CFA. It’s not as if this is the one and only joint to eat at in any of the concourses in Denver.
@Jason,
The devil is in the details. what does “unwarranted” mean.
Many have decided that they may declare what is warranted and what is not, and stifling unpleasant speech is well warranted. And some folks actually believe that the goveernment can shut you up if you repeat statements which have been held as truisms for centuries.
But the law is clear – the term must be read narrowly, particularly when political and religious views are involved. This limited “unwarranted” to the old saw of not being allowed to scream “fire” in a crowded theater.
This is the dumbest post. The owners of Chick fila are devout Christians and support traditional values. The majority of Americans are like minded by the way. Will the PC numbskulls also consider not allowing churches, mosques or any Muslim owned companies as well?