I’m getting lots of emails asking me how I feel about Menino banning Chick Fil A from Boston. I’m literally all over the map on this one. For starters I one zilllion percent support gay marriage. I think anybody who has a problem with gays is probably a closet homo themselves and trying to hide it for some reason. I think religious wackos are the scariest people on earth. (IE middle America) If I had to vote on whether to ban Chick Fil-A from Boston I’d vote to ban em. And that’s coming from a guy who loves Chick Fil A too. It’s great shit. But if you ain’t down with the gays you ain’t down with me.
But having said all that I’m not sure it’s fair for Menino to ban an entire restaurant chain by himself because he doesn’t like their religious views. That seems kind of unconstitutional right? Like even though I 100% agree with his stance this seems like something that people need to vote on. If somebody is willing to lease them the space they should be able to come. It’s not like Chick Fil A bans gays from the restaurant. If people want to eat there they should be allowed to eat there. If people want to boycott they should be allowed to boycott. Let the market dictate whether they succeed or fail in Boston not Mumbles just saying they can’t come and making a show of it. What if the situation was reversed and Chick Fil A was pro gay marriage and Menino was anti? Theoretically he could still ban them then too. I mean where do you draw the line in the sand? Menino doesn’t like Blackout Parties so those are banned too? Menino doesn’t like soda so he bans that too? Is Boston a dictatorship or a democracy? Actually check that. We all know the answer. And therein lies the problem.
PS – In all seriousness I think if Chick Fil A sued the City of Boston they’d win. This coming from a guy who literally knows nothing about the law, but I’m pretty sure I’m 100% right.