This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Wait, is that legal? Can the mayor of a city just target a specific business on ideological grounds like that?
No, but chic fil a is a predominately southern chain that wasn’t about to expand into Boston anyways.
More options
Context Copy link
Probably not
That was 10 years ago (and Chick-Fil-A did indeed open more Chicago locations). Today, due to the American Bar Association's Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policy, Chick-Fil-A would find that they could not get a lawyer as it would be unethical to represent them.
Oh nonsense. Go show me an actual state bar code of ethics that says it is unethical to represent actual racists, etc. You won't find one. And I guarantee that they have a lawyer in this suit
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I don’t think the 1A covers businesses like that.
The 1A definitely applies to cities, not just feds and states. It has a complicated history with corporate speech such as advertising and solicitation.
As long as residents can get a service somewhere relatively close, it appears restrictions are okay, even on businesses serving constitutional rights.
More options
Context Copy link
It depends on what action the mayor would actually take. Writing a letter about how a business isn't welcome in the town? Probably fine. Denying them a permit or otherwise taking some adverse action under color of law? Probably a 1st amendment violation if the basis is their speech.
More options
Context Copy link
IANAL, but what laws would you expect to be in the books that that would violate?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link