Chick-Fil-A - Boycott or support?

[Nakuyabi]

i believe i asked "why is gayness of such concern?". what i meant was why is the nation so worried about this instead of something more important? really, who cares about who is gay? when some new law gets passed or some major company "loses" 300 billion dollars and gets bailed out by our money, what do we do? not much if anything. when somebody talks about not supporting a different lifestyle, we line up by the thousands across the country! we are so distracted. not to say that this issue is not important, it is for both sides, but this whole thing is silly. oh and by the way, i enjoy watching 2 chicks go at it, sometimes 3 or 4. but 2 dudes? thats just inappropriate.

Well, for that bigoted and hypocritical attitude, GLAAD and PFLAG and a whole host of others would like to force you to watch 2 dudes going at it. In fact, they'd like a whole bunch of dudes have a go at you in prison.

Incidentally, people do complain when the government wastes our money too: if anything history is far more likely to despise Barney Frank for his incestuous financial relationship with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae than for letting that one guy whatsizname run a gay prostitution ring from his house decades ago. It's just, what are they going to do about it? Our media's also not about to report on all the government's thieving and waste when Democrats are in power, and it's likely that a fair number of the people who voted for these guys actually approve of all this thieving and waste anyway.

[Cthulhu]

In my observation, our media is always pro-sodomy and anti-Christian, and "tolerance" always only goes in one direction. The reason I oppose "marriage" between two people of the same sex is because it legally imposes their phony definitions of marriage on the rest of us and discriminates against those of us who oppose them based on our creed.

Phony definition of marriage? I suppose you use the bible's definition. Okay. Go ahead. But don't stop others from doing their own thing. If you don't like gay marriage, then don't marry a guy. It's that simple. But let others do what they please. You are the one imposing your will on others, in a way that limits their freedom.

ordering all of their employees into some kind of convention or parade or something promoting sodomy

I don't know the whole story here.

Sodomy supporters are always acting as if giving the sodomites their way on "marriage" would be harmless to the rest of us. Oh really? I submit, for your consideration, that sodomy supporters are fascist thugs, that they have bullied, oppressed, and persecuted us using what perverted laws they already have in place, and that they very much intend to use same-sex "marriage" to do the same thing.

Sure..that makes sense in so many ways...actually, no. By "us", I guess you mean christians. Truly, they are the most persecuted minority (at 80% of the population) in America. It's truly sad that a christian man could NEVER become president. I've heard that they have to go to mass in secret. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megachurch )
Also, the bullying that christian kids have to go through once their faith is made public. How many suicides were commited by the faithful, because of their persecution?

Oh wait. That's not the case at all...
Kids who are gay on the other hand, do have a bullying problem. Usually inflicted upon them by ignorant christians. Usually, but not all the time, of course.

Will anybody who doesn't believe in same-sex "marriage" be allowed to refuse to be the photographers at a same-sex "wedding" on First Amendment grounds? [urlhttp://www.lifesite.net/news/photographers-guilty-of-discrimination-for-refusing-to-shoot-same-sex-weddi]The tyrants in black robes in a New Mexico court say no.[/url]

I think that this is wrong. Even if the photographer refused for stupid reasons, he should've been able to do so. It's his right after all.

By the way, if you support Proposition 8, sodomy supporters think they should "Burn [your] f---ing churches to the ground, and then tax the charred timbers."

I'm not familiar with proposition 8. However, don't try to make a strawman argument. I've seen worse comments about Jessica Ahlquist by the other side. Death threats were commonplace.

Then there's North Carolina's Proposition 1, which passed 60-40. The sodomy supporters' responses? Here's one of the nicer ones: "Can I just kill everyone in North Carolina?" That link leads to a lot more of this civility from all those loving, tolerant sodomy supporters who just can't quite bring themselves to understand why I'm so bitterly opposed to all this loving and tolerance of theirs.

See above.

Question: in view of of their pushing this sick stuff on our kids, why hasn't every GLSEN member been arrested for child molesting and moral turpitude?

Answer: Because it's mental child molesting. That's different. We have to be tolerant of it because it's "free" speech (paid for with tax dollars) and they're "fighting hatred" (of pederasty and pedophilia) in our schools. Only a hateful Christian bigot could possibly be opposed making kids read pederastic porn, obviously.

I'm not sure about "pushing" this on the kids. Are they forced to read it? I really don't know.

And why do you equate homosexuality with pedophilia? They are not the same thing at all, you know. Two consenting adults can do as they please. If someone rapes a child, he deserves the harshest of punishments.

Of course, if same-sex "marriage" were legalized, people would almost have to let these perverts "adopt" children and show them these books to help indoctrinate them with their sicko beliefs, wouldn't they?

Just because someone is gay, doesn't mean he or she rapes children. Get this through your head. Would an orphan really be at a better place in an orphanage than in a loving home with two parents?
And as for indoctrinating children with their sicko beliefs, that should hit quite close to home to you, shouldn't it? And I doubt that gay parents try to raise their adopted children to be gay. After all, they should know what it is like to have heterosexuality forced on them by their parents. Well, I guess most of them.

And if a scientific study makes the mild observation that children on the whole tend to be at a bit of a disadvantage being raised under two "mommies" or "daddies" as compared to the traditional family, well, the people who did that study will have to be "scrutinized" (bullied) won't they? Do you suppose we'd be seeing any of this "scrutiny" from the usual suspects if the study had made the contrary observation? That's a little something to remember the next time sodomy supporters claim the science is on their side: it's easy to bend science to one's agenda when contrary observations are outlawed. That's one reason you'd never know there's no such thing as a "gay" gene and sodomites are most definitely not "born that way."

The criticism of the study seems valid. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/debra-umberson/texas-professors-gay-research_b_1628988.html

If you make a study with an already decided outcome, you will make it so that you will get that outcome.
And whether they are born this way (which I belive they do) or not, makes no difference in the question of marriage.

Needless to say, sodomy supporters are also determined to outlaw reparative therapy just to make sure that nobody is allowed to change his or her sexual desires.

Good. You can't pray the gay away. The people who say that you can are most likely delusional, or possibly want your money.
I find it disgusting that certain christians tell homosexuals that they are sinners, less than human, and that they need Jesus in their lives. No. This is evil. They deserve the same rights as all human beings, and should not be treated differently.

If marriage is really what you want, there is absolutely nothing in American law preventing you from being married in the eyes of any god who'll have you right now. (The Christian God won't, no matter what any of the Bible-rejecting pretend-Christians who support sodomy may say.) What the sodomite bullies and thugs are seeking is to be married in the eyes of their god the state, which will then allow them to punish dissenting thought criminals such as Christians with unemployment, heavy fines, and possibly prison time. If the sodomites were really into marital liberty, they could call for privatization; instead, they demand the state be their bully pulpit. That's why true Christians and everyone else who believes in religious liberty should resist it.

What are you babbling about? What world do you live in? Do you seriously believe that? They want to get married, for f**k's sake. If anyone can be accused of punishing thought crime, it's the religious. Noone is going to take your jobs or put you in prison...I can't believe I have to tell you this.

With these perverts poisoning the minds of the next generation in our public schools, however, I can only wonder how much longer we'll be able to hold out.

Good question. I want religion out of schools too.

[indianasmith]

Naku, all that diatribe will accomplish is to get this thread shut down.
Remember when I said something about "playing nice"?  This isn't it.

[Jim H]

The most interesting thing to come out of this has been the mayors and such trying to shut down Chick-Fil-A or deny them business licenses, etc.  It's one of the very few times I've seen where I think the rights claim of someone being persecuted by leftists for their beliefs is completely correct.

A few points...

Chick-Fil-A has pretty good food.  They also have the healthiest food of any fried foods fast food chain, interestingly enough. 

I actually think it's cool they're closed on Sunday, I wish more businesses were open fewer days - days of rest are good for everyone, in my opinion.  They cement social bonds and give people more time to themselves and their families. 

That said, I find it completely bizarre they'd drag their religious beliefs into this area of their business.  Why even talk about it at all? 

[Psycho Circus]

To Kakihara - I think you are deliberately exaggerating to make a point.  First of all, you know and I know there are many kinds of love.  There is paternal love (for our children), romantic love (usually for only one special person at a time), sexual attraction (which may or may not be a kind of love, depending on who you ask), and altruistic love (a deep and unselfish concern for the wellbeing of others).

Why is it such a big deal in America?  Most Americans are Christians, at least nominally (something like 80% in the last national poll).  The Bible, in both the Old and New Testaments, condemns homosexuality as a sin.  Sin, of course, implies choice.  A huge debate in recent years is whether sexual orientation is a result of nature or nurture. Different studies have come to mixed conclusions.  I guess, in answer to your question, the Christian position is that God made men and women, and men and women (for whatever reason) became homosexual.  The question about Jesus is, I think, a rhetorical flourish on your part, but if the question was sincere, NO.  Loving humanity enough to endure crucifixion in order to pay the price for their sins does NOT make him gay!

And I agree, making out in public is in poor taste, regardless of who does it.

I wasn't raised that way and I don't understand it.

This is where I'm applying it. 

[AndyC]

That said, I find it completely bizarre they'd drag their religious beliefs into this area of their business.  Why even talk about it at all? 

That's exactly what I find so bizarre about this. Remember the good old days, when a restaurant served food, and its owners had little to say publicly about anything not related to food? Remember when the only thing people considered when deciding where to dine was what they wanted to eat? Why is everyone so determined to let this stuff spill over into every part of life?

When I do business, I concern myself with the business I'm in. I try to set aside personal issues and be professional. And when I dine out, I just want to enjoy the food. I don't want to be thinking about whether I agree with the restaurant owner about this, that or the other thing.

It's as though we've been so bombarded in the last 50 years by the virtues of standing up and speaking out and exercising rights that we've lost any sense of the appropriate time and place for things. We've forgotten the importance of knowing when to just shut up and do your job, or shut up and try to get along, or shut up and enjoy your chicken. As a society, we've got it into our heads that evil will triumph if we let anything slide, even if that means living in a perpetual state of righteous indignation.

[Zapranoth]

We've forgotten the importance of knowing when to just shut up and do your job, or shut up and try to get along, or shut up and enjoy your chicken. As a society, we've got it into our heads that evil will triumph if we let anything slide, even if that means living in a perpetual state of righteous indignation.

I'm not trying to put myself beyond this by praising it, but -- this is very well said.

[Allhallowsday]

In my observation, our media is always pro-sodomy and anti-Christian, and "tolerance" always only goes in one direction. The reason I oppose "marriage" between two people of the same sex is because it legally imposes their phony definitions of marriage on the rest of us and discriminates against those of us who oppose them based on our creed.

Case in point: the pro-sodomy groups are forever complaining about hiring and firing discrimination, but the preacher at my church was, in fact, forced to resign from a company where he was employed back before he was a preacher because they were ordering all of their employees into some kind of convention or parade or something promoting sodomy. Needless to say, I don't think any of the hate-mongering hypocrites currently screaming against Chick-Fil-A much care about what happened to him, or what happens to the great many more Christians like him they're oppressing and discriminating against in their workplaces. (Incidentally, his courageous stand also convinced another Christian lady to quit.)

Sodomy supporters are always acting as if giving the sodomites their way on "marriage" would be harmless to the rest of us. Oh really? I submit, for your consideration, that sodomy supporters are fascist thugs, that they have bullied, oppressed, and persecuted us using what perverted laws they already have in place, and that they very much intend to use same-sex "marriage" to do the same thing.

More cases in point:

Will anybody who doesn't believe in same-sex "marriage" be allowed to refuse to be the photographers at a same-sex "wedding" on First Amendment grounds? [urlhttp://www.lifesite.net/news/photographers-guilty-of-discrimination-for-refusing-to-shoot-same-sex-weddi]The tyrants in black robes in a New Mexico court say no.[/url]

Speaking of tyrants in black robes, California's Proposition 8 amendment to the state constitution passed with overwhelming support from black Democrats, whereupon the sodomy supporters took it to court. Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who's er, into sodomy himself, refused to recuse himself from the case. Gosh, wonder what his decision was? It's pretty blatantly lawless to rule a constitutional amendment un-Constitutional, but other judicial tyrants stood by their fellow judicial tyrant's decision saying this, of course. By the way, if you support Proposition 8, sodomy supporters think they should "Burn [your] f---ing churches to the ground, and then tax the charred timbers."

Then there's North Carolina's Proposition 1, which passed 60-40. The sodomy supporters' responses? Here's one of the nicer ones: "Can I just kill everyone in North Carolina?" That link leads to a lot more of this civility from all those loving, tolerant sodomy supporters who just can't quite bring themselves to understand why I'm so bitterly opposed to all this loving and tolerance of theirs.

Their child-recruiting group GLSEN is pushing kiddie porn in schools to ever-younger groups of kids using our tax dollars. Here's one of the cleaner passages from one of the books they're pushing:

My sexual exploits with my neighborhood playmates continued. I lived a busy homosexual childhood, somehow managing to avoid venereal disease through all my toddler years. By first grade I was sexually active with many friends. In fact, a small group of us regularly met in the grammar school lavatory to perform fellatio on one another. A typical week’s schedule would be Aaron and Michael on Monday during lunch; Michael and Johnny on Tuesday after school; Fred and Timmy at noon Wednesday; Aaron and Timmy after school on Thursday. None of us ever got caught, but we never worried about it anyway. We all understood that what we were doing was not to be discussed freely with adults but we viewed it as a fun sort of confidential activity. None of us had any guilty feelings about it; we figured everyone did it. Why shouldn’t they?

--Reflections of a Rock Lobster

Question: in view of of their pushing this sick stuff on our kids, why hasn't every GLSEN member been arrested for child molesting and moral turpitude?

Answer: Because it's mental child molesting. That's different. We have to be tolerant of it because it's "free" speech (paid for with tax dollars) and they're "fighting hatred" (of pederasty and pedophilia) in our schools. Only a hateful Christian bigot could possibly be opposed making kids read pederastic porn, obviously.

Mercifully, "Safe School Czar" Kevin Jennings, who spearheaded this effort in our schools with full support from the current administration in the White House (not to mention NAMBLA), is gone. Not so mercifully, GLSEN is still very much in our public schools, and continues to push this perversion on our kids. Gosh, why would anybody be afraid to trust sodomites and their supporters with our kids?

Of course, if same-sex "marriage" were legalized, people would almost have to let these perverts "adopt" children and show them these books to help indoctrinate them with their sicko beliefs, wouldn't they?

And if a scientific study makes the mild observation that children on the whole tend to be at a bit of a disadvantage being raised under two "mommies" or "daddies" as compared to the traditional family, well, the people who did that study will have to be "scrutinized" (bullied) won't they? Do you suppose we'd be seeing any of this "scrutiny" from the usual suspects if the study had made the contrary observation? That's a little something to remember the next time sodomy supporters claim the science is on their side: it's easy to bend science to one's agenda when contrary observations are outlawed. That's one reason you'd never know there's no such thing as a "gay" gene and sodomites are most definitely not "born that way."

Needless to say, sodomy supporters are also determined to outlaw reparative therapy just to make sure that nobody is allowed to change his or her sexual desires. De Cecco's analysis of Kinsey's work which suggested that it was telling us sexuality is "changeable as the weather" will, of course, have to be outlawed too.

I could go on, but I think it should suffice to say that as far as I can see, same-sex "marriage" doesn't really have anything to do with love or liberty, but only with promoting perversion and outlawing all dissenting opinions. If a man wants to "marry" another man or a woman another woman, they can already draw up a private legal contract conferring all the general legal benefits of marriage on them; plenty of lawyers are more than willing (for a fee) to play along with any definition of marriage you may have, including if you'd like to marry your sheep. (You might still not be allowed to have sex with your sheep depending on your state's laws, but you can marry them.) Inheritance laws, likewise, allow you to leave everything to whomever you wish, including pets, wild animals, and inanimate objects. (e.g. "I hereby leave my entire vast fortune to be burned on a campfire.")

If marriage is really what you want, there is absolutely nothing in American law preventing you from being married in the eyes of any god who'll have you right now. (The Christian God won't, no matter what any of the Bible-rejecting pretend-Christians who support sodomy may say.) What the sodomite bullies and thugs are seeking is to be married in the eyes of their god the state, which will then allow them to punish dissenting thought criminals such as Christians with unemployment, heavy fines, and possibly prison time. If the sodomites were really into marital liberty, they could call for privatization; instead, they demand the state be their bully pulpit. That's why true Christians and everyone else who believes in religious liberty should resist it.

This latest assault on Chick-Fil-A is merely one in a long line of thuggish assaults on religious liberty in America, and I am somewhat heartened to see that people still resist these anti-religious hate campaigns. With these perverts poisoning the minds of the next generation in our public schools, however, I can only wonder how much longer we'll be able to hold out. The nearest Chick-Fil-A is an hour's drive from my house, but the next time I'm down in the city, I think I'll pay it a visit for lunch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anTMH-0hjGs
	Small | Large

...I could go on...

Oh-oh yeh, no doubt!  Windbag. 

[indianasmith]

The thing is, the interviewer ASKED Mr. Cathy the question.  It wasn't like he went on the air with a PSA.  If someone asks me my opinion on something, I am going to give it to him!  (I am sure you guys did not know that!)

[Allhallowsday]

The thing is, the interviewer ASKED Mr. Cathy the question.  It wasn't like he went on the air with a PSA.  If someone asks me my opinion on something, I am going to give it to him!  (I am sure you guys did not know that!)

Yeh, but nobody asked Nakuyabi... 

[Raffine]

Naku, all that diatribe will accomplish is to get this thread shut down.

That, and all the grade school fellatio. 

[Nakuyabi]

Good question. I want religion out of schools too.

All of this just proves my point: you and your pervert buddies are all hate-mongering totalitarian thugs, and all of this "marriage" nonsense is just another power play in your true agenda: suppression of all our First Amendment rights, and establishment of your totalitarian thuggery as the state religion with government schools as your madrassas.

[indianasmith]

With all due respect, as the long time representative of the right wing end of thinking on this forum, I would like to say:

You are nutty.

[Nakuyabi]

Naku, all that diatribe will accomplish is to get this thread shut down.
Remember when I said something about "playing nice"?  This isn't it.

I see no reason to "play nice" when your enemies are playing for keeps. If AHD and Cthulhu and a great many others like them had their way, you and so very many others wouldn't be allowed to post threads at all. From what I've seen of your posting, you think "playing nice" means treating your friends like your enemies and your enemies like your friends! Try treating your friends like your friends and your enemies like your enemies for a change.

[Cthulhu]

Good question. I want religion out of schools too.

All of this just proves my point: you and your pervert buddies are all hate-mongering totalitarian thugs, and all of this "marriage" nonsense is just another power play in your true agenda: suppression of all our First Amendment rights, and establishment of your totalitarian thuggery as the state religion with government schools as your madrassas.

You've failed to address any of my points. And I don't want to take away your right to have religion. But I do want to be left alone. If you choose to live your life under an imaginary dictator and his servants, go ahead. Don't force it down on my throat though. Or any child's throat for that matter.
As for establishing a state religion: that's precisely what I DON'T want. But why am I even bothering to use reason against someone who has clearly rejected it?