Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am still puzzled why Chickfila leaders even think their opinion on gay marriage is relevant to their business goal of selling more chicken and potatoes.
Its not, yet you and others want to ban them for using what we use to call, Free Speech.
Principles? Your assertion is that you can only support a case if people suffer enough for it. So I suppose you would not have supported equal rights for women or blacks if there had not been protests? Without protests you would believe today that women and blacks are not equal? Your principles are controlled only by the actions of others, which is rather unique. I suppose then that you do support and join in the case against all wars, as Quakers protest and refuse to pay taxes based upon this. When will you be refusing to pay taxes for this reason, as you are so easily swayed by the beliefs of others that your criteria is what others are doing in protest?
I also assume that you will be giving cash to everyone you meet who holds different beliefs that you do, as somehow NOT doing so is morally wrong?
My assertion is that if you are upset enough at the government, you should protest by not paying taxes and by picketing/demonstrating in Washington. I would respect that much more than a boycott of fast food.
Women and blacks (and gays, back in the days of the Stonewall riots) were willing to do just that. They had/have my admiration and support. The "marriage equality" bunch have not exhibited the same kind of passion. This thread is about Chick Fil A, and I'm calling people out on that. who cares about Chick Fil A? Take on the real holders of power- your federal government. Or as the Daminos poster points out- use your human rights and just marry already.
I suppose my point would be that you can't come up with a better argument against any of it than "typical rants". Fair enough, however. You are (legally, only legally) entitled to your opinion.
Didn't know where you wanted to go with it. Regarding the video from post 1947 I think...
How about this - the Prov. 25:21 part at the end where she suggests people asking for free water...
1- If it's not a true need, then you are justing testing people. God says He shouldn't be tested. I don't think we should just submit to someone just because they give us a hoop to jump through.
2- You are dealing w/ individual stores, not the CEO. So it won't have that much to do with him anyway. Do you think they should just have a free water policy for anybody? He has to pay for the water.
3- The passage is more for just regular personal relationships - or if the Holy Spirit leads one to give. Now if he he feels led to do that nationwide and he holds back - then OK he's at fault. But that's between him and God.
I just find it interesting that it's OK for this person to put all these judgements on CFA - but when the Christian person judges - no,no,no - you can't judge people. Practice what you preach people.
What do you mean that you do not have all the rights that I (as a heterosexual) have? You have all the rights. That is my contention. Furthermore, you willingly let government curtail your rights. Tell me how you do not have all the rights I do. You actually have more rights that we heterosexuals do. We have to get a license to get married, you do not (unless you live in a tyrannical state like New York).
What? How do same-sex couples not need a license to get married, and how do they have more rights than opposite-sex couples?
No one is trying to tell Chik Fil A they can't donate to who they want, say what they want, and do what they want.
What people are saying is that they won't support them as long as they oppose a position that they are in favor of.
This is free speech ALL THE WAY AROUND.
When in the hell did people get the idea that others are trying to silence them by law or something?
Ridiculous.
Quote:
On Wednesday, Moreno did not dispute that Cathy had the right to say what he said. But, Moreno said, "There are consequences for freedom of speech (and) in this case the consequences are... you're not going to have your first free-standing restaurant in Chicago."
Chick-fil-A has obtained a zoning permit for the restaurant but needs approval from the City Council to divide the land, Moreno said. And in a city where the City Council rarely go against the wishes of the alderman, Chick-fil-A needs Moreno's help.
Sure sounds like an attempt to silence the owner of Chick-fil-a, by a person who represents the government and legitimately yields power over them economically, to me. How else could it be interpreted?
No one is trying to tell Chik Fil A they can't donate to who they want, say what they want, and do what they want.
What people are saying is that they won't support them as long as they oppose a position that they are in favor of.
This is free speech ALL THE WAY AROUND.
When in the hell did people get the idea that others are trying to silence them by law or something?
Ridiculous.
I hate to say it, my friend, but this is EXTREMELY typical of the right wing especially the religious right. They're factually challenged and it really is a sign that they know they've lost the argument when they start making up stuff like you detailed above.
What? How do same-sex couples not need a license to get married, and how do they have more rights than opposite-sex couples?
No one should be required by ANY government to get married. Heterosexual couples have less rights than homosexuals (in general, unless they live in tyrannical states like California or New York) because heterosexuals require a license to be married. Homosexuals can just get married in the old fashion way.
They have more rights than heterosexual couples because in most states heterosexuals have more obligations than homosexuals to get married.
I hate to say it, my friend, but this is EXTREMELY typical of the right wing especially the religious right.
I agree. If you dare to question or challenge any of their statements, they'll say you're trying to silence them and force your beliefs on them. They often sound hysterical about it. It's almost comical.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
