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 have never had much desire to eat there, but now I will every chance I get. It's their business and they can run it any legal way they see fit.
20yrsinBranson
So you haven't ate there, but are agreeing to eat it, even if its bad tasting?
No one is saying they don't have a right to free speech. But what people who are boycotting don't like is that the money they make is used to support anti gay marriage groups.
Much like some business supported Hitler because of his disdain for Jews.
No on is trying to take their right of free speech, but why support a company who's profits go to things you despise?
An entire "controversy du jour" brought to you by the Left-Wing Americans.....more deflection away from Obama's MISERABLE record on the economy, unemployment, etc, etc, etc......
Huh? Dan Cathy brought this on himself and his company. All he had to do was keep his mouth shut.
Believe it or not, moderates didn't like his statements, and conservatives with gay friends, children, relatives or parents didn't like them either.
You suffer from an overabundance of lumpage with this comment.
Huh? Dan Cathy brought this on himself and his company. All he had to do was keep his mouth shut.
Believe it or not, moderates didn't like his statements, and conservatives with gay friends, children, relatives or parents didn't like them either.
You suffer from an overabundance of lumpage with this comment.
Very good point. Not everyone who dares disagree with a conservative extremist on one particular issue is a liberal
So you haven't ate there, but are agreeing to eat it, even if its bad tasting?
Inasmuch as he has not dined there, he does not know if he would like the food or not. I suggest he goes to a resturant, order a meal, and make up his OWN mind.
[snip]The answer is simple: People oppose gay marriage because THEY WANT TO. Not because of their religion, and certainly not because of any consistent evidence they have found (It would've been provided here and/or in all the other threads in which I've presented this challenge and they've failed at it.)
Let's say someone opposes ssm because they:
1. don't want social security or any other public programs to pay out any more money than it must now. SSM would add many new recipients to spousal benefits, so no to ssm.
2. oppose all gov't. involvement in marriage. The more people who get married with gov't. sanction, the harder it will be to achieve the ultimate goal of getting gov't. out of marriage.
Those are purely secular reasons. I'm sure you won't consider them 'valid,' but they can be argued on purely secular grounds.
1. don't want social security or any other public programs to pay out any more money than it must now. SSM would add many new recipients to spousal benefits, so no to ssm.
2. oppose all gov't. involvement in marriage. The more people who get married with gov't. sanction, the harder it will be to achieve the ultimate goal of getting gov't. out of marriage.
Those are purely secular reasons. I'm sure you won't consider them 'valid,' but they can be argued on purely secular grounds.
For your sake, jazzarama, I will clarify:
There is no justification for discriminating against homosexuals in this way. If you're okay with legal marriage and the benefits involved with it, you should be okay with it for both heterosexuals and homosexuals. If you're not okay with legal marriage and the benefits involved for either group of people, fine by me. But the discrimination is unjustifiable, by any means.
I have never had much desire to eat there, but now I will every chance I get. It's their business and they can run it any legal way they see fit.
20yrsinBranson
This is my point. This CFA stunt will encourage instead of discourage the rabid bible thumpers that live in the backwards areas of the country. Most of the customers in the southern states are either apathetic sheeple or ultra-religious to the point of now eating CFA sandwiches every day.
Kind of the way that Madonna used to shock people, creating controversy and then laughing all the way to the bank.
I ate CFA sandwiches at least 5-6 times a week, but family types typically flood the limited amount of stores that CFA has.
Originally Posted by hotair2
Most of the people that I know that live in Atlanta call Metro Atlanta -Atlanta. If you put Atlanta on your mail and you live in COllege Park, it will get to you. I think that the corporate office is actually in College Park.
I don't know about College Park. It would be interesting. Atlanta - metro Atlanta, has a huge gay population. I would bet after SF and New York it is the largest.
wehotex opined:
I went over there for gay pride once. They don't seem to be the "activist" type to me, sheeple just like most southern folk. There hasn't been a good southern social "liberal" (going against the grain) there since Scarlett O'Hara.
By championing KFC, Pelosi is one of the latest politicians to criticize Chick-fil-A for President Dan Cathy’s statements about his support for traditional marriage.
Unfortunately, her chicken of choice does not necessarily reflect a better progressive world, since KFC has come under recent criticism from environmentalists for destroying the rainforest.
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.
Pelosi's moonbattery strikes again!
