Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
The Library => Haley Center Basement => Topic started by: Townhallsavoy on July 24, 2012, 11:34:50 PM
-
This should excite some of you.
https://www.facebook.com/events/444598242237116
-
:facepalm: at humanity.
I find the Boston ban of Chick Fil A ironic. They are banning CFA from Boston because of the CEO's view on gays. The very people preaching for tolerance? They none. Other views? They don't want to hear em. Serious irony.
-
A few things here.
#1) Why is this shocking? A company based in the south that closes on Sunday's for worship, that is openly Christian doesn't support gay marriage!!! Who would have thunk it?
#2) Why all the outrage? It's not like the dude said they should die in a lake of fire, he just said that they don't support gay marriage. I think he even said something about praying for them and stuff.
#3) The boycotts, I for one welcome them. Not enough gays eat there anyways and all that means is a shorter line for me when I want some of that gay hating spicy chicken goodness with peperjack.
-
A few things here.
#1) Why is this shocking? A company based in the south that closes on Sunday's for worship, that is openly Christian doesn't support gay marriage!!! Who would have thunk it?
#2) Why all the outrage? It's not like the dude said they should die in a lake of fire, he just said that they don't support gay marriage. I think he even said something about praying for them and stuff.
#3) The boycotts, I for one welcome them. Not enough gays eat there anyways and all that means is a shorter line for me when I want some of that gay hating spicy chicken goodness with peperjack.
Of course the gay doesn't eat chicken-They like the beef.
-
This should excite some of you.
https://www.facebook.com/events/444598242237116
Well ain't that sweet.
Seriously, this CFA chatter in the media has to be the most non-news news story I've heard...at least in months anyway.
-
This looks like a great opportunity to pick up hot dudes....I mean a #3 with coke.
-
Well ain't that sweet.
Seriously, this CFA chatter in the media has to be the most non-news news story I've heard...at least in months anyway.
Another distraction TH, by the MSM.
-
Another distraction TH, by the MSM.
Because they can't talk about the economy, it'd look bad for The Pharaoh
Because they can't talk about world affairs and the Middle East, it'd look bad for The Pharaoh
Because they can't talk about gun control, it'd be bad for Democrats, they want it but they don't want to loose the election.
Because they can't talk about high unemployment, it'd look bad for The Pharaoh
Because they can't talk about high gas prices, it'd look bad for The Pharaoh
Because they can't talk about inflation, it'd look bad for The Pharaoh's economic plans
Because they can't talk about housing prices still going down, it'd look bad for The Pharaoh
Because they can't talk about the stock market, it'd look bad for The Pharaoh's lack of economic leadership
...
-
I think I'll go enjoy a delicious chicken, egg and cheese bagel.
-
I think I'll go enjoy a delicious chicken, egg and cheese bagel.
and some man saliva.
-
I think I'll go enjoy a delicious chicken, egg and cheese bagel.
My hate bagel was delicious this morning.
-
A few things here.
#1) Why is this shocking? A company based in the south that closes on Sunday's for worship, that is openly Christian doesn't support gay marriage!!! Who would have thunk it?
#2) Why all the outrage? It's not like the dude said they should die in a lake of fire, he just said that they don't support gay marriage. I think he even said something about praying for them and stuff.
#3) The boycotts, I for one welcome them. Not enough gays eat there anyways and all that means is a shorter line for me when I want some of that gay hating spicy chicken goodness with peperjack.
I agree with all of this, and will also add that this is ridiculous, especially considering where their priorities are in Chicago.
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/cities-move-to-ban-chick-fil-a-supporters-launch-day-of-support.html
Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Valuesâ€
Posted in Top Stories | 1,973 comments
Jul 25, 2012
By Todd Starnes
Officials in at least three cities have vowed to block efforts to open Chick-fil-A restaurants after the company’s president told reporters that he supported the traditional definition of marriage – and warned that redefining marriage might bring God’s judgment on the nation.
FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE.
“Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values,†said Mayor Rahm Emanuel in a statement to the Chicago Tribune. “They disrespect our fellow neighbors and residents.â€
Emanuel was vowing his support for Alderman Proco Moreno’s announcement that he would block construction of a Chick-fil-A restaurant in his district.
“If you are discriminating against a segment of the community, I don’t want you in the First Ward,†he told the newspaper.
Chick-fil-A is privately owned by the Cathy family. The company president, Dan Cathy, drew the wrath of gay rights advocates and supporters when he made recent statements that some have alleged are anti-gay.
Cathy told Baptist Press that the company was unapologetically in favor of traditional marriage.
“Guilty as charged,†he said. “We are very much supportive of the family – the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.â€
In a separate interview on the Ken Coleman Show — Cathy suggested that the nation could face God’s wrath over the redefinition of marriage.
“I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,’†Cathy said. “I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is all about.â€
Alderman Moreno called Cathy’s comments “bigoted†and “homophobic.â€
SARAH PALIN AND MARK LEVIN LOVE TODD’S NEW BOOK. CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT WHY.
“Because of this man’s ignorance, I will now be denying Chick-fil-A’s permit to open a restaurant in the First Ward,†he announced.
Boston Mayor Tom Menino was the first to announce that the Atlanta-based company would not be welcomed in his city.
“You can’t have a business in the City of Boston that discriminates against a population,†he told the Boston Globe. “We’re an open city. We’re a city that’s at the forefront of inclusion.â€
And Mountain View, Calif, a bedroom community of San Francisco, has temporarily blocked the chicken chain from opening.
A homosexual couple spearheaded an effort to launch a zoning challenge.
“It could be Mother Teresa that owns it and it would be a bad place,†resident David Speakman told SFGate.com. “But because it was a bunch of bigots, it gave us an extra nudge.â€
With the help of friends, a gay South Bay couple has at least temporarily blocked the very Christian-minded Chick-fil-A
The company’s position on traditional marriage notwithstanding, threats to ban the company have drawn fire from editorial pages across the nation.
The Los Angeles Times condemned the decision, calling it far more troubling than Chick-fil-A’s support of traditional marriage.
“Public officials have a responsibility to carry out their ministerial tasks fairly and evenhandedly – and to uphold the principle of free speech – whether or not they like a business executive’s social or political stances,†the Times opined.
The Boston Globe wondered “which part of the First Amendment does Menino not understand? A business owner’s political or religious beliefs should not be a test for the worthiness of his or her application for a business license.
Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin said “Boston’s Founding Fathers must be steaming in their graves.â€
“When an elected public official wields the club of government against a Christian business in the name of “tolerance,†it’s not harmless kid stuff,†Malkin wrote. “It’s chilling.â€
Meanwhile, thousands of Christians are mobilizing efforts to support Chick-fil-A – led by Fox News Channel host and former Ark. Governor Mike Huckabee.
Huckabee has declared August 1st as Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day.
“Let’s affirm a business that operates on Christian principles and whose executives are willing to take a stand for the Godly values we espouse by simply showing up and eating at Chick-fil-A on Wednesday, August 1,†Huckabee said.
Huckabee said the company has come under attack from militant homosexuals and is being “smeared by vicious hate speech and intolerant bigotry from the left.â€
“The militant homosexual advocates have launched an all out assault on Dan Cathy and Chick-fil-A,†he said. “The attempts to hurt or destroy Chick-fil-A are nothing short of economic bullying.â€
Donald Wildmon, the founder of the American Family Association, is backing Huckabee’s efforts saying he hoped it would generate the largest one-day sales in the company’s history.
“I have been incensed at the vitriolic assaults on the Chick-fil-A company,†Wildmon wrote in an email. “It’s a great American story that is being smeared by vicious hate speech and intolerant bigotry from the left.â€
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, was especially disturbed by the actions of Boston’s mayor.
“This is really outrageous when you see this is the train that follows same sex marriage,†Perkins told Fox News. “This idea of the loss of religious freedom – the freedom of speech — and it’s on perfect display in Boston with the intolerance of this mayor.â€
Perkins noted that Americans have overwhelmingly endorsed the traditional definition of marriage – 32 times in 32 states.
“Chick-fil-A is in the mainstream, he said. “The mayor of Boston is in the minority.â€
“It’s about forcing Americans who do not agree with this agenda to comply and if a business dare step outside of the PC lines they will be attacked just as we are seeing Chick-fil-A being attacked,†Perkins added.
All that being said (and you knew there'd be a "but"), it seems like a weird thing for a business to come out and straight-up eliminate a group of people from their customer base like that. Let alone the multitude of people who will just boycott in support of that group. Seems like bad business to me. I won't get into the general moral discussion on being against gay marriage for religious reasons, because it's been discussed before. All I'll say is that the "Bible's definition of marriage" says that if you die your wife has to marry your brother, you can never divorce, polygamy and concubines are cool, and if you get raped you have to marry your attacker.
But again, I'm still eating Chick-Fil-A, and I'm cool with the smaller lines as long as it doesn't end up raising the price on my #1 combo.
-
My hate bagel was delicious this morning.
I bet someone liked your Chick n Mini too.
-
I bet someone liked your Chick n Mini too.
I think you meant this for Buzzzzzzzzzz.
Cheep cheep.
-
I bet someone liked your Chick n Mini too.
Not until August 3. Then some poor chap is getting it behind the Chick-Fil-A dumpster.
-
on my #1 combo.
You are doing Chick-fil-A wrong!
#3, with a slice of pepperjack.
This article. Read it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/in-defense-of-eating-at-chick-fil-a/260139/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/in-defense-of-eating-at-chick-fil-a/260139/)
The Atlantic Home
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Jonathan Merritt - Jonathan Merritt is author of A Faith of Our Own: Following Jesus Beyond the Culture Wars (2012). He's published more than 300 columns in outlets such as USA Today, The Washington Post, The Christian Science Monitor, and CNN.com.
In Defense of Eating at Chick-fil-A
By Jonathan Merritt
Jul 20 2012, 5:30 PM ET 1255
Do we really want a country where people won't do commerce with those who have beliefs different than their own?
Dan Cathy, president of one of America's largest express fast food chains, has been frying more than chicken filets this week. The Chick-fil-A executive infuriated gay and lesbian groups when he again defended his company's anti-gay marriage position in an interview this week with a Christian news outlet.
"We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit," he said. "We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that."
Not surprisingly, his comments were met with fury by those who support same-sex marriage. The company was labeled a "hate group" by many on Twitter and in the blogosphere, and drew promises of boycotts from notables including The Office star Ed Helms. Meanwhile, Americans who patronize the chain's 1,600 locations were left wondering what to do.
Should they swear off the legendary chicken sandwiches to support gay rights? Or could they eat one of the filets anyway, knowing their dollars would be but a drop in the bucket for a chain that has more than $4 billion in annual sales and donated a pittance to groups they may disagree with?
I'd argue the latter -- and this has nothing to do with my views on gay marriage. It's because Chick-fil-A is a laudable organization on balance, and because I refuse to contribute to the ineffective boycott culture that's springing up across America.
First of all, Chick-fil-A is not a hate group. In a statement released yesterday, company leaders made their commitment to equal service clear, "The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect -- regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender."
As a native Atlantan, I've dined at the chicken chain more than I'd like to admit over more than two decades and even interacted with its leadership team. I've never witnessed any customer refused service or even treated differently. On the contrary, Chick-fil-A is known for offering world-class customer service to each person that walks through one of the restaurant's doors.
Additionally, the organization gives millions of dollars each year to charitable causes -- and not just to "pro-family" groups. It funds a large foster care program, several schools of a higher learning, and a children's camp. It has provided thousands of scholarships for Chick-fil-A employees to attend college and grow past the service sector where they got their workplace start. (On Friday, the company provided free meals for Aurora, Colo., policemen.)
And the company's leaders claim to do all of this out of convictions rooted in the Christian faith. Anyone who has even a cursory knowledge of the company should know that it does not hide its commitment to biblical values. Its corporate statement of purpose since 1982 has begun, "To glorify God..."
Given this, that anyone was surprised by Cathy's statements is, well, surprising. Like many conservative Christians, he does not support gay marriage.
I'm flummoxed that so many consumers are so quick these days to call for boycotts of any company that deviates from their personal or political views. For one thing, boycotts rarely cause actual pocketbook - rather than PR -- damage. Most consumers don't care enough to drive an extra mile to get the same product from someone else. And that's especially the case for companies as large as Chick-fil-A, which has prime locations on many college campuses where there is little head-to-head competition.
But my bigger question is this: In a nation that's as divided as ours is, do we really want our commercial lives and our political lives to be so wholly intermeshed? And is this really the kind of culture we want to create? Culture war boycotts cut both ways and are much more likely to meet with success when prosecuted by large groups of people, such as Christian activists, who are more numerous than gays and lesbians and their more activist supporters.
Gay and lesbian groups were famously rankled when pro-family activists reacted against Kraft for posting a photo of an Oreo cookie with rainbow-hued filling last month in honor of Gay Pride Month, and also when similar groups protested JCPenney for announcing lesbian talk show host Ellen DeGeneres would be its next spokesperson.
So should the 45 percent of Americans who oppose gay marriage opt for Chips Ahoy! instead of Oreos? Should they begin shopping at Belk instead of JC Penny? If they did, it wouldn't make any more sense than the endless failed calls for liberal consumers to boycott Urban Outfitters, because its owner is a conservative and Rick Santorum donor, or to not order from Domino's Pizza, because it was founded by a Catholic conservative who helped fund anti-abortion causes.
On both sides of our latest culture war divide, we must learn to have level-headed disagreements without resorting to accusations of hate speech and boycotts. As Josh Ozersky argued on TIME Thursday, "businesses should be judged by their products and their practices, not by their politics."
I agree: I don't care how my dry cleaner votes. I just want to know if he/she can press my Oxfords without burning my sleeves. I find no compelling reason to treat sandwiches differently than shirts.
From a business standpoint, some might say Cathy's comments were imprudent if not downright dumb. But in a society that desperately needs healthy public dialogue, we must resist creating a culture where consumers sort through all their purchases (fast food and otherwise) for an underlying politics not even expressed in the nature of the product itself.
If white meat's not your thing, try the Golden Arches. But if you want a perfectly fried chicken sandwich, Chick-fil-A, will be happy to serve you -- gay or straight. In this case, those who boycott are the ones missing out.
-
I think you meant this for Buzzzzzzzzzz.
Cheep cheep.
et tu weste?
-
et tu weste?
I go for the easy laugh.
We have to get maximum mileage out of that joke before the next outing.
-
I go for the easy laugh.
We have to get maximum mileage out of that joke before the next outing.
I get it...going for the low-hanging fruit.
-
I get it...going for the low-hanging fruit.
Which obviously disqualifies Snags from being a target.
-
You are doing Chick-fil-A wrong!
#3, with a slice of pepperjack.
This article. Read it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/in-defense-of-eating-at-chick-fil-a/260139/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/in-defense-of-eating-at-chick-fil-a/260139/)
Agree with this completely.
That's basically what I was saying. I disagree with Cathy, and think it's a weird business move to say that publically, but it does not effect his ability to make a delicious chicken sandwich, and I have no problem giving him my money for that. If I were actually gay, or cared a little bit more than I actually do about the subject, I could see not wanting to give this guy more money that he can in-turn donate to charities aimed at keeping the gay brotha down, so I actually see the other side of it too. Just doesn't affect me enough to care that much.
-
Which obviously disqualifies Snags from being a target.
http://youtu.be/y3Z2MP8vMWU
-
I agree with all of this, and will also add that this is ridiculous, especially considering where their priorities are in Chicago.
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/cities-move-to-ban-chick-fil-a-supporters-launch-day-of-support.html
All that being said (and you knew there'd be a "but"), it seems like a weird thing for a business to come out and straight-up eliminate a group of people from their customer base like that. Let alone the multitude of people who will just boycott in support of that group. Seems like bad business to me. I won't get into the general moral discussion on being against gay marriage for religious reasons, because it's been discussed before. All I'll say is that the "Bible's definition of marriage" says that if you die your wife has to marry your brother, you can never divorce, polygamy and concubines are cool, and if you get raped you have to marry your attacker.
But again, I'm still eating Chick-Fil-A, and I'm cool with the smaller lines as long as it doesn't end up raising the price on my #1 combo.
My big thing with this (regardless of what one thinks is marriage), is that Boston and Chitown are both boycotting CFA because Cathy is "intolerant of other views". By banning them, isn't that what THEY are doing to CFA? And on an even worse level since they are actively banning them? The anti gay views are just Cathy's personal views. He doesn't ban or discriminate people from CFA because of it. But that's exactly what those towns are doing to him. Hypocrisy and then some. And you are right, you'd think Chi would have better things to worry about on the values scale.
-
So, Chik-Fil-A doesn't reflect Chicago values.
In other news, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel played host to Louis Farrakhan this week...
Thanks for clearing that up, dude.
-
Every Saturday if I am coming off the morning shift of umpiring 9 to 2, I swing through the local CF and get 5 spicy chicken sandwiches and one large waffle Fry. Freeze 4 of the sandwiches for lunch during the week and chow down on one.
I think I’ll increase my order.
-
Agree with this completely.
That's basically what I was saying. I disagree with Cathy, and think it's a weird business move to say that publically, but it does not effect his ability to make a delicious chicken sandwich, and I have no problem giving him my money for that. If I were actually gay, or cared a little bit more than I actually do about the subject, I could see not wanting to give this guy more money that he can in-turn donate to charities aimed at keeping the gay brotha down, so I actually see the other side of it too. Just doesn't affect me enough to care that much.
Also, I believe he was asked. Was he supposed to lie or say no comment? They would have ran with that too. Like the Rend unto Caesar answer Jesus gave to a currency question from Pilate's roman guards, it was a trick question with no good answer. The media and the left have turned this into "CFA won't let gays have chicken now!!" propoganda hit piece. Fucking sad.
-
Also, I believe he was asked. Was he supposed to lie or say no comment? They would have ran with that too. Like the Rend unto Caesar answer Jesus gave to a currency question from Pilate's roman guards, it was a trick question with no good answer. The media and the left have turned this into "CFA won't let gays have chicken now!!" propoganda hit piece. Fucking sad.
That Cathy is a piece of shit. Depriving gays of their chicken.
-
If it were just about the money, Chik-fil-a would be open on Sunday. Americans have always prided themselves for standing up for what they believe. Most Americans respect Cathy more for this than the ones who will boycott. I will eat there when I choose and I will probably show up on the first just to accidentally spill my sweet tea with a splash of lemonade on the first couple I see kissing. Gay or straight.
-
I appreciate the fact that somebody has the nuts to come out and have a stance on the issue. That goes for Nabisco for taking a pro-gay stance as well. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion.
-
If it were just about the money, Chik-fil-a would be open on Sunday. Americans have always prided themselves for standing up for what they believe. Most Americans respect Cathy more for this than the ones who will boycott. I will eat there when I choose and I will probably show up on the first just to accidentally spill my sweet tea with a splash of lemonade on the first couple I see kissing. Gay or straight.
You sthpill lemonade on me and Bruce and I'll sthlap you sthilly.
-
That Cathy is a piece of shit. Depriving gays of their chicken.
Sometimes they need the cock golden-fried, and maybe even spicy
-
They come out of the closet and first thing they want is acceptance. Then they want marriage rights, What will they want next, to become president?
:facepalm:
-
(http://i1240.photobucket.com/albums/gg489/shugdye/willy.jpg)
-
(http://i1240.photobucket.com/albums/gg489/shugdye/willy.jpg)
The new kid keeps the hits coming.
-
The new kid keeps the hits coming.
Watch her, she has a mean streak.
-
All that being said (and you knew there'd be a "but"), it seems like a weird thing for a business to come out and straight-up eliminate a group of people from their customer base like that.
I with more people put their personal principles above making a buck. I admire the guy for that.
He'd rather state his beliefs than equivocate in the interest of pacifying a social agenda for the sake of keeping a few customers.
Bravo.
I'm eating at Chick Fil A more often in support.
-
http://youtu.be/3Ephh9J5BWQ
-
This guy is #winning. But from what I've heard about Rahm when he was Barry's pet attack dog in DC he might be willing to fire the first shot.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/31/chicago-religious-leaders-back-chick-fil/
Days after the big city boss blasted the chicken chain over its president's stance on same-sex marriage, an influential Baptist minister and Cardinal Francis George of the Archdiocese of Chicago struck back. The religious leaders, who support the traditional view of marriage, were incensed at Emanuel's claim that "Chick-fil-A's values are not Chicago's values."
"Do not disrespect us...We, too, are Chicago," the Rev. Charles Lyons of the Armitage Baptist Church thundered from the pulpit Sunday.
Cardinal Francis George also criticized Emanuel's stance, asking in the Catholic Chicago Blog if everyone who did not agree with Emanuel faced a similar fate.
"Must those whose personal values do not conform to those of the government of the day move from the city," George wondered. "Is the City Council going to set up a 'Council Committee on Un-Chicagoan Activities' and call those of us who are suspect to appear before it?"
The controversy began when a Chicago Alderman Proco Joe Moreno said he would block the restaurant from opening a location in his ward, citing recent comments by Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy. When asked about the company's values, Cathy was quoted saying he was "guilty as charged" for being "supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit."
Cathy also said on a radio program: “I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say ‘we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,’ and I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about.â€
As officials in other cities, including Boston, San Francisco and New York, blasted Chick-fil-A over Cathy's beliefs, the company issued a new statement over the weekend.
"The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect -- regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender," the statement read. "We will continue this tradition in the over 1,600 restaurants run by independent owner/operators. Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena."
But Lyons had a warning for anyone who tries to impose their values on his congregation.
"If the thought police come to Armitage Baptist Church, we will meet them at the door respectfully, unflinchingly, willing to die on this hill, holding a copy of the Sacred Scriptures in one hand and a copy of the U.S. Constitution in the other," Lyons said in the sermon.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/31/chicago-religious-leaders-back-chick-fil/#ixzz22ESTH9KL
-
This absolutely blows my mind. Why is this such a big story??
When I was in grade school, we read about the Civil War, the Great Depression, and winning World War II.
My kids will be reading about a guy who makes chicken sandwiches inciting riots because he offended two people who can't naturally procreate but want to be recognized by the government that they're married.
-
This absolutely blows my mind. Why is this such a big story??
When I was in grade school, we read about the Civil War, the Great Depression, and winning World War II.
My kids will be reading about a guy who makes chicken sandwiches inciting riots because he offended two people who can't naturally procreate but want to be recognized by the government that they're married.
It's just been simmering and this is the closest that anything has come to blowing the lid off. Just like LA in 1992 took the Rodney King riots to set off the race riots. It's mixed religion and politics just 4 months before the presidential election and given both sides something to talk about besides the economy, which let's face it, is not a topic that republicans or democrats really seem to have the best track record with lately.
-
It's just been simmering and this is the closest that anything has come to blowing the lid off. Just like LA in 1992 took the Rodney King riots to set off the race riots. It's mixed religion and politics just 4 months before the presidential election and given both sides something to talk about besides the economy, which let's face it, is not a topic that republicans or democrats really seem to have the best track record with lately.
Agree.
I also think it and other things (Fluke and Birth Control) have been used as a distraction for the left since the economy and livelihoods of the avg citizen are not something they really want to talk about at the moment.
-
Time to spill the sweet tea......
-
Seriously, I hate this country sometimes...
Apparently since Huckabee & Santorum declared today "Support Chick-Fil-A" day, stores across the country (or at least the south) are 10 times more packed than they usually are, which is quite a statement. The one here on Veterans (the New Orleans equivalent to 280) had the right lane leading into the Chick-Fil-A closed off, directing traffic in and out of the circus.
I still maintain that if your Chick-Fil-A consumption either decreased or increased dramatically because of the CEO's opinion on a social issue...just fuck you.
-
I still maintain that if your Chick-Fil-A consumption either decreased or increased dramatically because of the CEO's opinion on a social issue...just fuck you.
And I say fuck you, you miss the point completely.
It is not whether you agree with the CEO or not. It is about agreeing that the CEO had the RIGHT to do so in the first place.
-
Seriously, I hate this country sometimes...
Apparently since Huckabee & Santorum declared today "Support Chick-Fil-A" day, stores across the country (or at least the south) are 10 times more packed than they usually are, which is quite a statement. The one here on Veterans (the New Orleans equivalent to 280) had the right lane leading into the Chick-Fil-A closed off, directing traffic in and out of the circus.
I still maintain that if your Chick-Fil-A consumption either decreased or increased dramatically because of the CEO's opinion on a social issue...just fuck you.
I'll head there after work to get me some spicy chicken goodness, but it won't be because Rick Santorum or Brother Huck told me to. I despise both of them. This situation didn't need their opinion. I support CFA because it's the guy's right to personally believe what he wants. Just like it is for another company to support gays. First Amendment and all that. I support his right to say what he did.
-
And I say fuck you, you miss the point completely.
It is not whether you agree with the CEO or not. It is about agreeing that the CEO had the RIGHT to do so in the first place.
There's another side to this.
People also have the right to boycott his restaurant because of his speech, which is all protected by the constitution.
People shouldn't increase or decrease their consumption of Chick Fil A unless they vehemently disagree with his statement and feel that eating a sandwich from his store supports his philosophy.
-
(http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d58/saniflush/outrage.jpg)
-
Yeah. I mean, it's all really stupid. I mean really. fucking. stupid.
-
There's another side to this.
People also have the right to boycott his restaurant because of his speech, which is all protected by the constitution.
People shouldn't increase or decrease their consumption of Chick Fil A unless they vehemently disagree with his statement and feel that eating a sandwich from his store supports his philosophy.
This guy gets it.
Seems insanely hypocritical to me that when all the bans and boycotts started, everyone here agreed how ludicrous it was that so many people gave so much of a fuck about one man's opinion, as irrelevant to his actual business of chicken-sandwich making as it was.
Now, suddenly, those people are stupid for voting with their (lack of) dollars so to speak by not supporting the company, while hoardes and hoardes of people wait two hours for an order of chicken nuggets to "support the cause".
Fuck causes. This is such a silly fucking thing to get caught up in one way or the other.
-
Was about to head that way until I got a text saying minimum 1 hour wait. We have 2 here and I was going to head to the one at the Mall. There's a Sub shop directly across from the Mall Chik Phi-A and the owner sent all his help over to CFA to help handle all the customers.
-
(http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d58/saniflush/outrage.jpg)
I believe they technically just asked him if he STILL supported traditional marriage.
He said "guilty as charged".
And all of this uproar from liberals and the media is all for that. We are in a world of hurt if that simple question and answer creates THAT much stress on people. Fucking sad.
-
Was about to head that way until I got a text saying minimum 1 hour wait. We have 2 here and I was going to head to the one at the Mall. There's a Sub shop directly across from the Mall Chik Phi-A and the owner sent all his help over to CFA to help handle all the customers.
Chick Fillet sub????????
-
I'll head there after work to get me some spicy chicken goodness, but it won't be because Rick Santorum or Brother Huck told me to. I despise both of them. This situation didn't need their opinion. I support CFA because it's the guy's right to personally believe what he wants. Just like it is for another company to support gays. First Amendment and all that. I support his right to say what he did.
Ed Zachary.
Little boys and girls are goaded into doing things because of he said/ she said. As adults in this country, we must support the right of an individual or company to stand up for what they believe in. And in doing so, help protect that right. The fact that the gay community openly planned to attack Chik-fil-a and attempt to hurt their sales has backfired on them. The American people hate to be TOLD what to believe. But we respect the right for people to state what they believe without being attacked for it. If there is a company claiming to support gay marriage, I will not attack that company. I will, however, exercise my right not to do business there. The militant gays decided to attack. I'm glad we as Americans still support the right of free speech.
-
Ed Zachary.
Little boys and girls are goaded into doing things because of he said/ she said. As adults in this country, we must support the right of an individual or company to stand up for what they believe in. And in doing so, help protect that right. The fact that the gay community openly planned to attack Chik-fil-a and attempt to hurt their sales has backfired on them. The American people hate to be TOLD what to believe. But we respect the right for people to state what they believe without being attacked for it. If there is a company claiming to support gay marriage, I will not attack that company. I will, however, exercise my right not to do business there. The militant gays decided to attack. I'm glad we as Americans still support the right of free speech.
And let's expand on this. Toyota is a very gay friendly company (as are most car companies). So is it ok if I boycott them? And does it make the gays that DO buy from them because of it any less noble? This could really get into a slippery slope situation if you let it. Another reason why I agree with THS in saying this is a mountain made from a small mole hill.
I have no issue with people coming to Chick Fil A's defense. They were getting pounded on unfairly in the media and by the left which can actually have a huge impact with PR and financially. If me going helps to ensure they don't lose revenue because of a personal opinion, then so be it. I have no issue with that.
-
And for the record, I went to Chick-Fil-A yesterday.
Not going today.
-
And for the record, I went to Chick-Fil-A yesterday.
Not going today.
Not sure I will either. Was actually craving it last night and wanted some today (nothing to do with the debate going on). Because of the lines and all, I probably will just wait til tomorrow.
-
And for the record, I went to Chick-Fil-A yesterday.
Not going today.
It's because you hate straight people!
-
I'll be walking by on my way to workout soon...I'll say hello to VV for the board.
-
I'll be walking by on my way to workout soon...I'll say hello to VV for the board.
Is he gonna be there protesting?
-
Is he gonna be there protesting?
Dammit...it's not Friday?
-
Was about to head that way until I got a text saying minimum 1 hour wait. We have 2 here and I was going to head to the one at the Mall. There's a Sub shop directly across from the Mall Chik Phi-A and the owner sent all his help over to CFA to help handle all the customers.
I went at 7:30 this morning because I knew it would be insane at lunch.
As far as why went... I went this morning for several reasons but supporting Huckabee was not necessarily one of them. I have never watched his show on Fox and probably never will (I personally hate all the Rush Limbaugh, Al Franken, Neil Boortz, John Stewart, etc shows). Having a somewhat organized day for people to support Chick-fil-a is a good idea for the supporters just as having a day for everyone to protest is a good idea for the anti's. Who called for it was immaterial to me.
-
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/e86050c415/kfc-loves-gays-with-john-goodman?playlist=featured_videos
-
I guess if you know any Auburn fans who support this boycott, Ask them when are they going to give up their ticket to the AU-Clem (Chick-filet kickoff) Because they won’t be going will they?
-
It will be very interesting to see if the mainstream media covers the outpouring of support on "Chick Fil-A Day" with the same fervor they have covered the Gay side of this debacle.
-
I guess if you know any Auburn fans who support this boycott, Ask them when are they going to give up their ticket to the AU-Clem (Chick-filet kickoff) Because they won’t be going will they?
(http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/376180_10100911153907131_637299353_n.jpg)
-
And I say fuck you, you miss the point completely.
It is not whether you agree with the CEO or not. It is about agreeing that the CEO had the RIGHT to do so in the first place.
This.
I don't care if he said he hated gays, brown people, kicked puppies and punched babies in the face for fun. If that is what he believes, then he has the right to express himself. Opposite side of the coin.....if he said he hated straight men and women, kill whitey, and he had sex with goats, I don't care. He has that right.
I have supported Chick-fil-A for years, not b/c of the owners beliefs, but b/c I like the food. If I boycotted stuff just b/c of someones political opinions, I would starve, never listen to any music, watch TV and have the most miserable and boring life. People have the right to state what they believe. If you don't like it, don't support it, if you do, then support it, if you are indifferent and still like that spicy goodness with a slice of pepperjack, then by all means go get one.
-
and while I am getting pissed about this..........................
Who in the fuck does Emanuel and Menion think they are and get off telling someone they won't allow them to have a business license based on their religious and/or political beliefs and b/c they don't agree with it?
I don't care who you are, what you believe, what you think, what causes you support. The Gov't shouldn't and can't deny you a business license on that. You should be free to open any legit business you want and it's up to us, the consumers to support or not support that business.
-
I agree 100% with what you're saying.
I just think the "It shouldn't matter one way or another" argument can't be used in tangent with "But it matters, so I'm going to reverse boycott and eat there six times a day".
-
This.
I don't care if he said he hated gays, brown people, kicked puppies and punched babies in the face for fun. If that is what he believes, then he has the right to express himself.
Dammit...I tried to stay out of this...but...
No one (at least no rational person) disputes that the members of the Cathey family can espouse their views. They can be repugnant opinions...they can support the fucking KKK verbally and with their own personal finances.
The problem (at least what caused the protests and whatnot) arises when the corporate entity donates money to entities that actively work to advance a particular ideology.
Now, I tried to be as party-neutral in the last paragraph as I could. You can substitute any corporate entity and any cause into that paragraph and I would still support the position. In other words: private individuals can espouse whatever ideology they want and their companies do not necessarily represent those positions.
The problem arises (in the minds of ideologues and other activists) when the entity uses its funds to support organizations and entities that work actively to advance a particular position. In the case at hand it wasn't that Cathey espoused a pro-"traditional marriage" and ostensibly anti-gay marriage agenda. It was that Chik Fil A used their corporate funds and influence to support entities that are working actively to suppress and prevent the success of that agenda.
In other words: the man can say whatever he wishes, but when he uses his money and power to advance his opinions, then he should expect a response.
-
Dammit...I tried to stay out of this...but...
No one (at least no rational person) disputes that the members of the Cathey family can espouse their views. They can be repugnant opinions...they can support the fucking KKK verbally and with their own personal finances.
The problem (at least what caused the protests and whatnot) arises when the corporate entity donates money to entities that actively work to advance a particular ideology.
Now, I tried to be as party-neutral in the last paragraph as I could. You can substitute any corporate entity and any cause into that paragraph and I would still support the position. In other words: private individuals can espouse whatever ideology they want and their companies do not necessarily represent those positions.
The problem arises (in the minds of ideologues and other activists) when the entity uses its funds to support organizations and entities that work actively to advance a particular position. In the case at hand it wasn't that Cathey espoused a pro-"traditional marriage" and ostensibly anti-gay marriage agenda. It was that Chik Fil A used their corporate funds and influence to support entities that are working actively to suppress and prevent the success of that agenda.
In other words: the man can say whatever he wishes, but when he uses his money and power to advance his opinions, then he should expect a response.
Bullshit! The happening of the day had nothing to do with "where his money goes". It had to do with his opinion and then the GAYS DECIDED TO ATTACK. Well guess what. The straights showed up to PROTECT.
It the gays had decided to just boycott, nobody would give a damn. But when they decided to show up and disrupt business, everything changed. Militant gay activism should always be slapped down.
Support or not with your business. But don't propose terrorist tactics because you don't like the CEO's beliefs. Everything else is just part of the bigger liberal agenda.
-
Bullshit! The happening of the day had nothing to do with "where his money goes". It had to do with his opinion and then the GAYS DECIDED TO ATTACK. Well guess what. The straights showed up to PROTECT.
It the gays had decided to just boycott, nobody would give a damn. But when they decided to show up and disrupt business, everything changed. Militant gay activism should always be slapped down.
Support or not with your business. But don't propose terrorist tactics because you don't like the CEO's beliefs. Everything else is just part of the bigger liberal agenda.
:facepalm:
-
Dammit...I tried to stay out of this...but...
No one (at least no rational person) disputes that the members of the Cathey family can espouse their views. They can be repugnant opinions...they can support the fucking KKK verbally and with their own personal finances.
The problem (at least what caused the protests and whatnot) arises when the corporate entity donates money to entities that actively work to advance a particular ideology.
Now, I tried to be as party-neutral in the last paragraph as I could. You can substitute any corporate entity and any cause into that paragraph and I would still support the position. In other words: private individuals can espouse whatever ideology they want and their companies do not necessarily represent those positions.
The problem arises (in the minds of ideologues and other activists) when the entity uses its funds to support organizations and entities that work actively to advance a particular position. In the case at hand it wasn't that Cathey espoused a pro-"traditional marriage" and ostensibly anti-gay marriage agenda. It was that Chik Fil A used their corporate funds and influence to support entities that are working actively to suppress and prevent the success of that agenda.
In other words: the man can say whatever he wishes, but when he uses his money and power to advance his opinions, then he should expect a response.
I would be willing to bet that 95% of the people out there, be it in support or protest, don't have a clue about what advocacy groups he donates money to. I would also be willing to bet that some participants of this thread didn't know until it was mentioned in an article somewhere a couple of days later. As soon as his comments hit the air waves I didn't hear or read anything about what advocacy groups he sponsored. Most immediately jumped on the bandwagon of "he is a bigot and hater" or "I fully support his stance and his business". Most in support of and those that want to boycott, including some talking heads on TV and writers, haven't even mentioned where his money goes.
The OP in this thread, was a link to social media. Do you honestly believe that the majority of those that like that BookFace page honestly are mad b/c he supports entities that lobby against gay marriage or b/c of the actual words that came out of his mouth? I would bet good money it was what he said that has them in an uproar and most don't know where his money goes. It should have been expected, they have always been a pro-Christian company.
All I'm saying is that most are that boycotting and those that supported the chain today with business that they normally wouldn't get did so b/c of what he said and not b/c of where his money goes.........and it's dumb.
The real kicker for me in all this is that mayors have stated publicly they would deny him opening a business b/c of his beliefs. The LA Times and Boston Globe hit the nail on the head when they stated in their paper:
“Public officials have a responsibility to carry out their ministerial tasks fairly and evenhandedly – and to uphold the principle of free speech – whether or not they like a business executive’s social or political stances,†the Times opined.
The Boston Globe wondered “which part of the First Amendment does Menino not understand? A business owner’s political or religious beliefs should not be a test for the worthiness of his or her application for a business license.
that is what really has me pissed off. I didn't think I would see the day where someone would be threatened to deny them right to open a business based on their personal beliefs, convictions and a statement they publicly made.
This whole thing has been blown out of proportion and it's not even news worthy, but yet I have had to read about it for a week now when it should have died by now. I grow tired of shit like this making headlines across the nation instead of reporting real news.
-
Dammit...I tried to stay out of this...but...
No one (at least no rational person) disputes that the members of the Cathey family can espouse their views. They can be repugnant opinions...they can support the fucking KKK verbally and with their own personal finances.
The problem (at least what caused the protests and whatnot) arises when the corporate entity donates money to entities that actively work to advance a particular ideology.
Now, I tried to be as party-neutral in the last paragraph as I could. You can substitute any corporate entity and any cause into that paragraph and I would still support the position. In other words: private individuals can espouse whatever ideology they want and their companies do not necessarily represent those positions.
The problem arises (in the minds of ideologues and other activists) when the entity uses its funds to support organizations and entities that work actively to advance a particular position. In the case at hand it wasn't that Cathey espoused a pro-"traditional marriage" and ostensibly anti-gay marriage agenda. It was that Chik Fil A used their corporate funds and influence to support entities that are working actively to suppress and prevent the success of that agenda.
In other words: the man can say whatever he wishes, but when he uses his money and power to advance his opinions, then he should expect a response.
I try to stay out of this too...but...this is completely wrong. I would almost gaurantee you that Cathy and Chick fil a have given money for years and years to "traditional" foundations that advocate "traditional" values. But nothing has ever been said. Why now is this an issue if what you say is true? Your argument is how people try and justify what they are doing...
-
I agree that the initial outcry was reactionary to Cathey's public statements. The "movement", however, would have likely been a blip on the radar without the attendant research into CFA's corporate benevolence.
-
I agree that the initial outcry was reactionary to Cathey's public statements. The "movement", however, would have likely been a blip on the radar without the attendant research into CFA's corporate benevolence.
I think you need to add in the reactions by the gov officials of Chicago, Boston, and now New York adding to the fervor.
-
Just think what the outcry would have been from the liberal media (and there kind) had a Texas (or southern) Mayor said he would not support Starbucks or Amazon getting a business license because they (support) same sex marriage.
I bet we would have heard from the justice dept.
-
Just think what the outcry would have been from the liberal media (and there kind) had a Texas (or southern) Mayor said he would not support Starbucks or Amazon getting a business license because they (support) same sex marriage.
I bet we would have heard from the justice dept.
EXACTLY! You are talking about territories (states) that are still not allowed to determine their own voting districts.
BTW I am stealing this coherent thought. You have so few not involving cars I thought I should take advantage.
-
EXACTLY! You are talking about territories (states) that are still not allowed to determine their own voting districts.
This is the problem that I have with the whole thing.
Honestly...I could give a shit if gay people married or not. If it came to vote, I am not sure if I would go vote one way or the other. I see both sides of the fence. If I was forced in to voting, I would probably vote to allow it...because it doesn't matter to me who is married to who.
The whole thing though is that I don't like ANYTHING being forced down my throat. Especially by a federal government that really is not supposed to have the god damn power to do so...
-
EXACTLY! You are talking about territories (states) that are still not allowed to determine their own voting districts.
BTW I am stealing this coherent thought. You have so few not involving cars I thought I should take advantage.
Keen cars=keen thoughts (sometimes) :haha: