Jump to content





So This Whole Chick-Fil-A Controversy . . .

- - - - -

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
1021 replies to this topic

#221 mdrake34

mdrake34

    Pro Bowler

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,700 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 08:45 AM

I read somewhere that the CEO of Pottery Barn donates massive amounts of money to anti-pit bull organizations.

#222 JDaveG

JDaveG

    I Heart Matt Ryan, and not just on Thursdays

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,516 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 08:52 AM

View PostSerendipity, on 27 July 2012 - 07:35 AM, said:



Why you so sensitive? you might have one or two sizes too small shoes, that might explain it.

You call it "sensitive."  I call it "tired of destructive politics."

Remember when the Republicans were implying that anyone not on board with their foreign policy were traitorous, non-patriotic terrorist sympathizers?  This is exactly the same thing.  It's not funny.  It's sad.

#223 red falcon

red falcon

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,274 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:04 AM

View PostFlip Flop, on 26 July 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

Nice. This whole Chic-filA controversy is gonna make my diet much harder.  Just like I was compelled to eat at McD's because of the retarded Super Size me hullabaloo, now I fell compelled to eat at Chic-filA because of this.  Sheesh, What do they have that is low-calorie?

meat, no fries no buns lol.

#224 Jah

Jah

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,181 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:07 AM

View PostJDaveG, on 27 July 2012 - 08:52 AM, said:


You call it "sensitive."  I call it "tired of destructive politics."

Remember when the Republicans were implying that anyone not on board with their foreign policy were traitorous, non-patriotic terrorist sympathizers?  This is exactly the same thing.  It's not funny.  It's sad.

hahahaha

No, it isn't.

That is the hardest I have laughed in quite some time.  Thanks.

#225 eatcorn

eatcorn

    Pro Bowler

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,559 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:09 AM

To me, the simple fact is that straight marriages receive benefits that gay marriages do not. That is unequal treatment under the law.

I think the answer is to either get government out of the marriage business entirely, or to provide equal treatment for all consenting adults to marry who they wish.

Much of what I see in response to that often seems like semantics.

If you want to call them 'civil unions' and give them the same rights, that would be fine with me. Unfortunately, that's not on the table.

Referring to 'tradition' seems silly. Traditions aren't valid in and of themselves.

#226 JDaveG

JDaveG

    I Heart Matt Ryan, and not just on Thursdays

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,516 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:12 AM

View Posteatcorn, on 27 July 2012 - 09:09 AM, said:

To me, the simple fact is that straight marriages receive benefits that gay marriages do not. That is unequal treatment under the law.

I think the answer is to either get government out of the marriage business entirely, or to provide equal treatment for all consenting adults to marry who they wish.

Fully agree with both positions.

Quote

Much of what I see in response to that often seems like semantics.

If you want to call them 'civil unions' and give them the same rights, that would be fine with me. Unfortunately, that's not on the table.

Referring to 'tradition' seems silly. Traditions aren't valid in and of themselves.

I'll repeat at least for myself -- I have not referred to traditions.  I have referred to history and precedent, but I am not making an appeal to tradition.

View PostMr.Smiley, on 27 July 2012 - 09:07 AM, said:


hahahaha

No, it isn't.

That is the hardest I have laughed in quite some time.  Thanks.

Good for you.  You're still wrong.

#227 eatcorn

eatcorn

    Pro Bowler

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,559 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:13 AM

View PostATL Bear, on 26 July 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

Eliminate the subsidy as the divorce rates have proven that the subsidies aren't working, or extend it to every type of two party relationship.
This is pretty much where I'm at.

#228 JDaveG

JDaveG

    I Heart Matt Ryan, and not just on Thursdays

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,516 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:14 AM

By the way, to the "everyone who disagrees with me is a bigot" crowd, I hope none of y'all buy products manufactured by Georgia-Pacific.  Might oughta check your pantries.

#229 Jah

Jah

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,181 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:15 AM

View PostJDaveG, on 27 July 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

Good for you.  You're still wrong.

A majority of the people who oppose gay marriage are bigots.

#230 Jah

Jah

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,181 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:21 AM

View PostJDaveG, on 27 July 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

By the way, to the "everyone who disagrees with me is a bigot" crowd,

Who said that?

#231 mdrake34

mdrake34

    Pro Bowler

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,700 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:25 AM

Rahm is a hypocrite.
http://www.theatlant...arriage/260401/
Many voices have beat me to clucking at Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel for suggesting that its appropriate to prevent Chick-fil-A from opening a Windy City store because its CEO opposes gay marriage. UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh explained why the threatened action is a violation of the First Amendment. Glenn Greenwald insisted that all liberals should object to the awful precedent it would set. Wrote Kevin Drum at Mother Jones, "You don't hand out business licenses based on whether you agree with the political views of the executives. Not in America, anyway."

All that's left to say is what Michael Brendan Dougherty alludes to: As mayor of a safely Democratic city, Emanuel avows that "Chick-fil-A's values are not Chicago values. They're not respectful of our residents, our neighbors and our family members. And if you're gonna be part of the Chicago community, you should reflect Chicago values." In his initial formulation, since walked back, opposition to gay marriage is cast as so awful a transgression as to render one unfit to sell Chicagoans fast food! Yet Emanuel had no problem helping Barack Obama to attain the most powerful office in America while Obama was against gay marriage, a position the president clung to until this year. Nor did he shy away from Bill Clinton, helping him to win the Democratic primary in 1992 and serving as an adviser even after Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act.

Yes, times have changed, as have the positions that Clinton and Obama take on same-sex marriage. It nevertheless seems awfully cynical to decry gay marriage opponents as unfit for commerce in your city just a few years after you were enthusiastically touting a gay marriage opponent as the best man to run the most powerful executive office in the country and the word. It's the sort of double standard that lends credibility to the conservative charge that some Democratic politicians use identity politics as an opportunistic cudgel that is wielded disingenuously. Conservatives who advance positions that many Democrats held as recently as the last election cycle are deemed bigots unfit for polite company or equal treatment under the law.

Gay marriage proponents, of whom I am one, are going to prevail on this issue. We should do so magnanimously. Liberal bloggers have been admirably vocal in defense of the CEO of Chick-fil-A's rights. Let's hope that the Democratic mayors who started this controversy are genuine in their contrition.

#232 Jah

Jah

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,181 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:25 AM

By the way, to the "I hate homosexuals, but pretend to oppose gay marriage for other reasons" crowd, know that you are on the wrong side of history.

#233 JDaveG

JDaveG

    I Heart Matt Ryan, and not just on Thursdays

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,516 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:29 AM

View PostMr.Smiley, on 27 July 2012 - 09:15 AM, said:


A majority of the people who oppose gay marriage are bigots.

A majority of the people who say that are bigots.

See how easy it is?

#234 Serendipity

Serendipity

    Debbie Downer

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,112 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:29 AM

Similar but obviously not the same,

Interracial marriage some fifty years ago this was also up for debate eventually people came to there senses. Like I said in an earlier post give it another 10 to 20 years. For the rest of the world less then 10.  



#235 JDaveG

JDaveG

    I Heart Matt Ryan, and not just on Thursdays

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,516 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:30 AM

View PostMr.Smiley, on 27 July 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

By the way, to the "I hate homosexuals, but pretend to oppose gay marriage for other reasons" crowd, know that you are on the wrong side of history.

"Everyone who disagrees with me is a bigot."

Exactly.

#236 Serendipity

Serendipity

    Debbie Downer

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,112 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:31 AM

View PostMr.Smiley, on 27 July 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

By the way, to the "I hate homosexuals, but pretend to oppose gay marriage for other reasons" crowd, know that you are on the wrong side of history.


You know it would just a lot easier if they just come out of the closet and say it.... I hate homos !!!!

#237 eatcorn

eatcorn

    Pro Bowler

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,559 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:32 AM

View PostJDaveG, on 27 July 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:


"Everyone who disagrees with me is a bigot."

Exactly.
That's not what he said.

#238 Jah

Jah

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,181 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:33 AM

View PostJDaveG, on 27 July 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:


"Everyone who disagrees with me is a bigot."

Exactly.

I have never said that.  Not once.  You might want to start by being honest with yourself.  That will make it easier for you to be honest with others.

#239 Billy Ocean

Billy Ocean

    Pro Bowler

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,000 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:34 AM

View PostSerendipity, on 27 July 2012 - 09:29 AM, said:

Similar but obviously not the same,

Interracial marriage some fifty years ago this was also up for debate eventually people came to there senses. Like I said in an earlier post give it another 10 to 20 years. For the rest of the world less then 10.  



By "rest of the world" you mean Europe, right? Some how I doubt the Middle East, the vast majority of Asia, Russia, Africa, and Central + South America will be on board.

#240 Serendipity

Serendipity

    Debbie Downer

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,112 posts

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:37 AM

View PostBilly Ocean, on 27 July 2012 - 09:34 AM, said:


By "rest of the world" you mean Europe, right? Some how I doubt the Middle East, the vast majority of Asia, Russia, Africa, and Central + South America will be on board.


Yes if you look at my prior post on this I wrote "industrialized world" I was to just lazy to write it again , good catch bro