Gays boycott Chick-fil-a, Miracle rebound for economy

[StevePerryHair]

What cracks me up most reading these posts is how everyone generalizes and puts all gays and liberals under one umbrella, like they all think and feel the same and act the same. Think about this. If we "heteros" are all different in the things we think or feel, and I definitely would never line myself up with most people posting here, in my beliefs, why do you lump them as all alike? What a joke. Some of you are very closed/simple minded people who just generalize like crazy. Just unbelievable to me.

I am LMAO!!

I miss you around, laughing your ass off!!

[Michigan Girl]

What cracks me up most reading these posts is how everyone generalizes and puts all gays and liberals under one umbrella, like they all think and feel the same and act the same. Think about this. If we "heteros" are all different in the things we think or feel, and I definitely would never line myself up with most people posting here, in my beliefs, why do you lump them as all alike? What a joke. Some of you are very closed/simple minded people who just generalize like crazy. Just unbelievable to me.

I am LMAO!!

I miss you around, laughing your ass off!!

I missed you around here too!!

Hey, speaking of boycotting a ff chain, I've added another "will never eat there again" to my list ...Carl Jr's.
I'm not sure what their political stance is, but we just got a CJ's not long ago and my daughter (who's also not normally
a FF junkie) wanted to try it ...blech!! The sweet potatoe fries were good though.

[StevePerryHair]

What cracks me up most reading these posts is how everyone generalizes and puts all gays and liberals under one umbrella, like they all think and feel the same and act the same. Think about this. If we "heteros" are all different in the things we think or feel, and I definitely would never line myself up with most people posting here, in my beliefs, why do you lump them as all alike? What a joke. Some of you are very closed/simple minded people who just generalize like crazy. Just unbelievable to me.

I am LMAO!!

I miss you around, laughing your ass off!!

I missed you around here too!!

Hey, speaking of boycotting a ff chain, I've added another "will never eat there again" to my list ...Carl Jr's.
I'm not sure what their political stance is, but we just got a CJ's not long ago and my daughter (who's also not normally
a FF junkie) wanted to try it ...blech!! The sweet potatoe fries were good though.

I don't think we have those here in FL!

[Don]

What cracks me up most reading these posts is how everyone generalizes and puts all gays and liberals under one umbrella, like they all think and feel the same and act the same. Think about this. If we "heteros" are all different in the things we think or feel, and I definitely would never line myself up with most people posting here, in my beliefs, why do you lump them as all alike? What a joke. Some of you are very closed/simple minded people who just generalize like crazy. Just unbelievable to me.

I am LMAO!!

I miss you around, laughing your ass off!!

I missed you around here too!!

Hey, speaking of boycotting a ff chain, I've added another "will never eat there again" to my list ...Carl Jr's.
I'm not sure what their political stance is, but we just got a CJ's not long ago and my daughter (who's also not normally
a FF junkie) wanted to try it ...blech!! The sweet potatoe fries were good though.

I don't think we have those here in FL!

If you have a Hardee's, it's almost the same thing (same owner).
The word healthy doesn't exist on Carl's menu but some of their specials are pretty good. They actually cook their food - you'll see flames and smoke in their kitchen if you take a peek.

Their double six dollar burger is good. It's 1lb of beef so if you are REALLY hungry, it hits the spot.

[StevePerryHair]

What cracks me up most reading these posts is how everyone generalizes and puts all gays and liberals under one umbrella, like they all think and feel the same and act the same. Think about this. If we "heteros" are all different in the things we think or feel, and I definitely would never line myself up with most people posting here, in my beliefs, why do you lump them as all alike? What a joke. Some of you are very closed/simple minded people who just generalize like crazy. Just unbelievable to me.

I am LMAO!!

I miss you around, laughing your ass off!!

I missed you around here too!!

Hey, speaking of boycotting a ff chain, I've added another "will never eat there again" to my list ...Carl Jr's.
I'm not sure what their political stance is, but we just got a CJ's not long ago and my daughter (who's also not normally
a FF junkie) wanted to try it ...blech!! The sweet potatoe fries were good though.

I don't think we have those here in FL!

If you have a Hardee's, it's almost the same thing (same owner).
The word healthy doesn't exist on Carl's menu but some of their specials are pretty good. They actually cook their food - you'll see flames and smoke in their kitchen if you take a peek.

Their double six dollar burger is good. It's 1lb of beef so if you are REALLY hungry, it hits the spot.

Oh, ok! We have a Hardee's in our town, but I've never actually eaten in it. I think the last time I ate at one was 25 years ago in Indiana! I can't imagine it could be any greasier than mcdonalds though! And I'll still eat that sometimes!

[The Sushi Hunter]

It's all the same, just prepared differently.

[slucero]

During the DotCom boom.. I had a consulting practice in the San Fran Bay Area... one of my clients was a auto dotcom company in San Francisco.

Better than 50% of the men that worked there were gay. I found them to be normal people, with the same human issues everyone else had.. and ironically some of the most positive people I've ever met in my life. Even with the societal stigma they have to deal with.

In this day and age, we fancy ourselves to be a modern, progressive civilization... yet with our supposed "enlightenment", sexual orientation, ethnicity and skin color all still remain as divisive topics in this supposed "modern" world as they ever have been.

That's on us. All of us. And shame on us for it.

[The Sushi Hunter]

No one at Chick-Fil-A was saying people can't be gay or denied services at any of thier locations based on sexual preferences and no one went to a homo owned and operated establishment to harass or intimidate the homos or the people who are doing business with them. All that was said was one's personal belief in regards to what they believe marriage should be. It was the homos and their sympathizers who freaked and made it into the situation that it is in today. And those homos and sympathizers are the ones doing the threatening, intimidating and now the vandalism to the property and interfering with the employees and the business.

[slucero]

No one at Chick-Fil-A was saying people can't be gay or denied services at any of thier locations based on sexual preferences and no one went to a homo owned and operated establishment to harass or intimidate the homos or the people who are doing business with them. All that was said was one's personal belief in regards to what they believe marriage should be. It was the homos and their sympathizers who freaked and made it into the situation that it is in today. And those homos and sympathizers are the ones doing the threatening, intimidating and now the vandalism to the property and interfering with the employees and the business.

Really sushi... that's all you've got? Blame?

There's a bigger issue here.. its called tolerance, or ignorance to be precise.

Here's the article that caused the firestorm.... http://www.brnow.org/News/July-2012/%E2 ... hick-fil-A

You should read it... fuck EVERYONE should read it. Clearly the COO of Chick-Fil-A is rightfully proud of his company and what they do for the community.... the article largely talks about all Chick-Fil-A does in the community for kids, students, people of color, etc... Chick-Fil-A should be proud.. the work they do is awesome.

However, his position on supporting "the biblical definition of the family unit" (his words not mine) is fully hypocritical AND bigoted.. BECAUSE... within the ranks of all those biblically defined family units Chick-Fil-A does good things for...

...some of those family members are gay.


His words segregate people based on sexuality, no different than skin color, or you not eating California Roll because its from California..

[Monker]

I'll never eat at Chick-fil-a again. Not because of their donations but because to give that company money is to give it to a political cause - which is something I simply do not do.

You may want to consider not eating out at fast food establishments/restaurants and buying certain brands/products, etc. Chick-fil-a is by no means the only corporation that "gives to a political cause."

That is not what I said. I said the CEO turned the company into a political tool. the very fact that this thread exists and its contents are proof of that.

You said to give money to Chick-fil-A is to give money to a political cause, which is something you do not do.

And all I said was Chick-fil-A is not the only entity that does that.

When Monker said, "I'll never eat at Chick-fil-a again. Not because of their donations but because to give that company money is to give it to a political cause - which is something I simply do not do." That's not what he said. What he really said was, "the CEO turned the company into a political tool. the very fact that this thread exists and its contents are proof of that".

easy peasy lemon squeezy!

Monk, you are a trip. Btw, it's still $123 Billion over 10 Years..

Oh, please, are you guys this stupid?

It has absolutely nothing to do with how donations were made, which is what I said in what you quoted. I've known about that for years. It is because of all the crap you did NOT quote has made Chick-fill-a, the company itself, political, and eating there is now supporting hatred towards gays. That's just crap, and I'm not going to associate myself with a company that has made themselves so political.

Okay, so it's only a specific political cause you have an issue with. Gotcha. You might want to clarify that. And when you say one thing, and then say no, you said another thing, the quote function might say otherwise. As you were.

How dim are you? When is the lights going to come on.

It has nothing to do with how Chick-fil-a, or those assiciated with the company, spend their money. This is like the third time I've repeated that.

I would feel no different if the CEO came out in favor of gay tolerance and felt that gays should be treated fairly via allowing them to be married. Then the chain is banned from Montgomery, Al and Houston, TX. The owners of Veggie Tales stop their relationship with them. Then Chick-fil-a says Bob the Tomato has a problem with biting kids thumbs off so they have to recall the finger puppets. Then anti-gay hate groups decide to organize a boycott. Some fake teen she-male makes PR posts to Facebook. Then Richard Simmons organizes an appreciation day, with free kisses and other activities to work off all those calories.

The reality and the fiction above are both just as ridiculously stupid...and I will never eat at Chick-fil-a again because of it.

[conversationpc]

There's a bigger issue here.. its called tolerance, or ignorance to be precise.

Here's the article that caused the firestorm.... http://www.brnow.org/News/July-2012/%E2 ... hick-fil-A

You should read it... fuck EVERYONE should read it. Clearly the COO of Chick-Fil-A is rightfully proud of his company and what they do for the community.... the article largely talks about all Chick-Fil-A does in the community for kids, students, people of color, etc... Chick-Fil-A should be proud.. the work they do is awesome.

However, his position on supporting "the biblical definition of the family unit" (his words not mine) is fully hypocritical AND bigoted.. BECAUSE... within the ranks of all those biblically defined family units Chick-Fil-A does good things for...

...some of those family members are gay.


His words segregate people based on sexuality, no different than skin color, or you not eating California Roll because its from California..

Christians who believe that what the bible says about homosexuality is true would be hypocritical to NOT stand up for what they believe, myself included. That doesn't mean they have to be out there in someone's face about it but these topics do come up. However, what really irks me about this is that most of the folks who are in an uproar about "homophobes" who oppose gay marriage are just as bigoted and narrow-minded as they claim the others are.

[StevePerryHair]

I didn't call you simple or closed minded people because you don't agree with them...if that's why I keep seeing that used here. It's because of the way you generalize and lump everyone in the gay community together. Assuming what every one of them thinks and feels and would do. Just wanted to make that clear. I don't give two craps what anyone wants to believe as long as its not being used to hurt people... that goes for BOTH sides. I have my own beliefs and opinions too. My point is us heteros don't all think alike, why would the gay people?

[Monker]

There's a bigger issue here.. its called tolerance, or ignorance to be precise.

Here's the article that caused the firestorm.... http://www.brnow.org/News/July-2012/%E2 ... hick-fil-A

You should read it... fuck EVERYONE should read it. Clearly the COO of Chick-Fil-A is rightfully proud of his company and what they do for the community.... the article largely talks about all Chick-Fil-A does in the community for kids, students, people of color, etc... Chick-Fil-A should be proud.. the work they do is awesome.

However, his position on supporting "the biblical definition of the family unit" (his words not mine) is fully hypocritical AND bigoted.. BECAUSE... within the ranks of all those biblically defined family units Chick-Fil-A does good things for...

...some of those family members are gay.


His words segregate people based on sexuality, no different than skin color, or you not eating California Roll because its from California..

Christians who believe that what the bible says about homosexuality is true would be hypocritical to NOT stand up for what they believe, myself included. That doesn't mean they have to be out there in someone's face about it but these topics do come up. However, what really irks me about this is that most of the folks who are in an uproar about "homophobes" who oppose gay marriage are just as bigoted and narrow-minded as they claim the others are.

Correct. If WE don't agree with THEM then we are the closed/simple minded folk. We're not enlightened or some dumb shit. Well that's where the fights start. The time honored tradition here has been basically to vote on it, whether in person at the polls, or thru our representatives. Wednesday was a form of voting for some and today for the others.

From Wiki: This "initiative" has been voted down in 30 states and won in 6 states. (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont). 9 states prohibit same-sex marriage in statute, and 30 prohibit it in their constitution. California, which previously granted same-sex marriage, now only recognizes those entered into before November 5, 2008

Laws that would legalize same-sex marriage in Washington and Maryland were passed in 2012, but each will be subject to a referendum during the November 2012 elections, while Maine will also vote on an initiative to establish same-sex marriage.

here's the sad part: Same-sex marriage has been established through court rulings and legislative action, but not via popular vote.

Everytime it's been put to popular vote it loses everytime. So sadly,this battle will be fought for quite a few more years it seems. Polls are showing a growing trend to allowing it for everyone.

WIKI can sometimes be so wrong.

The fact is that in Iowa the marriage law PASSED...but it was struck down by the state supreme court for being unConstitutional...and rightfully so. The Constitution offers equal protection for all citizens....not equal protection unless you are gay.

and, since then "conservatives" across the country have poured money into the state to get those judges voted off the court...and it will happen again this year.

Funny how "conservatives" feel it is OK to rule this way if it favors them (Obamacare) but feel it is legislating from the bench in other cases, see above. Bunch of hypocritical assholes, IMO....Keep the money in your own states to influence your state politics.

[Monker]

There's a bigger issue here.. its called tolerance, or ignorance to be precise.

Here's the article that caused the firestorm.... http://www.brnow.org/News/July-2012/%E2 ... hick-fil-A

You should read it... fuck EVERYONE should read it. Clearly the COO of Chick-Fil-A is rightfully proud of his company and what they do for the community.... the article largely talks about all Chick-Fil-A does in the community for kids, students, people of color, etc... Chick-Fil-A should be proud.. the work they do is awesome.

However, his position on supporting "the biblical definition of the family unit" (his words not mine) is fully hypocritical AND bigoted.. BECAUSE... within the ranks of all those biblically defined family units Chick-Fil-A does good things for...

...some of those family members are gay.


His words segregate people based on sexuality, no different than skin color, or you not eating California Roll because its from California..

Christians who believe that what the bible says about homosexuality is true would be hypocritical to NOT stand up for what they believe, myself included. That doesn't mean they have to be out there in someone's face about it but these topics do come up. However, what really irks me about this is that most of the folks who are in an uproar about "homophobes" who oppose gay marriage are just as bigoted and narrow-minded as they claim the others are.

Correct. That means that you would not be exclusive but inclusive. You would invite gays to your house for dinner, or meet with them in public for a chat. It means you would stop the persecutors and tell them to look at their own faults before judging the faults in others. It means you would love gays as you love your neighbors and not add to any hatred directed at them. You would give to God what is God's and not to those who falsely believe they are doing God's will by judging others, or believe they know how God will judge the country.

Most Christians, IMO, do NOT follow the commandments of Jesus...but allow the bible to be twisted by others personal beliefs and agendas, and allow those beliefs and agendas to become their own.

[Ehwmatt]

There's a bigger issue here.. its called tolerance, or ignorance to be precise.

Here's the article that caused the firestorm.... http://www.brnow.org/News/July-2012/%E2 ... hick-fil-A

You should read it... fuck EVERYONE should read it. Clearly the COO of Chick-Fil-A is rightfully proud of his company and what they do for the community.... the article largely talks about all Chick-Fil-A does in the community for kids, students, people of color, etc... Chick-Fil-A should be proud.. the work they do is awesome.

However, his position on supporting "the biblical definition of the family unit" (his words not mine) is fully hypocritical AND bigoted.. BECAUSE... within the ranks of all those biblically defined family units Chick-Fil-A does good things for...

...some of those family members are gay.


His words segregate people based on sexuality, no different than skin color, or you not eating California Roll because its from California..

Christians who believe that what the bible says about homosexuality is true would be hypocritical to NOT stand up for what they believe, myself included. That doesn't mean they have to be out there in someone's face about it but these topics do come up. However, what really irks me about this is that most of the folks who are in an uproar about "homophobes" who oppose gay marriage are just as bigoted and narrow-minded as they claim the others are.

Correct. If WE don't agree with THEM then we are the closed/simple minded folk. We're not enlightened or some dumb shit. Well that's where the fights start. The time honored tradition here has been basically to vote on it, whether in person at the polls, or thru our representatives. Wednesday was a form of voting for some and today for the others.

From Wiki: This "initiative" has been voted down in 30 states and won in 6 states. (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont). 9 states prohibit same-sex marriage in statute, and 30 prohibit it in their constitution. California, which previously granted same-sex marriage, now only recognizes those entered into before November 5, 2008

Laws that would legalize same-sex marriage in Washington and Maryland were passed in 2012, but each will be subject to a referendum during the November 2012 elections, while Maine will also vote on an initiative to establish same-sex marriage.

here's the sad part: Same-sex marriage has been established through court rulings and legislative action, but not via popular vote.

Everytime it's been put to popular vote it loses everytime. So sadly,this battle will be fought for quite a few more years it seems. Polls are showing a growing trend to allowing it for everyone.

WIKI can sometimes be so wrong.

The fact is that in Iowa the marriage law PASSED...but it was struck down by the state supreme court for being unConstitutional...and rightfully so. The Constitution offers equal protection for all citizens....not equal protection unless you are gay.

That may be so under your worldview, but it's woefully incorrect as a matter of very well-established constitutional law, and it's not likely to change anytime soon.

The gay marriage issue is totally uninteresting and unconcerning to me, so I'm not familiar with the Iowa court's reasoning. But I'll assume they struck it down on STATE constitutional grounds because so far (i.e., unless/until the US Supreme Court alters its Equal Protection framework/analysis), gays get no special protection under the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution. Any law discriminating against gays would almost certainly pass federal Equal Protection muster.

You need to understand that when courts review laws that allegedly discriminate against a suspect class of people under the Equal Protection Clause, they do so under a well-established legal framework that says the federal Equal Protection Clause does not protect all classes of people equally. For example, laws that discriminate based on race are reviewed with "strict scrutiny" (meaning they rarely get upheld with certain notable exceptions, e.g., a college/grad school taking race as a "factor among many" into account in scoring admissions applicants). Laws that discriminate based on gender are reviewed with "intermediate scrutiny" (meaning the government has the burden of showing some "important" reason for the discrimination). There are some other classes that trigger strict or intermediate scrutiny.

But most classifications of people are not considered "suspect" for equal protection purposes. Laws that discriminate against other classes will be upheld as long as there is some conceivable rational basis for the law. These classes include gays, disabled, elderly, etc. In this group, the law will not be struck down unless the court cannot conceive of any rational reason why Congress (or the state legislature) enacted the law. This "rational basis test" is so deferential to the government that there are really only a handful of cases striking down laws under this rubric.

The Court hinted at a willingness to give gays a little bit of constitutional protection 9 years ago in Lawrence v. Texas, but that case was analyzed under the Due Process Clause and even today no one is quite sure what it means. The Court certainly never held that gays are a protected class. Right now, if you're gay, you're out of luck under the Equal Protection Clause and even federal statutory discrimination laws (e.g., the various provisions of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, where federal employment/public accommodation discrimination law comes from).

So in short, equal protection doesn't mean the same protection for all (at least not legally). You're wrong.

[conversationpc]

Christians who believe that what the bible says about homosexuality is true would be hypocritical to NOT stand up for what they believe, myself included. That doesn't mean they have to be out there in someone's face about it but these topics do come up. However, what really irks me about this is that most of the folks who are in an uproar about "homophobes" who oppose gay marriage are just as bigoted and narrow-minded as they claim the others are.

Correct. That means that you would not be exclusive but inclusive. You would invite gays to your house for dinner, or meet with them in public for a chat. It means you would stop the persecutors and tell them to look at their own faults before judging the faults in others. It means you would love gays as you love your neighbors and not add to any hatred directed at them. You would give to God what is God's and not to those who falsely believe they are doing God's will by judging others, or believe they know how God will judge the country.

Most Christians, IMO, do NOT follow the commandments of Jesus...but allow the bible to be twisted by others personal beliefs and agendas, and allow those beliefs and agendas to become their own.

What you said most Christians don't do, happens all the time in real life in spades. The problem being that the examples you cite are the ones people hear about. The ones you don't often hear about are the ones who are doing it right. No Christian does it right all the time but there are, in my opinion, more who are doing it right and don't ever seek notoriety for it.

[slucero]

There's a bigger issue here.. its called tolerance, or ignorance to be precise.

Here's the article that caused the firestorm.... http://www.brnow.org/News/July-2012/%E2 ... hick-fil-A

You should read it... fuck EVERYONE should read it. Clearly the COO of Chick-Fil-A is rightfully proud of his company and what they do for the community.... the article largely talks about all Chick-Fil-A does in the community for kids, students, people of color, etc... Chick-Fil-A should be proud.. the work they do is awesome.

However, his position on supporting "the biblical definition of the family unit" (his words not mine) is fully hypocritical AND bigoted.. BECAUSE... within the ranks of all those biblically defined family units Chick-Fil-A does good things for...

...some of those family members are gay.


His words segregate people based on sexuality, no different than skin color, or you not eating California Roll because its from California..

Christians who believe that what the bible says about homosexuality is true would be hypocritical to NOT stand up for what they believe, myself included. That doesn't mean they have to be out there in someone's face about it but these topics do come up. However, what really irks me about this is that most of the folks who are in an uproar about "homophobes" who oppose gay marriage are just as bigoted and narrow-minded as they claim the others are.

For me personally this is a silly, narrow minded topic, in its entirety... The only solution to this IS tolerance because there will always be gay folks in society...

Besides, other than tolerance, what are the options?

• Elimination of gays as they are born or found?
• Moving them to some far away place (that wont work because for some they still won't be outta-mind)

That's a slippery-slope to Adolf-land..

A person has a constitutional right to believe whatever they want, but it doesn't make a person "right" legally or morally. Further, a person does not have a constitutional right, directly or indirectly, to incite or discriminate against another person.

That is what the COO of Chick-Fil-A is doing. Had he prefaced his comments by saying they were only his personal beliefs, he would have been fine... but he specifically said it was the corporate position, which means its the employees also. What irked me.. was that he answered "guilty as charged"... its as if he specifically wanted to cause an uproar.

The COO is only able to make this statement because Chick-Fil-A is a privately business, owned by his family... had they been a public company he would have been FIRED in a heartbeat by the Board.


What I find highly ironic is that during times of extreme stress... when people go out of their way to help each other, for the simple reason that its HUMAN to do so.. sexual preference is a non-issue...

[DavidWT]

Didn't read through every post here, but I realized that a post I made previously was kind of rushed and I didn't really make the point I wanted to make.

Basically, my thoughts are this: I have absolutely nothing against gays. Nor do I have anything against gays marrying each other. In fact, I think they SHOULD be allowed to marry. I've never heard even one good argument against letting them marry, other than things like, "Well, it's not normal!" (neither is dwarfism... should dwarves be banned from marrying?) or "Well, the Bible says it's wrong!" (the Bible says that about lots of stuff that these same people conveniently ignore. What's the term? Cafeteria Catholics? They pick and choose what they want from the Bible.)

BUT, having said that: The owner of Chik-Fil-A has a right to express his opinion. I don't have to agree with it, and gays don't have to agree with it. And if it bothers someone strongly enough, fine, don't eat there. But don't try telling them they can't have a restaurant in your city or whatever, because then where does it end? Good luck trying to find ANY company that believes the exact same things you do.

As for the protests:
The "Appreciation Day Protests" felt a bit hypocritical to me. If those people sporting Jesus shirts and whatnot really cared about what Jesus wanted, they would have spent their time more valuably by going to volunteer at a homeless shelter or a soup kitchen or something. Somehow, I think Jesus would have appreciated that more than seeing you stuff your face with chicken in his honor. I also don't believe that the majority of those people were there to show their support for free speech. I think a large portion were there to show that they they don't approve of gays, and it doesn't sit well with me to see people bonding together over hatred (or even intolerance) of others, particularly when those others aren't doing anything that hurts or even affects you.

On the other hand, I think gays do themselves a big disservice many times. Look at the gay pride parade in NY-- Based on that, if you didn't know any better, you'd think all gays were a bunch of exhibitionist freaks and perverts. I happen to know several gay people, and that parade does not at ALL represent them. The people I know are just regular folks, and you wouldn't even necessarily know they're gay. They don't feel the need to constantly put it on display, same as I don't feel the need to constantly go around flicking my dick in women's faces to show that I'm straight. Sadly, things like the gay pride parade are what get publicized, and that becomes the image of the gay person, and people, understandably, are uncomfortable with it. And now they're doing a similar thing with these protests, unfortunately. They want acceptance, and I sincerely hope they eventually get it, but that's only going to happen if they stop going out of their way to make others feel uncomfortable. I'm not saying they can't kiss their significant other in public, but just as straight couples don't go out of their way to shove it in other people's faces, neither should gays. If I'm eating at a fast food restaurant, for example, I don't really want to see ANYONE making out, straight or gay.
I actually feel badly for the regular gay folks (the ones who aren't exhibitionists)-- I know several who HATE things like the Gay Pride Parade because it ends up giving them a bad name, which they really don't deserve.

And now I'm going to back away from this thread.....

[verslibre]

When is the lights going to come on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-AwlBkYBKY

[conversationpc]

As for the protests:
The "Appreciation Day Protests" felt a bit hypocritical to me. If those people sporting Jesus shirts and whatnot really cared about what Jesus wanted, they would have spent their time more valuably by going to volunteer at a homeless shelter or a soup kitchen or something. Somehow, I think Jesus would have appreciated that more than seeing you stuff your face with chicken in his honor...

Like this? http://www.theblaze.com/stories/viral-c ... -contrary/

[Monker]

You need to understand that when courts review laws that allegedly discriminate against a suspect class of people under the Equal Protection Clause, they do so under a well-established legal framework that says the federal Equal Protection Clause does not protect all classes of people equally.

And, you need to understand that the states also have a Constitution and a Supreme Court to rule on STATE laws. Also, you need to understand that Iowa Supreme Court voted 7-0 (which in itself is pretty much unheard of) to strike down the law banning gay marriage was unConstitutional...according to the state of Iowa's Constitution. That is where this ends...because as it currently stands it is being left up to the states on how to handle this issue. Your debate is a bit late, years late, and therefore irrelevant.,.

The summary of the decision is public record...i suggest you read it.

http://www.iowacourtsonline.org/wfData/ ... 281%29.pdf

So, again, I will say, keep your out of state money and politics out of this state.

[Liam]

I love how the other side is preaching tolerance.

[slucero]

I love how the other side is preaching tolerance.

Ya like Chick Fill-A COO Ron Cathy is right?

Cathy, a devout Southern Baptist whose family has always been outspoken about its faith, sparked the controversy by telling the Baptist Press that he and his family-owned restaurant chain are "guilty as charged" for openly -- and financially -- supporting groups that advocate for "the biblical definition of a family unit." He later added that the United States is "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 that would be why Chick Fill-A is now distancing it self from its own COO's statements...

The company posted a statement on its Facebook page regarding their attitude towards customers, saying they will remain devoted to treating everyone fairly no matter what their conflicting views may be.

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. 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.

Chick-fil-A is a family-owned and family-led company serving the communities in which it operates. From the day Truett Cathy started the company, he began applying biblically-based principles to managing his business. For example, we believe that closing on Sundays, operating debt-free and devoting a percentage of our profits back to our communities are what make us a stronger company and Chick-fil-A family.

Our mission is simple: to serve great food, provide genuine hospitality and have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.

Don Perry also died of a heart attack today. Mr Perry was Chick-fil-A's vice president of public relations.

[Ehwmatt]

You need to understand that when courts review laws that allegedly discriminate against a suspect class of people under the Equal Protection Clause, they do so under a well-established legal framework that says the federal Equal Protection Clause does not protect all classes of people equally.

And, you need to understand that the states also have a Constitution and a Supreme Court to rule on STATE laws. Also, you need to understand that Iowa Supreme Court voted 7-0 (which in itself is pretty much unheard of) to strike down the law banning gay marriage was unConstitutional...according to the state of Iowa's Constitution. That is where this ends...because as it currently stands it is being left up to the states on how to handle this issue. Your debate is a bit late, years late, and therefore irrelevant.,.

The summary of the decision is public record...i suggest you read it.

http://www.iowacourtsonline.org/wfData/ ... 281%29.pdf

So, again, I will say, keep your out of state money and politics out of this state.

Hence why I said in my original post that "I'll assume they decided it on STATE constitutional grounds" (including capitalizing the STATE part), and repeatedly stressed that I was talking about the FEDERAL constitutional standard (which most states mirror in applying their own state constitutional equal protection provision save for some outliers, like California and apparently Iowa). But I guess you missed that part of my post. But other than your missing that part of my post, there's still a deeper point to be made here:

Contrary to what you assert, the federal constitutional aspect is still VERY relevant because a state appellate or high court in the majority of states who use the federal standard to analyze their own state constitutional equal protection clause cannot just face an issue it sympathizes with, like gay marriage, and overhaul an entire legal framework to get the outcome it wants.

But of course, it IS within the state legislature's powers to statutorily protect more classes from discrimination in public accommodations, employment etc, and most states do. So you are right in the sense that it IS largely up to the individual states. Anyone who follows the news knows that, even if they don't know precisely WHY it's up to the states. But you are flat wrong in asserting that equal protection (in most states and under any federal review using federal constitutional standards) provides the same protection for all. That's not what the constitution means, period. And it's an important distinction to make because absent the rare higher equal protection standard in some states, legislation is potentially ephemeral (much more so than constitutional precedent) and could easily be repealed.

And the giant elephant in the room is there is simply no discrimination here. All you have are a few ill-advised remarks (which are ill-advised because it's anathema to make them in today's society, especially if you are a high-profile business leader). No one, including that goofball who filed the Illinois human rights charge, has come forward with ANY affirmative evidence of being mistreated, discouraged from patronizing, or barred from Chick-Fil-A because he is gay. That's what renders this whole controversy completely absurd to me.

[slucero]

slucero, Don Perry died about 7 days ago. I posted it here when it happened.

whoops my bad... thx

[AR]

Seems like Friday didn't create much of a stir.

This really is a fringe issue. So many more important things to be focusing on. Nothing against same sex marriages/unions = whatever.

Can we stop being fucked in the ass with taxes and fix that?

[pinkfloyd1973]

I find it both funny and very hypocritical that the City of Chicago would host the Jew hating and anti-gay Minister Louis Farrakhan from the Nation of Islam with open arms, but is outraged over a fast food restaurant and calling for a both a boycott and the denial of a permit for it in one of the wards because of an opinion from the COO (and by the way, Monker, the mayor of the City of Chicago is RAHM Emmanuel)

[verslibre]

I find it both funny and very hypocritical that the City of Chicago would host the Jew hating and anti-gay Minister Louis Farrakhan from the Nation of Islam with open arms, but is outraged over a fast food restaurant and calling for a both a boycott and the denial of a permit for it in one of the wards because of an opinion from the COO (and by the way, Monker, the mayor of the City of Chicago is RAHM Emmanuel)

That's because everyone walks on eggshells when it comes to Islams and Muslims and that's bullshit.

[RocknRoll]

Another great article. Kudos to Rob Halford, I don't care if he's gay or straight!

http://ultimateclassicrock.com/rob-halford-chik-fil-a/

ROB HALFORD THINKS CHIK-FIL-A DEBATE IS ‘A WONDERFUL THING’
by: Chad Childers 3 hours ago

Jo Hale,Getty Images

Metal god Rob Halford is the latest to comment on the Chik-fil-A controversy. A firestorm erupted when the fast food chain’s president, Dan Cathy, expressed his opposition to gay marriage in a radio interview. As a result, there has been some public outcry and protests of the chicken chain across the country.

Halford, the openly gay Judas Priest singer, told Noisecreep, “Before I get into this, I just want to say that I love America. I love the American Constitution and the First Amendment. I’m actually watching a PBS documentary that I got on DVD about the life of John Adams. If you really get into the heart and soul of this great country, it’s all about the constitution and the First Amendment and the freedom of speech.”

The singer added, “Everybody in this country has the right to say what they think and feel and what best represents them. The people at Chik-fil-A have the absolute right to say and do what they want. It doesn’t matter that all of these people disagree with their opinion. The question was how would the people that agree with what that man said do to support the company and how would the ones against his anti-gay remarks protest.”

Halford says he thinks it’s great that there have been people showing up in droves to spend money at the restaurant and peacefully assemble on one side, but there have also been people boycotting the company on the other. He adds, “What you’re seeing here are the elements of the American Constitution in all of their glory. It’s a wonderful thing to see happening and talk about and the fact that everyone is discussing the gay rights issue is great.”

Sharing his own thoughts on gay marriage as it pertained to the controversy at hand, Halford stated, “I don’t think that man thought too much about the business consequences of what he said, but I think he was standing for what he believes in. I don’t agree with him at all, but God bless the man. It’s as simple as that.”

[Ehwmatt]

Another great article. Kudos to Rob Halford, I don't care if he's gay or straight!

http://www.facebook.com/wsj?ref=stream

ROB HALFORD THINKS CHIK-FIL-A DEBATE IS ‘A WONDERFUL THING’
by: Chad Childers 3 hours ago

Jo Hale,Getty Images

Metal god Rob Halford is the latest to comment on the Chik-fil-A controversy. A firestorm erupted when the fast food chain’s president, Dan Cathy, expressed his opposition to gay marriage in a radio interview. As a result, there has been some public outcry and protests of the chicken chain across the country.

Halford, the openly gay Judas Priest singer, told Noisecreep, “Before I get into this, I just want to say that I love America. I love the American Constitution and the First Amendment. I’m actually watching a PBS documentary that I got on DVD about the life of John Adams. If you really get into the heart and soul of this great country, it’s all about the constitution and the First Amendment and the freedom of speech.”

The singer added, “Everybody in this country has the right to say what they think and feel and what best represents them. The people at Chik-fil-A have the absolute right to say and do what they want. It doesn’t matter that all of these people disagree with their opinion. The question was how would the people that agree with what that man said do to support the company and how would the ones against his anti-gay remarks protest.”

Halford says he thinks it’s great that there have been people showing up in droves to spend money at the restaurant and peacefully assemble on one side, but there have also been people boycotting the company on the other. He adds, “What you’re seeing here are the elements of the American Constitution in all of their glory. It’s a wonderful thing to see happening and talk about and the fact that everyone is discussing the gay rights issue is great.”

Sharing his own thoughts on gay marriage as it pertained to the controversy at hand, Halford stated, “I don’t think that man thought too much about the business consequences of what he said, but I think he was standing for what he believes in. I don’t agree with him at all, but God bless the man. It’s as simple as that.”

Class comments. I'm not much of a Priest fan at all (never tried, just not my style of music generally speaking), but Halford just earned tons of respect in my book. Very well-spoken.