keep the Evangelicals off the streets - and pigging out at Chick fil A. That way the fat little piggies will end up sick and they'll end up favoring health care reform

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I'm seeing from this is that gay people are focusing on the wrong fucking things to protest. Their supporters (who aren't gay) are even more rabid and confused.

And what are the right things to protest, O Wise One?

Uhmmmm...for starters why not protest the *actual anti-gay organizations* that you say CFA supports?

I'll protest them! First, let's find out where their funding comes from. And, then boycott those companies....

Anonymous wrote:You people are funny. I've recapped some of the highlights here: http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/13593626/chik-fil-a-debate

Someone had to do it. I wish I knew how to embed the video.

PP again. I just watched the video, and my favorite moment is at 2:20, when the Queen says "Oh fuck you!".

You people are funny. I've recapped some of the highlights here: http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/13593626/chik-fil-a-debate

Someone had to do it. I wish I knew how to embed the video.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I'm seeing from this is that gay people are focusing on the wrong fucking things to protest. Their supporters (who aren't gay) are even more rabid and confused.

And what are the right things to protest, O Wise One?

Uhmmmm...for starters why not protest the *actual anti-gay organizations* that you say CFA supports?

I think this thread has overlooked a few things.

1. Chik Fil A the corporation has directly contributed money to groups hostile to gays. It isn't just the CEO.

2. Dan Cathy is not just the CEO of a company, offering his opinion. His family is the owner of Chik Fil A. So Chik Fil A profits directly fund his private donations. And when you protest Chik Fil A you are basically protesting the Cathy Family because they own the thing.

3. Dan Cathy did not merely say this is his personal opinion. He said that he runs the company on these values. That is disturbing because it would be discrimination.

4. They aren't clean on discrimination lawsuits. I don't know specifically about gay employees, but I know they have faced gender discrimination suits.

Anonymous wrote:All I'm seeing from this is that gay people are focusing on the wrong fucking things to protest. Their supporters (who aren't gay) are even more rabid and confused.

And what are the right things to protest, O Wise One?

All I'm seeing from this is that gay people are focusing on the wrong fucking things to protest. Their supporters (who aren't gay) are even more rabid and confused.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never ate at Chick-fil-A before and don't intend to now. The fact that they were closed on Sundays gave a very large clue that they are conservative Christians and therefore their opposition to gay marriage should already have been understood. I respect everyone's right to freedom of speech. I also respect those who understand that just because you have a right to free speech, doesn't mean you need to exercise it every chance you get. Just sell whatever you want to sell and be quiet about your stand on social issues. As for the protest, the protestors have their right to free speech as well, so what's the problem?

LOL. Don't exercise your rights every chance you get, but GO, PROTESTERS!! You've got your rights!!

This is all too typical of my fellow liberals but it embarasses me.

Oh fuck you. The point is, Dan Cathy can invite controversy and then people can whine that other people are responding with a boycott. He brought it on himself. Your fellow liberals embarrass you? You're a jackass.

Anonymous wrote:Where are all the people protesting Islam? You know their stance on homosexuality, right?

When the Muslim corporate head of a fast food restaurant is vocal about his opposition to gay marriage and donates tons of money to anti-gay organizations, I will be most happy to boycott his restaurant.

Anonymous wrote:Where are all the people protesting Islam? You know their stance on homosexuality, right?

Marching around the ground zero mosque, protesting the building of mosques in other jurisdictions.

Anonymous wrote:i agree with you OP.

to play devils advocate, one can say a protest is warranted since the owner gives money to organizations that are against gay marriage. since he makes his money from chick fil a , it seems natural to hurt his bottom line to prevent him from lending that support.

on the other hand, im sure the owners of dunkin donuts, starbucks, 7-11 and other places i frequent believe in things i dont agree with and so long as they arent breaking the law and just hold so called bad beliefs, its means nothing to me

Sorry, I'm not involved in any of these protests but I don't have a problem with them. So would you continue to buy food at a restaurant whose owner donates money to organizations supporting slavery, even if he/she doesn't enslave his/her workers? Or if the owner gave money to organizations supporting female genital mutilation? Or child trafficking? Or lobbied for laws against interracial marriage?

If you can say that you would continue to support a restaurant in those cases, then I see your argument is based on whether it's an appropriate strategy. I can accept that. But if you would boycott those restaurants over those issues and not over the owner's support of anti-gay legislation, well, then that suggests that you don't see denial of these rights to gay people as a serious issue. As the mother of a lesbian, I can tell you that my daughter feels the denial of her rights deeply and it brings her a lot of pain.

What concerns me about this protest is that apparently there are many franchise owners of these restaurants and I don't think they should suffer (or benefit either) for the views of the corporate head. The pressure should go where it is deserved.

I can't imagine standing in-line for a half hour with my children to eat at Chik Fil A (which isn't that good), and telling my children it's because we don't want gays to get married. I can't imagine that scenario. It sounds like a different universe; one where people have more time and more docile children.

Also, I have friends on both sides on FB - one positing a picture of children paying at chik fil a, and another posting "If you f-ing go to chik-fil-a, just de-friend me now cos you are an a-hole." It's somewhat bewildering.

Obviously, the dan cathys of this world will lose and will be history. Change is hard.

Family Research Council did indeed call for homosexuality to be criminalized. I thought that might have been an overstatement, but it is true.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/frcs-sprigg-wants-see-homosexuality-criminalized

I didn't know exactly what the Family Research Council's position homosexuaity was, so I looked it up.

This is the organization Dan Cathy donated a lot of money towards.

http://www.frc.org/human-sexuality#homosexuality

From their website:

Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects. While the origins of same-sex attractions may be complex, there is no convincing evidence that a homosexual identity is ever something genetic or inborn. We oppose the vigorous efforts of homosexual activists to demand that homosexuality be accepted as equivalent to heterosexuality in law, in the media, and in schools. Attempts to join two men or two women in "marriage" constitute a radical redefinition and falsification of the institution, and FRC supports state and federal constitutional amendments to prevent such redefinition by courts or legislatures. Sympathy must be extended to those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, and every effort should be made to assist such persons to overcome those attractions, as many already have.