God must love Chick-fil-A

[Nam]

mrbiscoop,

What country wasn't?

-Nam

[mrbiscoop]

   America, like most if not all countries, was built on slavery and genocide.

Fixed it.

[Hatter23]

Or, some have switched to not being what they were. Time can change peoples minds.

-Nam

age seldomly makes people more liberal..sometimes, but not often.

[Nam]

I never suggested otherwise.

-Nam

[mrbiscoop]

"If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart.  If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."
This quote was falsely attributed to Winston Churchill.

[Azdgari]

^^ Accuracy of information is anti-conservative.

[nogodsforme]

"If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart.  If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."
This quote was falsely attributed to Winston Churchill.

I heard that quip from a black motivational speaker when I was in high school. Such a self-serving remark to excuse being greedy and not caring about other people. It annoyed me then and still annoys me now.

[Traveler]

"If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart.  If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."
This quote was falsely attributed to Winston Churchill.

It's been my experience that liberals continue to be liberal. And in fact become more liberal. BUT, and this is an important point, I'm talking about SOCIALLY liberal. I no longer even comprehend what makes a liberal or conservative political/financial/other person. That's changed so much over time that I'm simply overwhelmed with confusion.

But on social issues like equality for all ... my 81 year old mother continues to be a liberal, and she grows in her understanding of more and more rights infringements as my sib and I talk about them. The older I get (I'm in my 50s) the more willing I am to be outspoken about my liberal views. The older I get the more infuriated I get at the right wing "conservatives", and the more willing I am to be radical in my support for social equality. And, quite frankly, in the USA I would say that the current right wing "conservatives" are actually extremely radical. I'd be tempted to call them radical neanderthals, but I feel that does a disservice to our distant ancesters.

[Garja]

I'd be tempted to call them radical neanderthals, but I feel that does a disservice to our distant ancesters. Relatives

I was nitpicky about your post, but dont take it over-snarky.

In any case, I definitely agree in that my views have gotten increasingly liberal as ive aged.  I have never had a problem with different races, or sexual orientation, and have always believed in a social safety net for those less fortunate, but I do carry the shame of having voted for GW Bush in his reelection (in my defense, John Kerry was a bit of a douche).  Now, admittedly I am VERY liberal.  If I was to be perfectly honest with myself, I am probably a Socialist in most issues (still believe in private ownership generally, and the profit motive, but do not see the free-market as the panacea many on the right like to pretend).  In any case, my move to the left has been in a large part due to the vitriolic nonsense that the far right has been spouting the last few years.

[Nam]

I thought that GW Bush and Kerry were douches and voted for Walter Brown. There are other people on most ballots but Repubs and Democrats.

-Nam

[Airyaman]

If you want to protest all companies that are not gay friendly, you need to find out which ones are operated by Christians, Muslims, orthodox Jews, or any other related Abrahamic religion. Any people of these religions that are gay friendly are ignoring parts of their religion, so you'd have to determine the viewpoint of every single one.

Here's a thought, here's one with an outright admitted direct link. I shall start there. When another comes to light, it shall be added to the list. I don't need to determine the viewpoints of every person, despite your haughty demands, I can just slice the obvious assholes out of my life without much difficulty, when those assholes are gone, perhaps then I will take it to the next level.

"Obvious assholes" or simply assholes who stand up for what they believe in? How many of us would be so brave under camera scrutiny to say what we truly believe? I'd wager most of the people here (myself included) would say -- in front of a camera or other recorded media -- what we believe would keep us safe. This guy took a risk, he stood up for what he believed. Meanwhile, many of us sit behind keyboards as we sling shit in anonymity.

[jetson]

This guy took a risk, he stood up for what he believed. Meanwhile, many of us sit behind keyboards as we sling s**t in anonymity.

I don't think he took a risk at all, at least not from his perspective.  Unless he purposely worked with what's-his-face to create the biggest sales day ever, and perpetrated a masterful ad campaign that completely worked in his favor, forever placing Chik-Fil-A on the "weekly must eat at fast food joints" list for thousands and thousands of bigots.

People can "stand up for free speech" all they want, but in this case, they were directly supporting anti-gay bigotry and homophobia.  There is no other way to slice this.  They keep yammering on about how they don't hate the gays, but there are far better ways to show that than giving obscene amounts of money to the jack-ass that actually does hate gays.

[Brakeman]

This guy took a risk, he stood up for what he believed. Meanwhile, many of us sit behind keyboards as we sling shit in anonymity.

Should we applaud Adolf Eichmann the Nazi for standing up for what he believed? No, because the "belief" he was expressing was hate. Sometimes it was hate cloaked in god and country, but it was always hate. The Chick-fil-a CEO is no different, he hates LG folks because his creed tells him to.

"At least Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stood up for what he believed.."  No, when you remember the discrimination and hate in the belief, the fervency of the believer is no longer an admirable trait.

[Hatter23]

"Obvious assholes" or simply assholes who stand up for what they believe in?

If what they believe in makes them assholes, standing up for it makes them obvious.


Conviction isn't meritorius on its own, from the 9-11 perpetrators, the the soldier of the confederacy, to the Nazi party conviction is simply putting thoughts into action. If those thoughts are vile, then the actions are vile.

[The Gawd]

I think here what we see is people missing the bigger picture in general.

No one is trying to take that asshole's freedom of speech away, at least I didnt see any evidence of it. It did however spark other people to also use their freedom of expression to either disapprove of his "speech" or agree with his bigotry.

Some people do see "standing up for what you believe in" in itself to have merit, just as they think their "right" to believe whatever they want means that their belief cant be scrutinized and just plain wrong.

Standing up for the wrong things is just as stupid as believing the sky is orange (simply because you can believe whatever you want to by law)

[Nam]

The Gawd.

Those who complain about others taking their freedom of speech away realize, or if they don't should realize, the other side isn't advocating for their speech to be taken away. As you said: they are just voicing their opinion. But the thing is: the other side want themselves to have their freedom of speech but they don't want you to have yours. See, we would protect their right to freedom of speech but they wouldn't protect ours. Good example:

Atheists who attempt to create billboards but are stopped by those who feel they don't or shouldn't have the right to express their freedom of speech.

Another example:

Christians who feel their religious propaganda and scripture should be displayed in public government forums[1] even though the Constitution prohibits such things.

They want their freedoms but not have those who oppose them to have theirs. And, they've had successes in doing just that. Not as frequent as in the past but they still have their successes today. And, even though the opposition has some success it hasn't been as successful as theirs.

-Nam

1.	not speaking of onlineforums

[12 Monkeys]

This guy took a risk, he stood up for what he believed. Meanwhile, many of us sit behind keyboards as we sling s**t in anonymity.

I don't think he took a risk at all, at least not from his perspective.  Unless he purposely worked with what's-his-face to create the biggest sales day ever, and perpetrated a masterful ad campaign that completely worked in his favor, forever placing Chik-Fil-A on the "weekly must eat at fast food joints" list for thousands and thousands of bigots.

People can "stand up for free speech" all they want, but in this case, they were directly supporting anti-gay bigotry and homophobia.  There is no other way to slice this.  They keep yammering on about how they don't hate the gays, but there are far better ways to show that than giving obscene amounts of money to the jack-ass that actually does hate gays.

IF he stood up and said what many "Christians" believe to be true(mormons too) that people of African heritage are dirty and not allowed in the resturaunt would that be ok? or is it not ok because race is involved?

[Kimberly]

So how do you reward all the bigots for turning up to Chick-fil-A day? You reward them with free food!!!





Well okay, I'm being a little misleading. This is really to support a new location, but it's getting sent back. I'm pretty sure this is the first time the frugal in me has lost the war on freebies.

[Chronos]

Chick-fil-A is anti-gay. My gay friends and family members periodically put out posts on facebook to boycott them, and ever since I first found out about their policies and opinions, I have stopped going there. They can keep their "pro family" company to themselves. I'm pro-family too. I just have a more inclusive definition of family.

I keep telling people that definitely since the time of Citizens United, a company and its leaders just don't have opinions, they have political expressions. Although they certainly did before, now they can give unlimited funds to PACs that support their personal beliefs. Since giving that corporation money is the same as indirectly giving to a particular PAC, everyone should be examining where they spend their dollars. Remember, , so when you buy anything, you are also voting.

[Kimberly]

^ Chronos that video is EPIC! I stole it for my FB.

[Garja]

I dont think I am overstating it... I think the Citizens United case is the most destructive thing to this country since the Civil War.

[mrbiscoop]

^^^^^ No argument here.

[jetson]

^^^^^ No argument here.

It's also embarrassing.

[Hatter23]

I dont think I am overstating it... I think the Citizens United case is the most destructive thing to this country since the Civil War.

I can think of a few:
McCarthyism
The Native Removal Act and its implementation from 1865 to 1923
The Internment Camps of 1942
Jim Crow
Kelo v. City of New London


but I still think it merits a space in any sane person's top twenty list

[pianodwarf]

I dont think I am overstating it... I think the Citizens United case is the most destructive thing to this country since the Civil War.

I can think of a few:
McCarthyism
The Native Removal Act and it implementation from 1865 to 1923
The Internment Camps of 1942
Jim Crow
Kelo v. City of New London

Agreed.  And don't forget the infamous Plessy v. Ferguson, either.

but I still think it merits a space in any sane person's top twenty list

Yep.

[Hatter23]

I can think of a few:
McCarthyism
The Native Removal Act and its implementation from 1865 to 1923
The Internment Camps of 1942
Jim Crow
Kelo v. City of New London

Agreed.  And don't forget the infamous Plessy v. Ferguson, either.

I was sweeping that under Jim Crow. But I am very firm about the vast negative implications of Kelo v. City of New London; at any point what you own can be taken from you and handed to a corporation in order to maximize profits.
When the NAACP and Libertarians agree that something is bad, chances are, it is REAL bad.

[pianodwarf]

And don't forget the infamous Plessy v. Ferguson, either.

I was sweeping that under Jim Crow

Oh, yeah, I guess that's right.

[Garja]

I can think of a few:
McCarthyism
The Native Removal Act and its implementation from 1865 to 1923
The Internment Camps of 1942
Jim Crow
Kelo v. City of New London


but I still think it merits a space in any sane person's top twenty list

All shameful moments in U.S. history to be certain, but as horrid as those things are I dont think any of them have the same ability to subvert American democracy the way Citizens United does.  History will tell as everything plays out over the next few years, but when we give corporations the legal right to give as much money as they damn well please to a candidate or cause we have a serious problem.

[nogodsforme]

Plus, it is hard to trace the origin of the money, so Cubans, Saudis, Iranians, Chinese or North Koreans could put up a front company and buy a themselves a candidate. You would think that conservatives would be worried about that. I am.

I would love for a radical commie group or gay rights organization, or someone truly foul like the KKK or the Nazis to donate a bunch of money to Romney and then reveal themselves. But I don't think anyone on the Repub side would care, because it is all about the money. Free speech, first amendment and so forth.