God must love Chick-fil-A

[Timtheskeptic]

I think you'll be waiting a very long time. I doubt anyone ever went bankrupt selling fried chicken to Americans. GLTB people make up a tiny percentage of the population [snip]

tiny percentage of the population were LGBT? I didn't know you questioned 7 billion people worldwide. I didn't know that all 7 billion people would be truly honest with their own feelings and would come out. I didn't know everyone would be honest with themselves in a world where countries kill you for being gay, where you're treated as second class citizens in some countries like the US, and where people brainwash you into hating sexuality that isn't straight. Wow.

[Traveler]

...He cherry picks. Just like everyone else.  He picks the parts that he likes, and I have no idea how he justifies everything else...

I think that many of today's liberal christians simply take "love thy neighbor as thyself" as an over-arching statement that is more important than the other bits. Quite frankly, if they're going to cherry-pick, I'll take guys like this pastor over the more right-wing folks. I hear these type of christians say "jesus is love" or somesuch thing. Hey, it may not be fully biblical, but its not a bad way to live as a general philosophy.

[Azdgari]

I don't pretend to know how he justifies so many parts of the bible that he preaches, that contradict the work that he dedicates himself to.  But for me,, his work and his lifestyle are so much more important than his belief in some ancient stories.

I don't doubt he lives what we'd both consider a good life, Quesi.  Nor do I doubt that he finds ways to dismiss those parts of the Bible.  That wasn't what I asked, though, was it?

[Quesi]

I don't pretend to know how he justifies so many parts of the bible that he preaches, that contradict the work that he dedicates himself to.  But for me,, his work and his lifestyle are so much more important than his belief in some ancient stories.

I don't doubt he lives what we'd both consider a good life, Quesi.  Nor do I doubt that he finds ways to dismiss those parts of the Bible.  That wasn't what I asked, though, was it?

I'm sorry that I did not address your question point by point.  Let me try again. 

Does he use the same Holy Bible? 

I am guessing yes. 

Does he stroke out or annotate the parts about homosexuals being abominations unto the Lord, to be stoned to death? 

Strikes out, rationalizes, provides his own interpretations, updates.  I can't say for sure.  I have no idea how he justifies many many parts of the bible, including the "stone your disobedient kids to death" parts or the "marry your rapist" parts.  The way he lives his life demonstrates that he doesn't embrace any of that foolishness. 

Does he support printing more Holy Bibles that preach condemnation and death to gays, rather than edited versions that do not?

I would not speculate in his opinions concerning editing the bible and printing the edited versions. 

Is that a sufficient answer? 

[Azdgari]

Strikes out, rationalizes, provides his own interpretations, updates.  I can't say for sure.  I have no idea how he justifies many many parts of the bible, including the "stone your disobedient kids to death" parts or the "marry your rapist" parts.  The way he lives his life demonstrates that he doesn't embrace any of that foolishness. 

I guess I wasn't using the clearest language I could have, here.  I realize he finds a way to disregard them.  I'm asking whether he physically, literally strokes out or annotates the Bibles used at his church - whether he actually edits the Bible.  Or, whether he leaves it as it is.

I would not speculate in his opinions concerning editing the bible and printing the edited versions.

Well then.  I guess we can't know how serious he really is, and how much of his actions are just putting on an act.

Is that a sufficient answer?

I guess, insofar as "I don't know" is a sufficient - and in this case inescapable - answer.

[kcrady]

When I was growing up, the first time I saw it I thought it was pronounced Chick-fill-uh (rhymes with killa), and that sure seemed stupid to me. Yes, even when its pronounced correctly its still pretty lame.

Yeah, that's what I thought too.  So it's supposed to be pronounced "Chick Fillet?"  Well, that' still pretty lame, seeing as there is no such thing, unless you're a sexist cannibal.  *Remembers that we're talking about right-wing Republicans here*  Oh, wait...

[HAL]

Sarah supports them!

[Nick]

Then you know we are right not to.

[Frank]

I think you'll be waiting a very long time. I doubt anyone ever went bankrupt selling fried chicken to Americans. GLTB people make up a tiny percentage of the population [snip]

tiny percentage of the population were LGBT? I didn't know you questioned 7 billion people worldwide. I didn't know that all 7 billion people would be truly honest with their own feelings and would come out. I didn't know everyone would be honest with themselves in a world where countries kill you for being gay, where you're treated as second class citizens in some countries like the US, and where people brainwash you into hating sexuality that isn't straight. Wow.

We're not talking about the world we're talking about America although I doubt the percentage is any higher globally.

Americans Have No Idea How Few Gay People There Are

Surveys show a shockingly high fraction think a quarter of the country is gay or lesbian, when the reality is that it's probably less than 2 percent.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/americans-have-no-idea-how-few-gay-people-there-are/257753/

Two percent seems pretty low to me. Now even allowing for a certain amount of...denial shall we say, you could probably only add one or two percent to the total unless you know something I don't. Maybe it's the exageration of how many gay people there actually are that is one of reasons that they get so much trouble from christians.

[Timtheskeptic]

We're not talking about the world we're talking about America although I doubt the percentage is any higher globally.

oh so surveys are 100% accurate yes? Again, surveys are man-made, we have no idea how many there are, even in America. To say it's 2% or even 10% is merely a guess. With bigotry, indoctrination, threats of hell, and death for being gay, no one will tell you they're gay, bisexual, lesbian, transgender, pansexual, demisexual, asexual, or anything like that. I rather we don't assume we know the exact statistic of how many LGBT people there is. If there wasn't any bigotry, discrimination, or death penalty for gay people and everyone is honest with themselves, we would see the real result. So in the meantime, don't assume that the survey is 100% accurate.

[Traveler]

It is not only LGBT who are boycotting Chick-fil-A. Its those of us who have family and friends who are LGBT. How dare they hate on my loved ones??? And I am not the only one by far. I would say, amongst my facebook friends, the majority of us who are spreading this around are straight. Do not underestimate the support we will give to our loved ones.

[Frank]

We're not talking about the world we're talking about America although I doubt the percentage is any higher globally.

oh so surveys are 100% accurate yes? Again, surveys are man-made, we have no idea how many there are, even in America. To say it's 2% or even 10% is merely a guess. With bigotry, indoctrination, threats of hell, and death for being gay, no one will tell you they're gay, bisexual, lesbian, transgender, pansexual, demisexual, asexual, or anything like that. I rather we don't assume we know the exact statistic of how many LGBT people there is. If there wasn't any bigotry, discrimination, or death penalty for gay people and everyone is honest with themselves, we would see the real result. So in the meantime, don't assume that the survey is 100% accurate.

No they're not a 100% accurate. But this one is near enough. Lets look at my country. There are far fewer god botherers here threatening hellfire.

UK gay, lesbian and bisexual population revealed

Almost three-quarters of a million UK adults say they are gay, lesbian or bisexual - equivalent to 1.5% of the population, a survey suggests.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) says 480,000 (1%) consider themselves gay or lesbian, and 245,000 (0.5%) bisexual.
The ONS received 450,000 responses in its new Integrated Household Survey.
The survey provides the biggest pool of social data in the UK after the Census, ONS says.
London had the highest percentage of those polled who identified as gay, Lesbian or bisexual and Northern Ireland lowest

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11398629

Now if the figure is 1.5% here then 2% would appear to be a consistent figure there. Or are gay people here lying as well?

[Brakeman]

It is not only LGBT who are boycotting Chick-fil-A. Its those of us who have family and friends who are LGBT.

I don't have any friends or family that are LGBT, a few remote coworkers only, but some of us stand up for what is right on mere principle too. Don't forget to count us!

[Timtheskeptic]

No they're not a 100% accurate. But this one is near enough.

You admit they're not 100% accurate but you assume that is close enough. Riiiiiight. All i'm saying is that there is no way to know 100%. Sure there is a low number of LGBT would would openly say they're LGBT, but the ones in closet won't say a word and there are some who weren't sure about their sexuality.

It is not only LGBT who are boycotting Chick-fil-A. Its those of us who have family and friends who are LGBT. How dare they hate on my loved ones??? And I am not the only one by far. I would say, amongst my facebook friends, the majority of us who are spreading this around are straight. Do not underestimate the support we will give to our loved ones.

I concur. There are many people who are accepting of LGBT folks who would lend a hand against bigotry and lies.

[Traveler]

It is not only LGBT who are boycotting Chick-fil-A. Its those of us who have family and friends who are LGBT.

I don't have any friends or family that are LGBT, a few remote coworkers only, but some of us stand up for what is right on mere principle too. Don't forget to count us!

Yes, absolutely!

[shnozzola]

"The Jim Henson company, which created the Muppets, have cut their ties with Chick-Fil-A because of the company's anti-gay marriage stance. Insiders say the move came after intense pressure from Bert and Ernie." –Jay Leno

http://ohmygov.com/blogs/general_news/archive/2012/07/28/the-week-s-10-best-political-jokes-july-27-2012.aspx

[Frank]

No they're not a 100% accurate. But this one is near enough.

You admit they're not 100% accurate but you assume that is close enough. Riiiiiight. All i'm saying is that there is no way to know 100%. Sure there is a low number of LGBT would would openly say they're LGBT, but the ones in closet won't say a word and there are some who weren't sure about their sexuality.

Then what do you think the percentage is 10,20,30%? Because with all due respect I would find it difficult to reconcile a species with 7 billion members in it if a high percentage of them are homosexual and therefore unlikely to have offspring of their own. Not to mention any party who actively pursued an anti gay agenda against such a large section of the electorate would be unlikely to win any elections. So why do anti gay marriage votes keep winning and the anti gay party, the GOP, keep getting such a high vote at elections?

[magicmiles]

Just a thought:

How far do those of you joining the boycott take things? Do you also boycott the suppliers of this business? The financiers? Or is it a matter of 'some action is better than no action'?

[Nick]

Because rural whites vote in large numbers as well as church goers.  They also seem to have a high % among seniors who also vote in high numbers.  Along with a large number of conservative states.  True liberals are not as plentiful as in the past.  And some people can't go very long without Chic-Fil-A.

[Timtheskeptic]

Then what do you think the percentage is 10,20,30%?

*Sigh* No one knows! I don't know! I just said that all i'm saying that it's very difficult to make an accurate statistic of the percentage of LGBT people! Geez, do you not read what i said?

Because with all due respect I would find it difficult to reconcile a species with 7 billion members in it if a high percentage of them are homosexual and therefore unlikely to have offspring of their own.

Gays and lesbians CAN have offsprings. It's called surrogacy and artificial insemination. Also, there's adoption.

Not to mention any party who actively pursued an anti gay agenda against such a large section of the electorate would be unlikely to win any elections. So why do anti gay marriage votes keep winning and the anti gay party, the GOP, keep getting such a high vote at elections?

oh they're winning votes are they? Then explain the marriages that has been legal in several states and in several countries? They're not winning anything, they're losing and it's also with the help of straight allies too. More and more states are starting to recongize that there's nothing scary about two men or two women in love, that same-sex marriage is beneficial and not threatening, and that children can be raised by gays and lesbians. Civil rights activists are actually the one's that's winning.

[Frank]

Then what do you think the percentage is 10,20,30%?

*Sigh* No one knows! I don't know! I just said that all i'm saying that it's very difficult to make an accurate statistic of the percentage of LGBT people! Geez, do you not read what i said?

Because with all due respect I would find it difficult to reconcile a species with 7 billion members in it if a high percentage of them are homosexual and therefore unlikely to have offspring of their own.

Gays and lesbians CAN have offsprings. It's called surrogacy and artificial insemination. Also, there's adoption.

Not to mention any party who actively pursued an anti gay agenda against such a large section of the electorate would be unlikely to win any elections. So why do anti gay marriage votes keep winning and the anti gay party, the GOP, keep getting such a high vote at elections?

oh they're winning votes are they? Then explain the marriages that has been legal in several states and in several countries? They're not winning anything, they're losing and it's also with the help of straight allies too. More and more states are starting to recongize that there's nothing scary about two men or two women in love, that same-sex marriage is beneficial and not threatening, and that children can be raised by gays and lesbians. Civil rights activists are actually the one's that's winning.

It is not difficult to figure these things out give or take a percentage point. It just appears you are not willing to accept it. Does it bother you if it is a low figure?

As for surrogacy and artificial insemination. For 99.9% of human history such procedures have not existed and adoption is not having offspring it's having someone else's offspring, and even that option has only become open to gay people in very recent history.

I would argue that they are winning. As far as I know no public vote has ever approved gay marriage. It might get through national or state governments. But the anti gay crowd immediately get enough signatures for a proposition to put before the electorate and they invariably win such as the recent vote in California and then it all ends up in the courts.

[Nam]

It could get a popular vote of the people if outside forces weren't permitted to voice their oppositions. Only citizens of that particular area should be able to voice opposition.

The states are fickle, in such regard. They always allow those from outside states to decide what's best for them. i.e. Utah on California.

-Nam

[Timtheskeptic]

It is not difficult to figure these things out give or take a percentage point. It just appears you are not willing to accept it. Does it bother you if it is a low figure?

What bothers me is people making up statistics.

blah blah, blah, blah

[screwtape]

Tim,

Let me help you out here.  You are jumping on Frank wrongly.  He pointed out that there are fewer homosexuals than Americans think.  That is not bigotry or an assault on gays.   

While surveys are not 100% accurate, it is not a complete guess nor is it unknowable.  The accuracy can be ascertained statistically withing a range.  That is normally included in formal surveys along with methodology.  If the one Frank linked is an informal survey, it probably won't have it and won't be valid. 

Slow down and listen to what he's saying. 

[Nick]

I have always heard it was around 10%.  Probably really hard to know.  Many are not out, many are bisexual, etc.  Wide range of levels to each I would imagine.  And that does not take into account all the preachers like Ted Haggard who have been cured.  I wonder if he went to Michelle Bachman's husband for his curing.

[Timtheskeptic]

Tim,

Let me help you out here.  You are jumping on Frank wrongly.  He pointed out that there are fewer homosexuals than Americans think.  That is not bigotry or an assault on gays.   

While surveys are not 100% accurate, it is not a complete guess nor is it unknowable.  The accuracy can be ascertained statistically withing a range.  That is normally included in formal surveys along with methodology.  If the one Frank linked is an informal survey, it probably won't have it and won't be valid. 

Slow down and listen to what he's saying.

be as that may be, but all i've been saying is nobodsy knows the accurate statistic.

I have always heard it was around 10%.  Probably really hard to know.  Many are not out, many are bisexual, etc.  Wide range of levels to each I would imagine.  And that does not take into account all the preachers like Ted Haggard who have been cured.  I wonder if he went to Michelle Bachman's husband for his curing.

Some say 2%, some say 10%, i say it's really complicated and sexuality is fluid. That is what i'm trying to say.

[nogodsforme]

When it comes to basic human rights, it does not matter if there are 1% gays or 200% gays. Nobody should have their human rights voted on by other people. Do we vote on whether ugly people should be allowed to marry each other? High school dropouts? Conservatives? People with no rhythm? People who wear mismatched clothes?

Maybe we should. Think of the children!

[Timtheskeptic]

When it comes to basic human rights, it does not matter if there are 1% gays or 200% gays. Nobody should have their human rights voted on by other people. Do we vote on whether ugly people should be allowed to marry each other? High school dropouts? Conservatives? People with no rhythm? People who wear mismatched clothes?

Maybe we should. Think of the children!

I strongly agree! That is why no matter what, people shouldn't have their rights voted. Civil rights are human rights. Even as someone who is hearing impaired, would they start taking my right to marry because i can't hear either? Even though we're of small percentage as well, we still shouldn't have our rights voted!

[nogodsforme]

The whole point of having a constitution is that there are some things that everyone is entitled to, unless there is a bona fide reason. Equal protection under the law.
 
Like every citizen can vote.[1]

Ironically, there are countries that don't have a constitution that give people rights that we don't: Israel and England both have gay rights and universal health care.

1.	With a few exceptions like prisoners, ex-felons and minors. I don't agree with the  ex-felon part. And who cares if a person works with coal or whatever?