• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Muppets owner Lisa Henson severs ties with Chick-Fil-A over SSM

muciti said:
I would never support anything that took away a persons right to boycott. I agree it goes both ways. Those people do and should have the right to do it. Just because someone has the right to do it doesnt change that they are just as big of idiots and bigots as what they are protesting.
Click to expand...

Your wrong here, being against bigotry is not bigotry.
 
solletica said:
Any CEO who claims to believe one thing and acts and/or operates his/her business in a manner that is inconsistent with that belief, even though he has a choice not to, is by definition, a hypocrite.

The CEO of Chick-Fil-A cannot say he opposes gay marriage and then simultaneously be believed 100% that he opposes discriminating against gay couples in his facilities.

A person's values are fundamentally reflected by his actions. And Dan Cathy's actions are clear: he has donated money to organizations that promote a gay-bashing agenda. Therefore, he's a bigot himself, plain and simple. So if it's true that his eating facilities don't discriminate against people due to sexual orientation, then he must be a hypocrite. But if he's not a hypocrite, then he must support such discrimination, in keeping with his true beliefs.
Click to expand...

Show me the "gay bashing." Stating that he believes that it would be "audacious" for the nation to consider changing the definition of marraige (which he believes was originally defined by God) is not "gay bashing."

Show me one instance of a donation made by Chick fil A to a group that spews hate. I don't believe you will find one.
 
kamikaze483 said:
Show me the "gay bashing." Stating that he believes that it would be "audacious" for the nation to consider changing the definition of marraige (which he believes was originally defined by God) is not "gay bashing."
Click to expand...

It is. No different than stating that it would be audacious for the nation to consider legal recognition of marriages between Whites and Blacks.

kamikaze483 said:
Show me one instance of a donation made by Chick fil A to a group that spews hate. I don't believe you will find one.
Click to expand...

Chick-Fil-A Fast Food Chain Donated Nearly $2 Million To Anti-Gay Groups In 2009
 
Your Star said:
Your wrong here, being against bigotry is not bigotry.
Click to expand...


You're lucky, you missed an entire thread where he said that over and over in many different versions.

In his mind, having negative feelings towards bigots is the same thing as being a bigot.

Oh and free speech doesn't extend to boycotts, apparently if you boycott someone because of their twisted religious beliefs, you're a bigot, in his mind.
 
kamikaze483 said:
Show me one instance of a donation made by Chick fil A to a group that spews hate. I don't believe you will find one.
Click to expand...


What?!!!


The owner said there's an invisible man in the sky who will smite America because we're too tolerant of gays.

And then God gave his VP a heart attack.

Shut him up right quick...
 
muciti said:
being intolerant of a mans faith and religious beliefs because they differ from yours is bigotry no matter how you slice it.
Click to expand...

Not being okay with intolerance is not intolerance.
 
Omgitsme said:
Except they arnt boycotting him because his religion. They are boycotting him due to him supporting legal discriminating against homosexuals. There is a huge difference between the two. No one should use their religious beliefs to interfere with the rights of others. Would you agree with that last sentence?
Click to expand...

yes I do agree with that last sentence. However he is not interfering with any rights of others. Noone has the right to marry and further more he does not have the authority to make the decisions as to whether or not ssm ever happens. That is done politically and at the voting booths. Neither of which does he control. His opinion is that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. I am aware of no time has this man ever said that he did not support the legal rights of a ss couple to be equal to that of a ds couple. This IS about his religion. Look around. You have one person sitting in here stating it is because of baptists, another saying how evil baptists are, another idiot mocking religion as an imaginary man in the sky, another stating that god is petty and the list goes on and on just on this thread and you can go to other website to see even more of it. This situation, these comments and many other things are clearly bigots being intolerant of christian beliefs while at the same time being confused as to why the people that they discriminate against wont be more tolerant of them.
 
Your Star said:
Not being okay with intolerance is not intolerance.
Click to expand...

So, in your mind, it's okay to be intolerant of folks whose beliefs don't allow them to tolerate something you believe in. In fact, it's your righteous mission to oppose them, to be intolerant towards them, right?

You're in the same boat as they are, you're just holding a different oar and pulling in another direction.
 
muciti said:
When gays and lesbians can learn to be tolerant...
Click to expand...

Hasty generalization is a logical fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence.

In other words, if you want people to take you seriously, don't lump an entire group of people in a statement.
 
clownboy said:
So, in your mind, it's okay to be intolerant of folks whose beliefs don't allow them to tolerate something you believe in. In fact, it's your righteous mission to oppose them, to be intolerant towards them, right?

You're in the same boat as they are, you're just holding a different oar and pulling in another direction.
Click to expand...

i wish i could like this twice.
 
CriticalThought said:
Hasty generalization is a logical fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence.

In other words, if you want people to take you seriously, don't lump an entire group of people in a statement.
Click to expand...

good point and i apologize for that one.
 
muciti said:
When gays and lesbians can learn to be tolerant it will make sense for them to demand it. To demand tolerance when you are not willing to be tolerant yourself is just hypocritical and you should be ashamed.
Click to expand...

You realize that the vast majority of those speaking out in this thread against Chic-Fil-A are strait? That the vast majority of gay people are not boycotting Chic-Fil-A? Do you realize that asking for the right to marry has jack and **** to do with "demanding tolerance", but has to do with legal recognition?
 
Redress said:
You realize that the vast majority of those speaking out in this thread against Chic-Fil-A are strait? That the vast majority of gay people are not boycotting Chic-Fil-A? Do you realize that asking for the right to marry has jack and **** to do with "demanding tolerance", but has to do with legal recognition?
Click to expand...

no i dont know if people are straight or not. intolerant is intolerant now matter who the sleep with.
 
muciti said:
no i dont know if people are straight or not. intolerant is intolerant now matter who the sleep with.
Click to expand...

So the point flew over your head. Hint: you are justifying denying your tolerance towards gays based on what you percieve to be intolerance that is not from most gays and mostly from people who are not gay. In other words, your logic is so screwed up it is hilarious.
 
muciti said:
no i dont know if people are straight or not. intolerant is intolerant now matter who the sleep with.
Click to expand...

I think you are intolerant of the intolerant of the intolerant.
 
Redress said:
So the point flew over your head. Hint: you are justifying denying your tolerance towards gays based on what you percieve to be intolerance that is not from most gays and mostly from people who are not gay. In other words, your logic is so screwed up it is hilarious.
Click to expand...

I apologized for that statement and shouldnt have said it and i deleted the post. I shouldnt lump all gays and lesbians in with the bigotted people like many of the people in this thread.

Also I do not have any intolerance toward gays.
 
Billy the Kid said:
Wait a minute, are you sure you've smeared everyone in the South you possible could? Think about it a minute, I'm sure you can come up with a few more folks you can add to your bigoted tirade.
Click to expand...

Byte me. Conservatives in the South have long had a tradition of being the country's bigoted, uneducated riff raff (slavery, Jim Crow, oil spill liability caps, ...)
 
solletica said:
Byte me. Conservatives in the South have long had a tradition of being the country's bigoted, uneducated riff raff (slavery, Jim Crow, oil spill liability caps, ...)
Click to expand...

You do realize that while the South was doing slavery, the North was doing child labor and indenturement, right? Or did you skip that history course. For every dumb**** thing the South has done, the Northern states have an equally ugly companion piece.

Your post is rife with bigotry as you rail against it.
 
muciti said:
being intolerant of a mans faith and religious beliefs because they differ from yours is bigotry no matter how you slice it.
Click to expand...

Really? So civil rights activists that campaigned against the Klan were bigots?

The Polish Underground State that acted against Nazism were bigots?

Difficult to say what's more stupid--the fact that the "bigotry against bigots" excuse has historically been dismissed as idiotic--or the fact that modern day right wingers still try to use it :rolleyes:

Bigots are those that try (or aid in the effort) to deny legal rights to a specific group of people that are granted to everyone else, when the basis of that denial is purely arbitrary (i. e. no other reason than to discriminate).

Groups such as the FRC are examples of this since they all favor denying the legal recognition of marriage to anyone whose mate is of the same sex, without offering any rationale for that denial other than discredited myths (i. e. gays destroy families, molest kids more, etc.)

Groups that fight discrimination, i. e. GLAAD, OTOH, do not deny anyone legal rights. A boycott against Chick Fil A does not deny the legal right of that establishment to operate, nor does a town exercising its legal ability to deny permits for a business to operate (since it is free to operate elsewhere where it's granted a permit), so it's not bigotry.

It would only amount to bigotry if GLAAD enacted (or supported the enactment of) a law that would prohibit businesses from operating/obtaining licenses anywhere solely because its owners/CEOs were homophobic, and that's not being done.
 
muciti said:
being intolerant of a mans faith and religious beliefs because they differ from yours is bigotry no matter how you slice it.
Click to expand...

Here's the problem, I know more about the Chick-fil-a's religion than he does.

His is a twisted, perverted version of Christianity.
 
clownboy said:
You do realize that while the South was doing slavery, the North was doing child labor and indenturement, right? Or did you skip that history course. For every dumb**** thing the South has done, the Northern states have an equally ugly companion piece.

Your post is rife with bigotry as you rail against it.
Click to expand...

You do realize that the South was doing both child labor AND human bondage, right? Perhaps making excuses for slavery isn't such a hot idea?
 
muciti said:
no i dont know if people are straight or not. intolerant is intolerant now matter who the sleep with.
Click to expand...

I want to exercise my biblical right to stone my son to death when he curses me. Will you permit me my religious freedom, or will you be intolerant?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom