Omniscience just sucks without omnipotence!
1. Don't like Coffee and starbucks hot chocolate sucks
2. The only reason I would've even THOUGHT about attending the Chick-Fil-A protest purposefully was due to the only potential (and arguably actual) infringement of the first amendment on the part of the idiot mayors
3. Even then, I didn't have any desire to attend such a protest because its ****ing fast food. I go to my resturants and coffee joints to eat/drink, not make some stupid political statement
4. If this was anything more than a political stunt, or wasn't just reactionary BS rather than some honest desire to raise SSM awareness, Starbucks would've done this without the extra urge from Chick-Fil-A. This is them trying to cash in on the whole thing imho.
So yeah...the chances of me purposefully attending this "protest" is just a smidgen less than the "ridiculously doubtful to an extreme" chance that I would've purposefully attended the Chick-Fil-A one.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Anyone who supports SSM probably already goes to Starbucks every day of the week, so I doubt they will get much traction with this reverse boycott.
It's interesting to me how thoroughly consumerized we are as a society when we support pet causes by organizing buy-ins at businesses that SAY they support the cause. Are we tacitly saying we prefer retail stores to express our political wills rather than the state houses and Capitol Hill? No need to bother with elected representatives when we have the voice of some big business publicly aligning itself with our stances.
Dunno whether to laugh or cry.
Sent from my homing pigeon using Crapatalk.
The morality of abortion is not a religious belief, any more than the morality of slavery, apartheid, rape, larceny, murder or arson is a religious belief. These are norms of the natural law of mankind and can be legislated even in a completely religionless society.
Tomorrow, in support of anything, use a fossil fuel.
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the ******* irony in that." - Justin Halpern
It is real simple: This is a states’ rights issue until SCOTUS says it is a US constitutional issue.
End of story.
I have no more rights than any gay man does so it has nothing to do with “equality”. It has everything to do with changing the current definition of marriage, which is ok by me, but not upon the basis of ‘human rights” or “constitutional rights”.
There is no disparity in rights as the law stands unless you consider any and all limits on marriage an infringement upon the rights of others.
I gave you them.
You just contradicted yourself; first you said there were no rights gay couples don't get, now you're admitting there are rights they don't get per states not letting them allowed to marry.
YOU get a clue.