• 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

sawyerloggingon said:
So I will wrap this up for you guys before I go to the chair. This boycott by libs is about trying to deny this man freedom of religion. Any views that don't conform to the liberal agenda shall be quashed. Dissent is not allowed, conform or perish. You will be assimilated, resistance is futile. WE ARE THE BORG! LMAO
Click to expand...

How the hell did you come up with that? Its about his comments on SSM and his donations to several anti-gay groups that spread lies around about homosexuality. It has nothing to do with his religion or with Christianity. It is in no way shape or form about trying to suppress his religious freedoms. He is still free to practice his religion as he sees fit and to make anti-SSM comments all he wants. But people are also free to boycott him for his views which you seem to forget.
 
rocket88 said:
You can treat people with dignity and respect and be against SSM.

This whole thing is rather silly to me. If the dude wants to use his company to promote an anti-gay agenda, he's free to do so. If that pisses people off enough not to patronize his business as a result, they are free to do that. Everybody just get back to excercising your freedom, and we're fine.
Click to expand...

You can treat people with dignity and respect and be against heterosexual marriage.

This whole thing is rather silly to me. If a man wants to use his company to promote an anti-heterosexual agenda, he's free to do so. If that pisses people off enough not to patronize his business as a result, they are free to do that. Everybody just get back to exercising your freedom, and we're fine.

Thanks for playing. :)
 
ChuckBerry said:
Muppets dump Chick-Fil-A to support gay marriage - Chicago Tribune

"The Jim Henson Company has celebrated and embraced diversity and inclusiveness for over fifty years and we have notified Chick-Fil-A that we do not wish to partner with them on any future endeavors," the company said in a statement posted on their official Facebook page.

(snip)

The Henson company, whose Muppet characters are hugely popular, said its Chief Executive Lisa Henson is a "strong supporter of gay marriage and has directed us to donate the payment we received from Chick-Fil-A to GLAAD," the company said in their statement.

Chick-Fil-A has not hidden its Christian mission statement from day one, which precedes the founding of Henson's company. If Henson actually gave a damn about the issue, rather than responding to pressure and then grandstanding, they might have never chosen to associate with Chick-Fil-A at all.

It's a pity that simple symbols and characters from childhood now have to be politicized.
Click to expand...

Chick-Fil-A really has no choice but to claim to abhor gay rights and marriage, because in the right wing southern Xtian states like MS, KT, AL, etc. Chick-Fil-A is considered fine dining. One has to consider the economic situation of the right wing folks that live there; middle class righties in those states just eat hot dogs or Mac-and-Cheese and go out to McDonald's for fine dining, whereas the elite upper wealthy class dines at Chick-Fil-A.

When an eating establishment is revered as a culinary creme-de-la-creme by so many right wingers, the last thing such an establishment should do is insult its patrons by supporting something those patrons consider deplorable. After all, what would happen if a right wing couple in AL, KT, MS, etc. walked into a Chick Fil-A, having saved up for so many months to afford to dine there, and saw a gay couple dining at another table. To say the least, they would pissed to the max.
 
solletica said:
Chick-Fil-A really has no choice but to claim to abhor gay rights and marriage, because in the right wing southern Xtian states like MS, KT, AL, etc. Chick-Fil-A is considered fine dining. One has to consider the economic situation of the right wing folks that live there; middle class righties in those states just eat hot dogs or Mac-and-Cheese and go out to McDonald's for fine dining, whereas the elite upper wealthy class dines at Chick-Fil-A.

When an eating establishment is revered as a culinary creme-de-la-creme by so many right wingers, the last thing such an establishment should do is insult its patrons by supporting something those patrons consider deplorable. After all, what would happen if a right wing couple in AL, KT, MS, etc. walked into a Chick Fil-A, having saved up for so many months to afford to dine there, and saw a gay couple dining at another table. To say the least, they would pissed to the max.
Click to expand...

Chick Fil A in no way prevents gay people from dining or working at their restaurants. This is just ignorant.
 
rocket88 said:
You can treat people with dignity and respect and be against SSM.

This whole thing is rather silly to me. If the dude wants to use his company to promote an anti-gay agenda, he's free to do so. If that pisses people off enough not to patronize his business as a result, they are free to do that. Everybody just get back to excercising your freedom, and we're fine.
Click to expand...

This! You've hit the nail on the head.

I'm SO sick of the partisan hacks who have blown this story out of proportion.

*See posts #456 & 459.
 
Last edited:
muciti said:
Chick Fil A in no way prevents gay people from dining or working at their restaurants. This is just ignorant.
Click to expand...

It may discourage them from dining there.

True, (educated) liberals (including gay liberals) will boycott the place for lunch in the same way they boycott the local sewage tank, but there are many (closeted) right wing gays who live in the aforementioned southern states, and they may feel less inclined to dine at Chick Fil-A because of the hostility of that establishment's executive leadership to their love life.
 
muciti said:
Yea all baptists are evil i suppose. I once got asked to leave a gay bar. Hmmmmm. Should I overreact? Hmmmmmm.
Click to expand...

We call this a straw man. I do not like the baptist church, you know, the organization, what we are talking about. I don't know any baptists, but then again I never ask any person what cult they belong to.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
So I will wrap this up for you guys before I go to the chair. This boycott by libs is about trying to deny this man freedom of religion. Any views that don't conform to the liberal agenda shall be quashed. Dissent is not allowed, conform or perish. You will be assimilated, resistance is futile. WE ARE THE BORG! LMAO
Click to expand...

The Super Stealth Rainbow Coalition has been sneaking in gay chickens to Chik-Fil-A suppliers and this explains the high rate of divorce among Christians
 
solletica said:
FYI, Chick-Fil-A is not an escort service/gentlemen's club. It only serves chicken.
Click to expand...

I'm more than a little unnerved anyone would look at that young female and think "prostitute."
 
muciti said:
Oh they "say". This type of **** is getting rediculous. This whole Chick Fil A thing is making this a really ****ty choice for people to have to make. Support religious freedom and the right to free speech vs the right to marry. I value free speech over marriage. Earlier this year there were petitions going around to get Colorado to get our state politicians to review SSM. I signed it and even stood outside king soopers for an hour collecting signatures. I have always voted for ssm when it has been on the Colorado ballot. My wife and I make a yearly donation to GLAAD and cospride.org. The disgusting attitudes of the people on this site and other websites is strongly making me reconsider all of this. Apparently the gay community wants to force people to discriminate based on religion and suppress the right to free speech. I suppose since I don't agree with religious discrimination it would not make sense for me to continue to support these groups. As long as the gay and lesbian community is encouraging people to discriminate I will no longer be supportive of them and I am going to instead donate that money elsewhere and encourage my friends and family to do the same.
Click to expand...

Where the hell are you guys getting this idea? Boycotting a company because you dont agree with something they did or said is nowhere near close to religious discrimination or suppressing someones free speech.
 
Well, one thing's for certain. Mitt Romney is now going to have to dine at Chick-Fil-A (and be photographed doing so) to cement his conservative credentials.

FYI, he (may) not have to swallow.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
We call this a straw man. I do not like the baptist church, you know, the organization, what we are talking about. I don't know any baptists, but then again I never ask any person what cult they belong to.
Click to expand...

It is not straw man. Furthermore referring to a church as a cult is as bigoted as me referring to gays a faggots. Just because you try to justify your hate for people based on their beliefs doesnt make it right. No better than the people who have reasons for hating blacks, gays, jews, or whoever else you want to throw in there.
 
Omgitsme said:
Where the hell are you guys getting this idea? Boycotting a company because you dont agree with something they did or said is nowhere near close to religious discrimination or suppressing someones free speech.
Click to expand...

Refusing to use the goods or service of a person or company because you do not like their religious values is discrimination.
 
muciti said:
It is not straw man. Furthermore referring to a church as a cult is as bigoted as me referring to gays a faggots. Just because you try to justify your hate for people based on their beliefs doesnt make it right. No better than the people who have reasons for hating blacks, gays, jews, or whoever else you want to throw in there.
Click to expand...

Sorry, condemning someone for his/her bigotry is not bigotry.
 
muciti said:
Refusing to use the goods or service of a person or company because you do not like their religious values is discrimination.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily.

Since we have freedom, people can use their freedom to not buy goods from a certain place if they don't wish to. This goes for Nabisco, Chick-fil-A, etc.

Business owners have the freedom to hold their views without being punished, and people have the right to not shop at/boycott companies if they wish.
 
Wake said:
Not necessarily.

Since we have freedom, people can use their freedom to not buy goods from a certain place if they don't wish to. This goes for Nabisco, Chick-fil-A, etc.

Business owners have the freedom to hold their views without being punished, and people have the right to not shop at/boycott companies if they wish.
Click to expand...

Just because they have the right to do it doesnt mean it isnt discrimination. They are refusing to eat his food because they dont like his religion. They are free to shop where they want, but it is still discrimination.
 
muciti;1060733257[B said:
]you clearly think that the only way to discriminate against someone is to disagree with their views on marriage.[/B] That is simply not the case. As long GLAAD and their supporters continue to discriminate against people based on their religious beliefs I will not support them or their causes. If SSM makes its way back to Colorado this bigotry has lost at least one vote and if I can help it more. I am going to strongly advocate against GLAAD and cospride.org until they stop this nonsensical attack on a man for no reason other than his religious beliefs.
Click to expand...

Disagreeing with someones views is in no way discrimination. Basically you can believe that marriage should be whatever you want and you can voice that opinion. But as soon as you actually stop a group of people from getting married and receiving the same rights and benefits as other groups of people then you are discriminating against that group.

Also are you going to advocate against groups that attack the Westboro Baptist Church for no reason other then their religious beliefs?
 
muciti said:
Refusing to use the goods or service of a person or company because you do not like their religious values is discrimination.
Click to expand...

It would help to clarify it is legal discrimination. Practicing the act of discrimination itself is not always illegal. I don't go to Hooters or Mary Lou's coffee because of their exploitation of young women which means I am discriminating but I'm doing it with my own dead presidents. That is consumer freedom.
 
Omgitsme said:
Disagreeing with someones views is in no way discrimination. Basically you can believe that marriage should be whatever you want and you can voice that opinion. But as soon as you actually stop a group of people from getting married and receiving the same rights and benefits as other groups of people then you are discriminating against that group.
Click to expand...

Disagreeing, no. But refusing to dine somewhere because of their religion is discrimination.

For instance. If I were to refuse to go to a restaurant because the owners were Muslim I would be discriminating against that restaurant. If I were to refuse to eat a restaurant run by a gay man because he was gay I would be discriminating. If I were to refuse to eat at a restaurant because it was run by a black woman I would be discriminating. This idea that just because its discrimination against a Christian is ok just because he is Christian is disgusting and bigoted. Has nothing to do with the tolerance these hypocrites pretend they want.
 
Furiounova said:
It would help to clarify it is legal discrimination. Practicing the act of discrimination itself is not always illegal. I don't go to Hooters or Mary Lou's coffee because of their exploitation of young women which means I am discriminating but I'm doing it with my own dead presidents. That is consumer freedom.
Click to expand...

I am not talking about legally. Legally I can do a lot of things doesnt mean they are right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom