Chick-fil-a Support Day and Free Speech

[agzg]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Kinda, sorta no.

So, yes you do.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

What people do in their lives is their business. But, since homosexuality has been turned into a 'hot button' political issue, it is not unreasonable for people to take sides.

Christianity is very deeply rooted in this country. And, in Christianity homosexuality is seen as sinful, along with other acts. So, if you ask me as a Christian, do I have a problem with gays, then yes I do because it does go against the Bible. I strive to live as close to God's word as possible.

Yes you do then.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

But, I'm also wise enough to recognize that not everyone is a Christian. I'm also wise enough to know that people have the right to their own beliefs even though they differ from mine. So, in that respect, then I say live and let live.

Did you know that a lot of gay people are also Christian? Also that the Bible has a lot of definitions of marriage?

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Personally, I'm heterosexual. So for me it is hard to comprehend being attracted to someone of the same sex.

You've made that quite clear.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

If someone says they are not in support of gay marriage, as marriage defined by the Bible, then they have every right to express that openly in the same way that someone would express the opposite view.

First, which biblical definition of marriage do you mean, here? I'm quite fond of the Man+Wife+Wife+Wife one. Because Lord knows, taking care of a man (clearly my job as a woman, as is spelled out by the Bible) gets tiring sometimes.

OH WAIT THAT'S NOT LEGAL.

It's interesting, though, right? I mean... the status quo right now is that no gay marriage is federally recognized, and only recognized in some states. Super interesting that someone else's "free speech" won out there. At what point does it leave "free speech" and enter "actively working to keep inequality?" Which donation to anti-LGBT groups would that have been?

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Going back to the original point of this thread - I think if the CEO of CFA was not the CEO, but some random guy, then this would not make news. The reason this made news, IMO, is because this was said by someone who runs a multi-billion dollar company. Gays are seen as a political group that exercises its power and influence (read money). So, the idea of someone offending a political group like that ruffled feathers. Bottom line - money is involved. If money was not involved then I don't think anyone would care. Gay, or not.

Of course he wouldn't. Random guys on the street are statistically unlikely to have the dollars (and be willing to give them) to fund side projects that help other groups lobby against gay marriage. No one gives a shit what the toothless white dude with a NASCAR hat thinks about Chick-fil-A and "the homosexicals that are threatnin' traditional marriage!" and has to squeeze a nickel so tight the buffalo poops to make ends meet. His one vote doesn't effect change or uphold the status quo. Now, funding groups to mobilize 3 million toothless white dudes with NASCAR hats on (PrettyBoy is going to come in this thread and bitchslap me for the NASCAR references) DOES make a difference.

Gays are not the only power minority that has money. They're certainly not a power majority that has money. Because people who run multi-billion dollar companies sometimes start charities that fund anti-LGBT groups. But it's cool though - because they're always more privileged than someone, right?

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I am also a Christian and I do not consider homosexuality sinful or wrong.

And that is your choice. I do.

I also challenge people who quote the Bible for their stance on homosexuality.

Again, that is your choice.

No, you will not end your random posts with a dish washing flounce.

Well, I don't know how your day / week has been, but mine has been full of long hours, so I must go now.

I know from years and years of being on GC with you, this can go on forever and ever. I will have to catch up with this thread again in the morning.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by agzg

So, yes you do.



Yes you do then.



Did you know that a lot of gay people are also Christian? Also that the Bible has a lot of definitions of marriage?





You've made that quite clear.



First, which biblical definition of marriage do you mean, here? I'm quite fond of the Man+Wife+Wife+Wife one. Because Lord knows, taking care of a man (clearly my job as a woman, as is spelled out by the Bible) gets tiring sometimes.

OH WAIT THAT'S NOT LEGAL.

It's interesting, though, right? I mean... the status quo right now is that no gay marriage is federally recognized, and only recognized in some states. Super interesting that someone else's "free speech" won out there. At what point does it leave "free speech" and enter "actively working to keep inequality?" Which donation to anti-LGBT groups would that have been?



Of course he wouldn't. Random guys on the street are statistically unlikely to have the dollars (and be willing to give them) to fund side projects that help other groups lobby against gay marriage. No one gives a shit what the toothless white dude with a NASCAR hat thinks about Chick-fil-A and "the homosexicals that are threatnin' traditional marriage!" and has to squeeze a nickel so tight the buffalo poops to make ends meet. His one vote doesn't effect change or uphold the status quo. Now, funding groups to mobilize 3 million toothless white dudes with NASCAR hats on (PrettyBoy is going to come in this thread and bitchslap me for the NASCAR references) DOES make a difference.

Gays are not the only power minority that has money. They're certainly not a power majority that has money. Because people who run multi-billion dollar companies start charities that fund anti-LGBT groups. But it's cool though - because they're always more privileged than someone, right?

You win. It is apparent that we are not going to convince each other, so to you too, I say goodnight.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

And that is your choice. I do.




Again, that is your choice.

No shit. You volunteered your opinion and I responded.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Well, I don't know how your day / week has been, but mine has been full of long hours, so I must go now.

Flounce.

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

I know from years and years of being on GC with you, this can go on forever and ever. I will have to catch up with this thread again in the morning.

You started this. YOU did. Don't blow smoke up your ass.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

You win. It is apparent that we are not going to convince each other, so to you too, I say goodnight.

Oh no, I'd never challenge your gold medal spot on the podium . Have a good night.

[amIblue?]

Originally Posted by agzg

First, which biblical definition of marriage do you mean, here? I'm quite fond of the Man+Wife+Wife+Wife one. Because Lord knows, taking care of a man (clearly my job as a woman, as is spelled out by the Bible) gets tiring sometimes.

Yeah, I wouldn't mind having someone to help with the housework.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by amIblue?

Yeah, I wouldn't mind having someone to help with the housework.

Don't tell Live-in, I have him convinced that the only way to run our household is 50/50. He's cooking dinner tomorrow, Friday, and Saturday, since I cooked Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday. If he finds out the Bible says I need to do all the housework he'll start going back to church. Probably with his dad, which would be fine if the pastor wasn't awful.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

But, since homosexuality has been turned into a 'hot button' political issue

Bless your heart.

Homosexuality isn't a political issue at all. The political issue comes into play when people like you see homosexuals as second class citizens not worthy of equal protection of rights as heterosexual citizens. Your statements about how a white homosexual male could never be as oppressed as you is quite bold as well. In all seriousness, how the hell do you know? Everyone's journey is different in life and not everyone can "hide under the radar" like you assume they can or even choose to do. I really don't want to get into the Oppression Olympics here but I personally have gay friends that have been disowned from their families, have been forced out of their careers, have been arrested, have been gay-bashed so bad that they were hospitalized all based solely on their sexuality so your comment about how none of these individuals know oppression really ANNOYS me.

[VandalSquirrel]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Kinda, sorta no.

What people do in their lives is their business. But, since homosexuality has been turned into a 'hot button' political issue, it is not unreasonable for people to take sides.

Christianity is very deeply rooted in this country. And, in Christianity homosexuality is seen as sinful, along with other acts. So, if you ask me as a Christian, do I have a problem with gays, then yes I do because it does go against the Bible. I strive to live as close to God's word as possible.

But, I'm also wise enough to recognize that not everyone is a Christian. I'm also wise enough to know that people have the right to their own beliefs even though they differ from mine. So, in that respect, then I say live and let live.

Personally, I'm heterosexual. So for me it is hard to comprehend being attracted to someone of the same sex.

If someone says they are not in support of gay marriage, as marriage defined by the Bible, then they have every right to express that openly in the same way that someone would express the opposite view.

Going back to the original point of this thread - I think if the CEO of CFA was not the CEO, but some random guy, then this would not make news. The reason this made news, IMO, is because this was said by someone who runs a multi-billion dollar company. Gays are seen as a political group that exercises its power and influence (read money). So, the idea of someone offending a political group like that ruffled feathers. Bottom line - money is involved. If money was not involved then I don't think anyone would care. Gay, or not.

The problem is that many people who are Christian are politically forcing their religious beliefs on the rest of the country, and that is what is unacceptable. There has never been one statement, fact, or reason to deny two consenting unrelated adults of the same sex/gender a marriage that doesn't come down to religion, and this is the core of the whole problem and why people are mad about the money donated by ChikFilH8 to influence politics and deny human rights while furthering their Christian beliefs. I'm getting tired that Freedom of Religion is an argument for interfering with the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment by depriving people of equal rights. It wasn't okay with Loving v. Virginia 45 years ago, and it isn't okay now either.

[Senusret I]

If you ate at Chick-fil-A yesterday, I hope you get salmonella poisoning and die.

[AGDee]

I am fascinated by the whole "marriage is religious" thing because, there is no state in this union that requires that a marriage be performed by a religious clergy person. In every state, you need a marriage license from the state and have to be married by someone granted the legal powers to perform a marriage ceremony. "By the power vested in me by the state of ________ I now pronounce you husband and wife". People can choose to have a religious clergy person with those powers perform that ceremony and sign that certificate but people can also choose to not have a religious clergy person perform that ceremony and sign that certificate. In our country, all of these people are equally legally married. And, by the way, that wording can be altered, if someone chooses to use that as an argument against gay marriage. It used to say "man and wife". It could just as easily say "legally married partners".

Tolerance and inclusiveness means that you try to see things with empathy for others who have different circumstances than yours. Just as sigmadiva said she cannot imagine being attracted to someone of the same gender, homosexuals cannot imagine being attracted to someone of the opposite gender. Frankly, I can't choose which men I am attracted to. I can choose whether I act on that attraction or not (if he is married, for example, I can ignore that attraction and not act on it). I just don't think it is fair or logical to ask homosexuals, as consenting adults, to ignore all of their attractions for their whole lives because it doesn't fit into someone else's religious beliefs.

In my belief system, laws should be made to prevent an infringement of rights. If gay marriage is legal, it allows more people to get married. Nobody has to marry someone of the same sex, but they can if they choose. If you don't believe in gay marriage, then you don't marry someone of the same gender. That seems pretty simple to me. It is legal to own a gun. I choose not to. I don't push for laws that ban all guns because others don't have to share my beliefs. If the law said I had to own a gun, that would be a problem. If the law said I couldn't own a gun, that would be a problem. If the law said I had to be married by a religious clergy, that would be a problem. If the law said I couldn't be married by a religious clergy, that would be a problem.

Finally, it isn't that this CEO is expressing his opinion. People do that every day. He is putting corporate funds into his opinion. If people choose to not contribute financially to organizations that fund his opinion, then so what? Consumers speak with their dollars. Those who believe as he does and want to fund those organizations will do so. Those who don't, won't. I'm thankful he has made it known so that we have the knowledge to make that decision.

I'm also thankful that some Christian religions perform gay marriages and allow gay clergy. I'm also thankful we don't have to follow every law put forth in the Bible.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Agreed - I think there's a "taste" element (or maybe even risk tolerance), and there's definitely a range of reasonable reactions to it (all of which think it's varying degrees of bad/silly).

Apparently Chicago Alderman Joe Morena didn't get the memo, because he did say he would try to block Chik-Fil-A from getting a permit to build there.

Originally Posted by AGDee

I'm also thankful that some Christian religions perform gay marriages and allow gay clergy. I'm also thankful we don't have to follow every law put forth in the Bible.

Just to be clear, those churches that allow gay clergy and same-sex unions would see that as being consistent with the Gospel, not as ignoring what the Bible says.

But yeah, what you said.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

Homosexuality isn't a political issue at all. The political issue comes into play when people like you see homosexuals as second class citizens not worthy of equal protection of rights as heterosexual citizens.

Considering gay marriage is now an issue on many state ballots, where one is asked to vote for or against it, then yeah, it got to be pretty political at that point.

Your statements about how a white homosexual male could never be as oppressed as you is quite bold as well. In all seriousness, how the hell do you know? Everyone's journey is different in life and not everyone can "hide under the radar" like you assume they can or even choose to do. I really don't want to get into the Oppression Olympics here but I personally have gay friends that have been disowned from their families, have been forced out of their careers, have been arrested, have been gay-bashed so bad that they were hospitalized all based solely on their sexuality so your comment about how none of these individuals know oppression really ANNOYS me.

It has been a while since I had to take a US history and US government class, but as far as I remember, I never read or came across any moment in US history from the early - mid 1600's to today, where gays were forced into servitude just because they were gay. Nor do I recall any law needing to be passed to allows gays the right to vote because they were denied the right to vote simply because they are gay.

I agree with you on what you said above. Those are examples of oppression. But, when I see White gays hold up banners with pictures from the 1960's Black Civil Rights Movement trying to proclaim that they have suffered the same fate, that I don't buy.

I'm not saying that there have not, and are not, clear instances where someone has been oppressed simply because they are gay. What I'm saying is there has never been in the history of this Nation such a systematic and at a period of time forced by law, oppression of gays to the same extent experienced by Black people in this country.

[AlphaFrog]

So systematic oppression is the only oppression that makes you officially oppressed?

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

The problem is that many people who are Christian are politically forcing their religious beliefs on the rest of the country, and that is what is unacceptable.

This has been happening since Europeans first arrived in this country, so that is nothing new.

There has never been one statement, fact, or reason to deny two consenting unrelated adults of the same sex/gender a marriage that doesn't come down to religion, and this is the core of the whole problem and why people are mad about the money donated by ChikFilH8 to influence politics and deny human rights while furthering their Christian beliefs. I'm getting tired that Freedom of Religion is an argument for interfering with the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment by depriving people of equal rights. It wasn't okay with Loving v. Virginia 45 years ago, and it isn't okay now either.

And the counterpoint to this is, if the CEO of CFA had come out with a statement completely opposite to what he actually said and decided to donate money to support gay marriage, then some people would still applaud him and others would still be angry.

Its his company. He feels that he can say what he wants about his company. For those who are not familiar with CFA, they are closed on Sundays for the sole purpose to allow their workers to go to church. So for him to come out with this statement should not be much of a surprise.

Also, what a person sees as 'equal rights' is very subjective. The best we can do is what we are doing now - present the issue and give the people the right to vote on that issue.