The Great Chick-fil-A Snake Oil "Faith" Hustle

[doggie]

I thought this was an excellent article on the whole freedom of speech crap we have been seeing. I love this quote.

"The concept of "free speech," which was designed to keep governments from throwing dissenters into prison to silence them, is never more degraded than it is in cases like these. To people like Mr. Cathy's followers, the First Amendment is a sort of shapeless, elasticized polyester pant suit that will stretch to accommodate any amount of ugliness, all the while allowing the wearer to claim that he or she is dressed in something at least technically decent. "

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-r ... 39428.html

[Koala]

"chicken-fried Jesus" cult

:lol:

[doggie]

:lol:

yep that was a good one.

[shesinsane]

yep that was a good one.

If Christenfreude is the glee one gets from being better/holier than the rest of the Christians, Crispy Christenfreude is showing how much you lurve Jebus by eating at Chick-Fil-A.

[scarygirl]

I thought this was an excellent article on the whole freedom of speech crap we have been seeing. I love this quote.

"The concept of "free speech," which was designed to keep governments from throwing dissenters into prison to silence them, is never more degraded than it is in cases like these. To people like Mr. Cathy's followers, the First Amendment is a sort of shapeless, elasticized polyester pant suit that will stretch to accommodate any amount of ugliness, all the while allowing the wearer to claim that he or she is dressed in something at least technically decent. "

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-r ... 39428.html

Since when did expressing an "opinion" constitute ugliness? So what now, "opinions" only belong to select groups? If you are not apart of that group and supporting that group whether you agree or not that is now ugliness?

What's next? Having an American Idol style vote on every controversial topic, the most votes wins. Those that don't express the views of the popular vote, off with their heads! :roll:

BTW, I think Chick Filet food is overrated, but the company CEO is still entitled to his opinion.

[atheistjd]

Since when did expressing an "opinion" constitute ugliness? So what now, "opinions" only belong to select groups? If you are not apart of that group and supporting that group whether you agree or not that is now ugliness?

What's next? Having an American Idol style vote on every controversial topic, the most votes wins. Those that don't express the views of the popular vote, off with their heads! :roll:

BTW, I think Chick Filet food is overrated, but the company CEO is still entitled to his opinion.

Wait, you honestly don't see how there are ugly opinions? What if it was my "opinion" that a certain racial minority should have their own water fountains. Or sit on the back of the bus. You wouldn't consider expressing that opinion ugliness?

[BoomerLynn]

Since when did expressing an "opinion" constitute ugliness? So what now, "opinions" only belong to select groups? If you are not apart of that group and supporting that group whether you agree or not that is now ugliness?

What's next? Having an American Idol style vote on every controversial topic, the most votes wins. Those that don't express the views of the popular vote, off with their heads! :roll:

BTW, I think Chick Filet food is overrated, but the company CEO is still entitled to his opinion.

He can have whatever opinion he wants. I don't care. What I care about is that he has donated millions of dollars towards certain hate groups that wish to deny a portion of our population their rights. I care that these same hate groups urged congress not to act on the killing of gay people in Uganda. I care that his company has fired women because they had children and should be home caring for them. (Nevermind that most likely these women needed their jobs to feed and clothe their children). He is perfectly entitled to have whatever beliefs he chooses. People are not reacting to his beliefs, they are reacting to the fact that he is trying to force those beliefs onto everyone else.

[scarygirl]

Wait, you honestly don't see how there are ugly opinions? What if it was my "opinion" that a certain racial minority should have their own water fountains. Or sit on the back of the bus. You wouldn't consider expressing that opinion ugliness?

Someone saying they support the biblical view of marriage is not an ugly opinion. It may not be your opinion, but that doesn't make it ugly.

That isn't the same thing as somone saying racial minorities should have their own water fountains or should have to sit at the back of the bus. Those are horriblly ugly opinons, but at the same time people are entitled to have their own thoughts and opinions whether you and I agree or not.

So long as Chick Filet follows the rule of law when it comes to not discriminating against employees and patrons based on race, creed, sexual orientation, etc, I don't see the problem.

And concerning the other issue, there are laws that protect minorities now. As well there should be.That doesn't mean people aren't allowed to have their own opinions, ugly or otherwise.

A businesss that supports such blatant discrimination wouldn't stay in business very long anyway. I woudn't spend my dollars there, and I don't think you would either.

At the end of the day you can't legislate personal behavior. So long as one is purposely not trying to maim, murder, or molest another individual why should I care?

[scarygirl]

He can have whatever opinion he wants. I don't care. What I care about is that he has donated millions of dollars towards certain hate groups that wish to deny a portion of our population their rights. I care that these same hate groups urged congress not to act on the killing of gay people in Uganda. I care that his company has fired women because they had children and should be home caring for them. (Nevermind that most likely these women needed their jobs to feed and clothe their children). He is perfectly entitled to have whatever beliefs he chooses. People are not reacting to his beliefs, they are reacting to the fact that he is trying to force those beliefs onto everyone else.

Please name the hate groups in question. I don't take anyone's word on the internet otherwise that such hate groups exist without investigating for myself.

If certain so called hate groups are urging congress to not act on the killing of gay people in Uganda that is not very Christian of them. Not because they are a gay minority, but because they are people first and killing is wrong, period.

Firing women: I heard those same accusations too, but isn't it funny how not nary a peep was made until someone had the absolute gaul to express support for the biblical view of marriage. Maybe those stories are true, maybe they are not. If proven true, I wouldn't spend my dollars there. That is what the courts are for. Next!

[debrand]

scarygirl, I'm a little confused about your statement.

Freedom of speech does not mean that the speaker is free from reaction. Chick-Fil-A expressed a vile, disgusting and yes, ugly opinion. Because Chick-Fil-A doesn't have greater freedom of speech rights then I do, I can tell them that they are hateful for their opinion and they can express similar sentiments back to me.

[CanadianHippie]

Someone saying they support the biblical view of marriage is not an ugly opinion. It may not be your opinion, but that doesn't make it ugly.

That isn't the same thing as somone saying racial minorities should have their own water fountains or should have to sit at the back of the bus. Those are horriblly ugly opinons, but at the same time people are entitled to have their own thoughts and opinions whether you and I agree or not.

So long as Chick Filet follows the rule of law when it comes to not discriminating against employees and patrons based on race, creed, sexual orientation, etc, I don't see the problem.

And concerning the other issue, there are laws that protect minorities now. As well there should be.That doesn't mean people aren't allowed to have their own opinions, ugly or otherwise.

A businesss that supports such blatant discrimination wouldn't stay in business very long anyway. I woudn't spend my dollars there, and I don't think you would either.

At the end of the day you can't legislate personal behavior. So long as one is purposely not trying to maim, murder, or molest another individual why should I care?

Different rights for different groups of people is exactly the same as the Jim Crow laws. That's what Jim Crow laws were about, and that's what the fight against same-sex marriage is about. Most states still allow discrimination against LGBTQ people because they are not considered a protected group (you the whole "well those people don't hate to deal with discrimination, so they shouldn't be protected and we should be able to ban them from marrying each other!" logic fail?)

The people who cry "freedom of speech" for Chick-fil-a and the owner are the same people who claim that J.C. Penny shouldn't have had Ellen DeGeneres as a spokes person. They care only that their group be allowed to speak out and want anyone else to shut the fuck up. It's not about actual free speech, its about them not wanting to be called on their bigotry.

[BoomerLynn]

Please name the hate groups in question. I don't take anyone's word on the internet otherwise that such hate groups exist without investigating for myself.

If certain so called hate groups are urging congress to not act on the killing of gay people in Uganda that is not very Christian of them. Not because they are a gay minority, but because they are people first and killing is wrong, period.

Firing women: I heard those same accusations too, but isn't it funny how not nary a peep was made until someone had the absolute gaul to express support for the biblical view of marriage. Maybe those stories are true, maybe they are not. If proven true, I wouldn't spend my dollars there. That is what the courts are for. Next!

They donated to the Family Research Council and Exodus International. One of the women fired sued the company last year, long before Cathy's statements were made.

[debrand]

[Please name the hate groups in question. I don't take anyone's word on the internet otherwise that such hate groups exist without investigating for myself.

If certain so called hate groups are urging congress to not act on the killing of gay people in Uganda that is not very Christian of them. Not because they are a gay minority, but because they are people first and killing is wrong, period.

Firing women: I heard those same accusations too, but isn't it funny how not nary a peep was made until someone had the absolute gaul to express support for the biblical view of marriage. Maybe those stories are true, maybe they are not. If proven true, I wouldn't spend my dollars there. That is what the courts are for. Next!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world ... ganda.html

Here is one article out of many that describes the situation in Uganda. Other people can provide more information.

There is no such thing as the biblical view of marriage. The Romans influenced our view on marriage far more then the bible.

http://wearegoonies.wordpress.com/2009/ ... the-bible/

10. Find an attractive prisoner of war, bring her home, shave her head, trim her nails, and give her new clothes. Then she’s yours. – (Deuteronomy 21:11-13)

9. Find a prostitute and marry her. – (Hosea 1:1-3)

8. Find a man with seven daughters, and impress him by watering his flock.- Moses (Exodus 2:16-21)

7. Purchase a piece of property, and get a woman as part of the deal. – Boaz (Ruth 4:5-10)

6. Go to a party and hide. When the women come out to dance, grab one and carry her off to be your wife. – Benjaminites (Judges 21:19-25)

5. Have God create a wife for you while you sleep.-Adam (Genesis 2:19-24)

4. Kill any husband and take his wife. -David (2 Samuel 11)

3. Cut 200 foreskins off of your future father-in-law’s enemies and get his daughter for a wife -David (I Samuel 18:27)

2. Even if no one is out there, just wander around a bit and you’ll definitely find someone. -Cain (Genesis 4:16-17)

1. Don’t be so picky. Make up for quality with quantity. – Solomon (1 Kings 11:1-3)

[scarygirl]

scarygirl, I'm a little confused about your statement.

Freedom of speech does not mean that the speaker is free from reaction. Chick-Fil-A expressed a vile, disgusting and yes, ugly opinion. Because Chick-Fil-A doesn't have greater freedom of speech rights then I do, I can tell them that they are hateful for their opinion and they can express similar sentiments back to me.

That is your opinion, what you cannot do is tell another business they cannot open in your district just because you don't agree with the owner's religious beliefs. No more than you can tell Starbucks (hello!) that they cannot open a coffee shop because they don't support the war.

To some that might seem like an ugly opinion. Where is the outcry?

[Guest Anonymous]

Someone saying they support the biblical view of marriage is not an ugly opinion. It may not be your opinion, but that doesn't make it ugly.

Which one is the biblical view of marriage? Is that the one where you labour for years to win your bride's hand and then get tricked by your future father-in-law into marrying her sister instead (and so you end up married to both)? Or is it the one where you have to pretend to be a prostitute in order to trick your dead husband's father into impregnating you because he failed in his responsibility to gift you in marriage to his younger son?

Bible stories are fun!

ETA: I didn't realise that someone had already looked at 'the biblical view of marriage'. With references and everything! That'll teach me for being lazy.

[CanadianHippie]

That is your opinion, what you cannot do is tell another business they cannot open in your district just because you don't agree with the owner's religious beliefs. No more than you can tell Starbucks (hello!) that they cannot open a coffee shop because they don't support the war.

To some that might seem like an ugly opinion. Where is the outcry?

Municipal government can decide if they want to allow a company to operate with in it's borders. This came up a while ago when some cities and towns decided not to allow Wal-mart to open stores. If Wal-mart can be banned in a city so can Chick-Fil-A.

[BoomerLynn]

:clap:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world ... ganda.html

Here is one article out of many that describes the situation in Uganda. Other people can provide more information.

There is no such thing as the biblical view of marriage. The Romans influenced our view on marriage far more then the bible.

http://wearegoonies.wordpress.com/2009/ ... the-bible/

:clap:

[debrand]

That is your opinion, what you cannot do is tell another business they cannot open in your district just because you don't agree with the owner's religious beliefs. No more than you can tell Starbucks (hello!) that they cannot open a coffee shop because they don't support the war.

To some that might seem like an ugly opinion. Where is the outcry?

I will admit, It makes me uncomfortable that some towns try to prevent Chick-Fil-A from opening a store. However, many of the same laws that are used to prevent a Chick-Fil-A from opening a store were created to keep adult bookstores and stripclubs out of neighborhoods. Those same laws keep Walmart from destroying local businesses. I doubt very much that most of the people screaming about Chick-Fil-A's rights also fought for the stripclub's right to move into their neighborhood

[scarygirl]

I will admit, It makes me uncomfortable that some towns try to prevent Chick-Fil-A from opening a store. However, many of the same laws that are used to prevent a Chick-Fil-A from opening a store were created to keep adult bookstores and stripclubs out of neighborhoods. Those same laws keep Walmart from destroying local businesses. I doubt very much that most of the people screaming about Chick-Fil-A's rights also fought for the stripclub's right to move into their neighborhood

Agreed.

[CanadianHippie]

I will admit, It makes me uncomfortable that some towns try to prevent Chick-Fil-A from opening a store. However, many of the same laws that are used to prevent a Chick-Fil-A from opening a store were created to keep adult bookstores and stripclubs out of neighborhoods. Those same laws keep Walmart from destroying local businesses. I doubt very much that most of the people screaming about Chick-Fil-A's rights also fought for the stripclub's right to move into their neighborhood

Probably fought to get the ban on strip clubs and adult bookstores.

[emmiedahl]

So let me get this straight, ScaryGirl:

1. When conservatives boycott, it is good.

2. When liberals boycott it is an offense to the First Amendment.

3. Keeping strip clubs out of the suburbs because they are not compatible with local values, good.

4. Keeping a homophobic business out of town because it is not compatible with local values, bad.

5. Giving people different rights because of inborn trait is bad when we are talking about black people.

6. Giving people different rights because of inborn traits is a constitutional right when we are talking about gay people.

7. Chik-Fil-A has the right to say whatever they want.

8. We do not.

Anything else, asshole?

[scarygirl]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world ... ganda.html

Here is one article out of many that describes the situation in Uganda. Other people can provide more information.

There is no such thing as the biblical view of marriage. The Romans influenced our view on marriage far more then the bible.

http://wearegoonies.wordpress.com/2009/ ... the-bible/

The first article is horrible. A true christian should not agree with a government purposely killings others because of ther sexual practices so long as the partner are of age and of agreement with one another.

However, I have no issue with pastors sharing what the Bible says about sins of any kind. People should be free to take it or leave it.

[emmiedahl]

I have no problem with pastors sharing. But I don't think their opinion on the Bible is relevant to law in a secular nation.

[Loveday]

So let me get this straight, ScaryGirl:

1. When conservatives boycott, it is good.

2. When liberals boycott it is an offense to the First Amendment.

3. Keeping strip clubs out of the suburbs because they are not compatible with local values, good.

4. Keeping a homophobic business out of town because it is not compatible with local values, bad.

5. Giving people different rights because of inborn trait is bad when we are talking about black people.

6. Giving people different rights because of inborn traits is a constitutional right when we are talking about gay people.

7. Chik-Fil-A has the right to say whatever they want.

8. We do not.

Anything else, asshole?

I was a little confused by ScaryGirl's posts, but you got me sorted. Thanks. :?

[atheistjd]

Someone saying they support the biblical view of marriage is not an ugly opinion. It may not be your opinion, but that doesn't make it ugly.

That isn't the same thing as somone saying racial minorities should have their own water fountains or should have to sit at the back of the bus. Those are horriblly ugly opinons, but at the same time people are entitled to have their own thoughts and opinions whether you and I agree or not.

So long as Chick Filet follows the rule of law when it comes to not discriminating against employees and patrons based on race, creed, sexual orientation, etc, I don't see the problem.

And concerning the other issue, there are laws that protect minorities now. As well there should be.That doesn't mean people aren't allowed to have their own opinions, ugly or otherwise.

A businesss that supports such blatant discrimination wouldn't stay in business very long anyway. I woudn't spend my dollars there, and I don't think you would either.

At the end of the day you can't legislate personal behavior. So long as one is purposely not trying to maim, murder, or molest another individual why should I care?

Oh I LOVE when bigots pretend they are merely supportive of "traditional marriage" (you might want to note that there is no such thing, for future reference, so you sound like less of an uneducated idiot), ignoring the fact that what that "support" actually entails is donating time and money to take away the civil rights of other humans. Sorry, you fail. If you donated time and money to say, heterosexual marriage counseling, you can say you are supportive of traditional marriage (you'd still sound like an idiot but at least you'd be honest). But when you (by you I mean Cathy personally and CFA's charitable arm) donate to ensure that a certain group DOES NOT HAVE EQUAL RIGHTS, you aren't supporting anything but hate. And that's ugly.