Does anybody really think that gays are pro bomb threat?
And who exactly should do the lamenting? Do you want Al Sharpton to get a night job as “Official Spokesman for Gay America”? Should Anderson Cooper open his show with “As a gay man, I want to start by lamenting that bomb threat”? Or should Elton John write a song called A Chicken in the Wind? How exactly would you like your Lamentations?
The Chick-Fil-A closest to me announced they were taking a booth on Pride Day. And they don’t even have full marriage freedom in that state.
So, a gay couple would have every single right that a heterosexual couple gets, but they just have to call it something different? Is it a semantics issue with the word marriage? Do you feel that a gay couple being “married” lessens the sanctity of your own marriage?
Not being snarky, genuine questions.
Considering how demonic some people consider gays to be I expect quite a few people do think that. There’s plenty of people who think they are all child molesters, after all.
Good opinion piece from the Washington Post. Huckabee does make a valid point that CEO’s (and their companies) who support Gay marriage have not been boycotted like Chick-Fil-A.
I have no issue with boycotting. Where you spend your money is a personal choice. What I object to is the firestorm of negative press and Mayors wanting to kick out the franchises.
In part due to the writings of Paul Cameron, which are forwarded and used in literature by Family Research Council and Exodus and other organizations that have received money from Chick Fil A.
The whole “free speech” issue is a total red herring. He IS allowed to say whatever he wants. However, he votes with the company wallet - and consumers vote with theirs.
I haven’t heard anyone say that Cathy should be forbidden from saying what he did. Just that he’s a terrible person for saying it.
I’m also happy to hear of the CFA franchises that are supporting Pride celebrations in their local communities in spite of the corporate positions. Someone needs to make them some ‘Chic-fil-A-but-not-narrow’ signs and T-shirts so that people can make more informed boycott decisions.
There’s been plenty of calls for boycotts over things as trivial as Oreo’s rainbow cookie advertisement. And the two sides are not equivalent; the anti-homosexual side wishes to oppress or kill the homosexuals, while the homosexuals want to be treated like everyone else. Huckabee and those like him are just doing to old right wing routine where they whine about being oppressed any time they aren’t allowed unopposed free reign to oppress others.
Yeah it kind of is a semantics issue. I believe the Bible when it says that a Marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman. Which would make a gay marriage not a marriage, but something of another name. So I think we should call it by another name.
This whole attitude of these people make me sick. In twenty years, they’ll be the ones on camera proudly waving their bigotry around like a damn flag, just like those skinhead bitches who were against segregation. I just wish there was some way to make the bastards wear a shirt that proclaims their hatred, “I’m glad I’m a homophobe!” so the rest of us could eschew them like the fucking plague that they are. And I’ve never felt that way about anybody in my life, but dear Og, I absolutely wish these people would go hump their bibles in private. Disgusting pigs.
I don’t always agree with you, but when I do I usually want to buy you a small car or something in appreciation. This is one of those times. 
I bet some people in West Virginia believe that some gay people are, where they didn’t yesterday.
And I’d be satisfied if everyone reading this agreed that the bomb threat was neither productive nor funny, and that they’d say so if the opportunity ever arose with someone who got the idea to pull such a stunt again.
Not sure why you’re so touchy about this.
I have it!
Separate But Equal
Catchy, no?
Gosh, how do you really feel?
Probably Chik Fil A withdrawal.
Fair enough, join a church that agrees with you. There are plenty of them and there is absolutely zero chance under the Constitution that they can ever be compelled to accept any definition of marriage but their own.
But why should others be denied the protections and rights granted by the state- again, NOT by the court but the state and federal governments and their statutes, because you disagree with their definition of marriage? They can already get the “sacred” mumbo jumbo at any number of churches and if they want that more power to them, but I’m asking about the 100% secular and having-nothing-whatso-fucking-ever-to-do-with-yours-or-any-other-made-up-invisible-sky-fairy’s blessing. You can throw the chicken bones and dance naked around a goat for anyone you want to or not for anyone you don’t, I only care about the rights granted at the local courthouse, or, if you prefer to use the terms of Jesus, the rights granted by Caesar, not by God. Why should you care what the godless world grants?
(And as for sacred bonds of the Bible- was there a single marriage in the Bible that was borne of anything like a modern courtship? I don’t even recall one being happy. Very few were even monogamous.)
So, someone who is a believing Christian who accepts the Biblical condemnation of homosexuality is a homophobe? Disagreeing about the morality of an act doesn’t mean they are mentally ill or have some neuroses. They just disagree with you. I disagree with people who think that it’s immoral to drink alcohol because of their religious beliefs, but I don’t think they are insane or neurotic.
No, they’re just judgmental assholes.
I love that. “They just disagree with you.” As if we’re discussing who our favorite bands are.