The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

...Chick-fil-A.

After former governor of Arkansas and current Fox News host Mike Huckabee had enough of what he called the "vicious hate speech and intolerant bigotry", he called for a national day of support for the fast-food chain.

As long as this is still America, the chain's owner has the right to express his beliefs -- a right we should all be defending.
But ---

When he stated his views were that of his company, did that blur the line?



Here are five reasons why Chick-fil-A isn't what you think:

1) Chick-fil-A has donated at least $5 million to organizations (including a certified hate group) that, among other things, depict gay people as pedophiles, want to make "gay behavior" illegal, and even say gay people should be "exported" out of America.

Even if you oppose same-sex marriage, do you really want to support a company that advocates putting gay people in jail, or "exporting" them, just because they're gay?

2) Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy didn't merely say he supports traditional marriage. Dan Cathy said if you support gay marriage, you "are inviting God's judgment on our nation," and that we "shake our fist at Him" when we do. Dan Cathy also said same-sex marriage is the result of a "deprived" mind and called it "twisted up kind of stuff."

Even if you don't support same-sex marriage, do you really think gay marriage is "inviting God's judgment on our nation"? Haven't we all heard enough blame from those who claim to speak for the Lord, like after Katrina or, more recently, after the shooting in Aurora, Colo.?

3) Chick-fil-A supports organizations that have claimed they can change gay people into straight people -- "pray away the gay" -- despite the fact that practically every major medical organization has stated that this is not only impossible but dangerous and harmful.

Even if you don't support same-sex marriage, do you support fake "science" that is known to harm the very people it claims to help?

4) The media keep saying Chick-fil-A has never discriminated, but the truth is that Chick-fil-A has been sued over a dozen times for employment discrimination. That's what a leading business publication, Forbes, stated in 2007, when they also called Chick-fil-A a "cult" and reported that Chick-fil-A's founder and CEO Truett Cathy said he wanted to hire married people because they are more industrious and productive. Truett Cathy has also said he would probably fire someone who "has been sinful or done something harmful to their family members."

Even if you don't support same-sex marriage, do you want to support what some call a "cult" whose CEO says he would fire employees for "being sinful"?

5) Chick-fil-A is just exercising their First Amendment rights by running a business based on the Bible, right? Wrong. There's a line between the "free exercise of religion" and violating the law. If Chick-fil-A is violating the law by discriminating against gay people, or by firing women so that they can be "stay home" moms, as one woman who is suing Chick-fil-A says in court documents, that's not exercising religious expression or free speech, and that's not a First Amendment issue. It may be, if the court decides, a violation of the law.

Even if you don't support same-sex marriage, do you want to support a company that might fire women to force them to be "stay home" moms against their will?

There are plenty of good restaurants that are happy to work hard for your hard-earned dollar. Why support a company that is working so hard to deny people their rights?

Links to the above:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-badash/chick-fil-a-5-reasons-it-isnt-what-you-think_b_1725237.html

Intolerance is an acceptable American norm ever since the TeaBaggers took over the GOP.



CHAZ scores! watch these amusing Conan videos! http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/08/01/621201/conan-obrien-introduces-chaz-the-intolerant-chick-fil-a-chicken/


I like this term ... "religious bullying" http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/07/31/615971/the-chick-fil-a-controversy-is-about-religious-bullying-not-chicken-sandwiches/

If Mittens were by some fluke to get elected his morons would definitely be bullying the agnosticators and atheists.

I remember when the Dixie Chicks made a political statement and radio DJs burned their records and refused to play their music. It seems similar today with Chick Fil A.

Maybe it is just the word "Chick" that makes things difficult.

No. Big diff.

I'm not amazed at the correlation between stupidity and fat. Talk about bad eating habits. Come on chick fillet and be honest with your customers about the poisons you push.

It fits your attack on the Mormons.  of course you do.

“Hate” “Intollerant” “Racist” and “Bigoted” have been over-used by the leftists in trying to intimidate people who don’t share their beliefs.

If you don’t approve of a liberal position, you are “intolerant”.

If you don’t agree with Obamacare, or won’t vote for his reelection it’s really because you are “racist”.  If you are conservative but openly consort with black people it’s only out of a sense of deep-seated racist guilt.

If you don’t approve of gay marriage, you are a “bigot”.

A lot of the descriptions I hear of Christian, white, hetero, conservatives sounds pretty damn bigoted, intolerant, and racist to me.

(http://afrocityblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/tolerant-liberals.jpg)

(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs182.ash2/44551_154845694525578_100000004457716_516126_7371513_n.jpg)

In 2005, Mike Huckabee wrote a book on diet and how to lose weight. In 2012, he held a press conference and encouraged Americans to eat at a fast food restaurant. Welcome to the dark side, Mike.

If you don't follow a specific style of Christianity you burn in Hell for all eternity.  I think that takes the blue ribbon over anything else.

It's absolutely hypocritical.  Unless you follow that specific style of Christianity.

Geez Louise Conan, I guess you back the biblical definition of marriage. Wait a minute. You've divorced! Hypocrite.

Really TeaTownClown?

Why do you get all personal and then you hide behind a fake name?

Divorced twice at that!  I guess that would make me a double adulterer then, eh?  "Everybody must get stoned!"

I’m perfectly cool with the government recognizing gay marriage.  I hope some day people will come to respect marriage by the commitment of two people rather than being consumed with what their gender is.

Just because that doesn’t jibe with someone else’s sense of tradition or religion, it doesn’t make them intolerant or bigoted.  Personally, I think some Christians are fearful that if the gov’t recognizes same sex marriage it will eventually require the church to sanction it.  Nevermind there is this separation of church and state thingy that’s a foundation of our Constitution which will prevent that from happening.

Of course, it’s probably never crossed most people's minds that marriage was a societal concept which predates The Bible and Christianity does not have a monopoly on the term “marriage".

Uh, ok recyclemichael. And I thought it was Mr. America. Silly me.

Conan, you don't have 10 grandmothers....

Out of curiosity, do you think it needs to be between just two people?  (I'm not throwing animals in here, just consenting adult humans)  If so, from a socially acceptable view or due to insurance/taxation etc.?

I’ve never really considered that to be honest and it’s a good question.  Polygamy has been “socially acceptable” for thousands of years in many societies.  I could see where it could become ripe for abuse if it were allowed in the United States.

There again, people have said gays just want to game the benefits system with gay marriage as if hetero couples haven’t considered the financial and survivorship benefits of marriage.  Mrs. C and I certainly didn’t “have” to get married at our age.  We really are THAT committed to each other, but I’d be lying if we didn’t discuss the legal benefits of marriage before we decided to do it, certainly not the only reason we did tie the knot but it was a consideration at least.

Interesting. Without getting personal (salutations to Mista America), you mean just your word was not enough to be committed? Interesting concept. Shall we discuss contractual arrangements....

I've wondered about the marriage thing many times.  

Polygamy's not for me.  I'd freakin' snap if I had another wife.

My thing is, if the commitment is already there, your God thing is thrown in between you, the only thing left (if you really need it) is for someone besides yourselves to recognize it.  I don't really see many chances for someone to F that up, gay or straight, unless you allow it.

That being said, it sounds to me that all these folks freaking out about gay marriage must not have much confidence in their relationships.

Meh. . .and I thought the Dixie Chicks thing was stupid. People should be free to believe the way they want to believe and be free to speak of their beliefs without threat from government.   People should also be free to support or boycott a business for whatever reason they choose.

Where it crosses the line is where government officials (Rahm "Lets Destroy Chicago" Emanuel, and others) penalize or infringe on an individual's right to free speech by "banning" a business because of the beliefs of it's leadership.  That fits the definition of intolerance.

There are many businesses that I won't visit because I don't agree with where the money goes, and I am free to share my feelings with others, but I have no intension of launching a campaign of hatred, threatening, or misusing the force of government to infringe on the rights of those individuals, their employees, or their investors.

I agree with Conan, the entertaining part of this is the use of the term tolerance.  Chick-fil-a's CEO believes in traditional marriage and other biblical stuff, and some of its leadership is Christian.  They do not discriminate against anyone in hiring, they provide money to numerous charities and make a delicious albeit expensive little chicken sandwich.  Because Liberals cannot tolerate anyone who defines anything differently than they do, they launch a massive effort to "Shut Down" Chick-fil-a.  And liberal government leaders ILLEGALLY pledge to throw the force of government behind it by being obstructionist.  It's rather amusing, and sadly silly to watch.

Liberals should probably stop buying gasoline that comes form most of the OPEC countries.  I hear they believe in traditional marriage, AND many of them even kill homosexuals.  

If only their was an abundant source of Canadian, gay friendly oil?. . .

You realize the amount of kettle v pot there is in there?

The gasoline thing?  The conservatives buying from OPEC countries are supporting anti-christian ideals.

Actually going through the spiritual sacrament of marriage and executing the legal contract of it implies a bigger or more permanent commitment to some people.  To others it doesn’t.

I have thought a lot about that. Much of the world does allow plural marriage and various religions allow it. It’s all through the bible. Theoretically I would not be against it so long as it involved only consenting adults in non arranged marriages that involve no monetary consideration. If plural marriage meant that there were equal numbers of marriages with multiple men as women there I would have no issue but that’s not how it happens. In places where you are allowed multiple spouses it’s always multiple wives which creates big problems.

Only the men with the money to support multiples wives (and the resultant increase in the number of children) are the ones that have multiple wives. This first lowers the potential pool of wives for men with less money. Second, it devalues women because it creates a culture where a single man is worth many women. The first problem is very bad, it creates an underclass of men with few potential mates sex starved and lonely. And angry. The second problem is even worse because women are little more than property to be bought if you have the money.

Tell me this doesn’t explain a lot of the problems Islamic world.

Unlike with gay marriage I think there are real world non-religious based reasons to be against plural marriage.

You don't get it.  Who cares.  If the individual consumer wishes to boycot a company, they should be free to do so.  It is not the role of government to limit the rights of an individual or company because of the beliefs or speech or sexual preference, or race, or eye color of that group.

This was just another issue of Liberal intolerance until liberal politicians got involved and began to pledge actions that are ILLEGAL!  You can't use the power of government to infringe on the rights of people because you disagree with their religion, or their personal beliefs.

It's not that difficult to understand.

You'll make up all sorts of crap to post and make yourself feel superior in your belief system.  

Someone has a deferring opinion to yours you give a "who cares?"

Such a grumble.

edited to say:  Dammit, I fell for it.  What you meant to say was "Who cares what Gaspar has to say about politics or finance?  It's a big pile of pucky and you're wasting your time reading it."

I'll read your grilling ideas though.

The silver lining is that some of the more logical liberals are starting to understand, but that does not change the fact that the lesser politicians will still engage ignorant emotional majority of their constituency and set precedents that are damaging to this country.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/07/chik-fil-a-homophobes-have-rights-too

Edited: to remove the term liberal because it was offensive and confusing to some.

On Phlox's world the men and women all had multiple partners.  He had 7 wives and his wives had multiple husbands.

Whatever floats the canoe.

So, Gasler, what about the people married to lesser liberals? Or their children and grandchildren who are part liberal? Major ignorant emotional half liberals, quarter liberals. How far down the line does it go before they are pure enough to be considered normal, you know conservative enough?

We need to know so these people can be accurately classified and denied Chick-fil-a employment or food service.

John Goodman, as the Colonel, on Funny or Die.  There's an S word near the end so heads up.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/e86050c415/kfc-loves-gays-with-john-goodman (http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/e86050c415/kfc-loves-gays-with-john-goodman)

Ah, but whadda bout the contract? The contract is what gay marriage is all about. What about those contracts? You do know this country was built on contract law...and on rock and roll.

"I would slave to learn the ways to sink your ship of fools" Garcia/Hunter

My apologies. Let me clarify.  I am using two adjectives and I see where one can be confused.  What I mean is to apply the term "lesser" to the term politician.  After I post this I will remove the term liberal because there are "lesser" politicians on all sides.  A lesser politician is one who is interested in motives other than to serve his constituency.

Nice gesture.  It was over 110 today, and the line of cars went all the way down Memorial for Chic-fil-a.  There were a few protesters with signs that demonstrated they had no idea what they were protesting. 

The protesters were not prepared for the heat, so Chic-fil-a provided them with unlimited free beverages and supported their rights to free speech.  KRMG posted this photo.

(http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/334234_10151134951533373_315409680_o.jpg)

That's because we're in Tulsa.  Have you noticed the crazy in this state and what it does to people?

Also, we can't seem to put down our processed chicken parts.

Same-sex marriage foes flock to Chick-fil-A chain

http://tinyurl.com/ccr6y8f (http://tinyurl.com/ccr6y8f)

They "got to take a stand".

I'm listening to the scanner.  Owasso PD is sending two officers to Chick Fill A to direct traffic.  According to one co-worker, 96th Street was jammed at lunch time and it appears it will be jammed again at dinner.

I agree that the CEO has the right to speak his mind and that customers have the right to vote with their feet and dollars.  And I reserve that same right to call them homophobes and bigots.

I've not been eating there since sometime last year when it became clear what WinShape was really about. I was beginning to think I might make occasional exceptions until blabbermouth opened his trap again and doubled down four or five times.

Conan, I'm not sure why you think that anyone is obligated to eat at Chik-Fil-A. Not eating there doesn't make me intolerant. At no point have I said that other people can't eat there if they like. I'm also not quite sure how you can say with a straight face that calling someone out for their hateful and intolerant speech is somehow itself hateful and intolerant. Nobody is asking Dan Cathy to get gay married or hating him because he refuses to do so. Nobody is telling him what to believe. They're simply saying that they don't want to spend money that will then find its way back to supporting bigoted and hateful positions.

Despite what the right-wingers are trying to do, it's not about what Dan says, it's about who he supports financially with his company. I wish he'd go back to just saying stupid smile. I'd like to eat some Chick Fillet.

On the bright side, their days are numbered.  :D

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/31/bush-appointed-federal-judge-rules-doma-unconstitutional/

OK wait a minute. Did the three hippies actually drink free beverages from the very business they are protesting?

Why would they have any problem keeping 5 cents or so from going to support bigots? Taking free stuff from them only serves the purpose of the protestors. (I'm not calling Chik-Fil-A employees in general bigots, I'm calling WinShape and some of the other causes the company supports bigots)

Good man. I like to think I am one of the logical liberals but time will tell.

They might not have been hippies. Any one consider that they might be SUBWAY COUNTER OPERATIVES!?

I think it's time for some new, politically correct terms for homophobes and bigots.

Sometimes it feels like Oklahoma is still living in the 1950s.  Socially, anyway.

Why? It's all the left has? If you support traditional marriage, you are a homophobe. Just ask the current white house occupant, who was a homophobe and a bigot until recently. Now, heading over the Chick-Fil-A to protest anti-First Amendment right people.

WOW!! Traffic at 106th & Memorial Chick Fil-A location backed up onto Memorial. Must be around 30 cars waiting at the drive thru.. Lines inside the restaurant are nuts--and its 8:45 in 111 degree weather. Look at all those bigots and homophobes out there--oh wait. Nope. Let's look instead at the whiners who stayed home and grumble about how UN-enlightened the masses are.

Warning: Shrinkage alert:

(http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/sarah-palin-chick-fil-a-facebook.jpg)


DAMN YOU FREEDOM OF RELIGION!!!! Laughing over all those corporate profits being gathered to be later spent on protesting SSM instead of being spent on the free speech issues the precious few in here believe is more worthy.

No, if you support traditional marriage, you are supporting racism and homophobia. If you are merely against SSM, you are only supporting homophobia. Unless traditional has been redefined, anyway.

That's OK. Nobody's going to force you to change your views, just like nobody is going to force anyone to eat at Chick-Fil-A.

If you want to get picky you can also throw in religious and social discrimination. You can't marry him/her, he/she is a different religion, a different social caste (money), political party and probably even more if you go back far enough.

I think within the last 20 or so years the race issue has declined significantly regarding marriage but I will agree it is not gone in some circles.

I've boycotted Chick-fil-a for years.  Mainly because their food sucks.

It's amazing.  Mike Huckabee wrote on book on weight loss about 5 years ago.  Now he goes and undos that by calling for a Chick-fil-a appreciation day.

Awesome.

I heart Huckabee!

LOL.

I doubt that one trip to Chick-fil-a is going to do much to you.  I've never been there but some of the guys at work went once a week for quite a while.  Then they changed to Buffalo Wild Wings.  I think the latest fad is Freebirds.

I don't expect the left, or anyone, to stop bashing homophobes and bigots.  I just want to redefine some otherwise unrelated words to describe them like other groups have abandoned derogatory words for new words that will be derogatory after a while.

Well, tell us all Nate when you will be at the "kiss in" this Friday at Chick Fil-A (you don't have to buy a damned thing--just sit there) to show your support for anti-homophobia or whatever else you bozos want to call people with a different opinion than you.

 Heck, RM, organize a TNF brown bag lunch and support SSM. Action speaks louder than words...

It's easy to sit behind a computer and spew nonsense like Nate does. We will look for his live report from Chick Fil-A this Friday as he rolls up his sleeves and starts calling everyone eating there/working there a bigot and homophobe. Maybe some guy trying to just pay his bills or enjoy lunch will help Nate with some free dental work.

Please point out to me when I stated that everyone who works at Chick-Fil-A or eats at Chik-Fil-A is a homophobe. You'll have a hard time doing that, since I didn't say that. The company supports homophobes and is run by a self-professed homophobe. People are free to eat where ever they like. Perhaps they see the connection between their dollar and the radical religious right's campaign of divisiveness, fear, and hatred as indirect enough to be fine with spending their money there. It's not my problem or my place to tell them what to do.

How about you take off the burger king crown and stop hassling me over what I choose to spend my money on. What are you, some kind of crypto-fascist?

Ha!  This coming from the king of the ad-hominem?

Holy cow!

So everyone, the answer is NO. Nate will not be attending the "kiss in" after all. What's the matter, afraid to spend time with "those" people?

Their food is ok, but not exceptional.  The problem I have with them is they price it like it IS exceptional....

I eat there once in a while, because it is like so many fast foods...ya just gotta get a "fix" once in a while...

Time out!!!!

Completely unrelated to anything here....watching men's gymnastics for the first time in a long time, and a Japanese guy did a handstand that was incredible.  And did it very well, too.

The difference from what I have seen previously was that instead of hands at about shoulder width, his were a good 4 feet apart, or what looked like about double the normal width, making a very wide stance.  The power required for that is amazing!

Ok, back to your normally scheduled wackoutedness...

I agree with that. My kid loves it because of the play area. But I am going to make an announcement for recent choice of chicken. Everyone...I liked Pizza Hut/Wing Street hot "wings"--the breaded boneless. Okay purists, let er rip.

We have never had a TulsaNow lunch that turned bad. I don't want to risk our perfect record eating in a place that uses social issues to promote their food. I think that is in poor taste amd I want good tatste when I eat.

Nothing wrong with that.  I actually like Buffalo Wild Wings boneless wings.  I like both, but I also like the sauce selection BWW has.

You personally haven't said it but others (Chicago, Boston) have said so by wanting to prohibit the presence of Chick-Fil-A in those cities.

The fact that some do want to prohibit people from eating there is the bigger issue.

But I won't do Chuck-E-Sleazes....


Pizza Hut, huh?  Well, geez, guy, the Salvation Army will feed you if you go to the Center of Hope....  

Gotta love wings, though, but would rather have without the breaded.  Plus, real wings are dark meat - if you get the boneless, it is more white meat - too dry, less taste!


Another time out moment - 115 in Enid.  Was driving through Norman/Moore/OKC earlier and it was 112 on truck thermometer the whole time.  Yuck!!

Your taste buds are burned out from too many hot peppers.  ;D

Just let anyone (except my doctor) try to tell me not to eat there...

Old Harley rider saying, "You can tell a biker....but you can't tell him much!!"

I've seen that saying in many versions.  It would be interesting to find the true originator.  (But not enough to actually spend my time researching it.)

You can't HAVE too much fun....

....just like you can't have too many hot peppers!!


My cayenne peppers are turning red.  Don't know how they have lived through this in the big pot that they are living in - it is absolutely brutal for them in that thing, but they are trying hard to make me happy!   Good little peppers!!

Probably doesn't matter - it is one of those universal truths of the human species....

You got that right.

Of course, I have the gallon size of Anchor Bar hot wing sauce (where Buffalo wings were invented) that I put on Pizza Hut wings, meatballs, french fries, to help flavor. Did I have that when you came over? I'm going to be ordering some more soon.

Here ya go Nate. One of your buds get your message out as only he can:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TIVvOmnF0jc[/youtube]

The Cult of Chick-fil-A (Forbes Magazine)
   
The fast-food purveyor seeks loyal employees and operators who believe serving chicken is God's work. Careful screening of new hires keeps it out of trouble.

At a busy Chick-fil-A in Rome, Ga. Richard Yadkowski keeps a paternal eye on employees squeezing lemons and cooking chicken. Like seven teens who work in his restaurant, Yadkowski, 33, came to Chick-fil-A when he was living in a group foster home created by Chick-fil-A founder and chairman S. Truett Cathy. "I tell the kids, 'This is not just selling sandwiches; it pays for your upbringing,'" says Yadkowski, a hardworking, happily married Southern Baptist who plans to work with Chick-fil-A for life.

Chick-fil-A tries to recruit and retain loyalists like Yadkowski, who is so devoted to the company and its founder that he named his son Samuel (Cathy's first name). The privately held chain--with $2.3 billion in systemwide sales last year from 1,300 franchised stores in the U.S.--is best known for chicken-breast sandwiches that inspire fans to camp out so they are first in line when a new restaurant opens.

Cathy, 86, credits the company's success to 975 franchisees and 600 employees who are unusually dedicated in an industry known for grumpy operators and high turnover among hourly workers. The turnover among Chick-fil-A operators is a low 5% a year. Among hourly workers turnover is 60%, compared with 107% for the industry. "We tell applicants, 'If you don't intend to be here for life, you needn't apply,'" says Cathy, who opened his first restaurant in 1946.

That's not the only company mandate. Chick-fil-A's corporate mission, as stated on a plaque at company headquarters (and by Cathy), is to "glorify God." It is the only national fast-food chain that closes on Sunday so operators can go to church and spend time with their families; franchisees who don't go along with the rule risk having their contracts terminated. Company meetings and retreats include prayers, and the company encourages franchisees to market their restaurants through church groups. Howe Rice, a franchisee in Glen Allen, Va., hosts a Bible study group in one of his two Chick-fil-A restaurants every Tuesday. He offers a free breakfast to all who attend. "You don't have to be a Christian to work at Chick-fil-A, but we ask you to base your business on biblical principles because they work," says Cathy.

Chick-fil-A is run by Cathy and his sons Dan T., chief operating officer, and Donald (a.k.a. Bubba), a senior vice president. They screen prospective operators for their loyalty, wholesome values and willingness to buy into Chick-fil-A's in-your-face Christian credo, espoused often by Cathy, an evangelical Southern Baptist who says "the Lord has never spoken to me, but I feel Chick-fil-A has been His gift."

Fifty employees and one franchisee grew up in one of 13 Christian foster homes in the U.S. and Brazil run by a nonprofit organization Chick-fil-A funds, the WinShape Foundation. Sixteen others were in Sunday-school classes Cathy teaches at First Baptist Church in Jonesboro, Ga. Cathy likes to give a leg up to people who have ambition but little else: The company asks operators to pay just $5,000 as an initial franchise fee. KFC, for example, demands $25,000 and a net worth of $1 million.

Chick-fil-A pays for the land, the construction and the equipment. It then rents everything to the franchisee for 15% of the restaurant's sales plus 50% of the pretax profit remaining. Operators, who are discouraged from running more than a few restaurants, take home $100,000 a year on average from a single outlet. A solo Bojangles' franchisee can expect to earn $330,000 (Ebitda) on sales of $1.7 million.

Loyalty to the company isn't the only thing that matters to Cathy, who wants married workers, believing they are more industrious and productive. One in three company operators have attended Christian-based relationship-building retreats through WinShape at Berry College in Mount Berry, Ga. The programs include classes on conflict resolution and communication. Family members of prospective operators--children, even--are frequently interviewed so Cathy and his family can learn more about job candidates and their relationships at home. "If a man can't manage his own life, he can't manage a business," says Cathy, who says he would probably fire an employee or terminate an operator who "has been sinful or done something harmful to their family members."

The parent company asks people who apply for an operator license to disclose marital status, number of dependents and involvement in "community, civic, social, church and/or professional organizations."

But Danielle Alderson, 30, a Baltimore operator, says some fellow franchisees find that Chick-fil-A butts into its workers' personal lives a bit much. She says she can't hire a good manager who, say, moonlights at a strip club because it would irk the company. "We are watched very closely by Chick-fil-A," she says. "It's very weird."

Is it legal? There are no federal laws that prohibit companies from asking nosy questions about religion and marital status during interviews. Most companies don't because it can open them up to discrimination claims, says James Ryan, a spokesman for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Chick-fil-A has more freedom to ask whatever it wants of franchisees because they are independent contractors and not necessarily subject to federal employment discrimination laws. (Employees, however, may sue under those laws.)

Chick-fil-A, the corporate parent, has been sued at least 12 times since 1988 on charges of employment discrimination, according to records in U.S. District Courts. Aziz Latif, a former Chick-fil-A restaurant manager in Houston, sued the company in 2002 after Latif, a Muslim, says he was fired a day after he didn't participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program in 2000. The suit was settled on undisclosed terms.

The company might face more suits if it didn't screen potential hires and operators so carefully. Many Chick-fil-A job candidates must endure a yearlong vetting process that includes dozens of interviews. Ty Yokum, the training manager for the chain, sat through 7 interviews and didn't get the job. He reapplied in 1991 and was subjected to another 17 interviews--the final one lasted five hours--and was hired. Bureon Ledbetter, Chick-fil-A's general counsel, says the company works hard to select people like Yokum, who "fit." "We want operators who support the values here," Ledbetter says.

Those who do say they like the member-of-the-club feel that goes along with working with Chick-fil-A. "It is very difficult to get in, but once you're in, you're in for life," says Donald Elam, a Chick-fil-A franchisee in Superstition Springs, Ariz.: "I tell all my people, 'I'm not working for Chick-fil-A; I'm working for the Lord.'"

(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/s480x480/217882_406179129441073_925187529_n.jpg)

I don't agree with anyone trying to stop them from opening a restaurant beyond any of the usual development red tape. That said, I have little sympathy. They were getting along fine doing what they were doing quietly, but decided to make it a big issue all on their own. I'm not surprised the usual suspects took the bait and decided to turn it into some kind of culture war BS.

Who made it a big deal? I'm pretty sure anyone with half a brain would have been able to figure out that the ownership of Chick-fil-A would support traditional marriage, and for quit some time.

Regarding the mayors banning new franchises, they might as well say no more new religious organizations that don't support same-sex marriage. Let's see how well that one goes over.

Winners and Losers from yesterday. 

Winner- CFA.  I estimated they could approach 119Mil in sales (if anyone has seen anything let me know)

Loser- Your Sodium levels.

One day winner maybe. But I think the long version of alienating some customers will prove costly to them.

It's a fast food restaurant.  It's like worrying about the beliefs of a high up at Taco Bell.

Show your support for the Virgin of Guadalupe.  Eat our taco salad bowl.

I'm glad so many were able to eat over-priced processed chicken parts and waffle fries to ensure Jesus Christ's message stays in their front and centers.

Does everyone's Jesus speak through poultry?

This scheme was so good. It gave their PR man a heart attack.

Can't imagine what their brainstorming sessions are like right now.

It reminds me of a guy named Brian, that just couldn't "Shoe" those pesky Christians away.
No matter what he said.  ::)

Where in the hell do you get the idea I think anyone is obligated to eat at Chik-Fil-A?

So, let me get this straight (pun intended):

If someone in their 80’s believes in traditional marriage, they are homophobic or racist?  If their traditions (religious or societal) are against same sex marriage they support homophobia?

For the better part of their lives, that’s been their societal norm.  How does continuing to believe that make someone homophobic?

Liberals stood up against “Islamophobia” yet Islam is even less tolerant of homosexuality.  It carries the death penalty in some parts of the world.

Why is it if someone disagrees with a liberal or progressive position that it’s always some sort of character flaw like hate, intolerance, racism, a phobia, etc?  What ever happened to respecting someone else’s opinion or stance on an issue even if it’s not the same as your own?

You will never change hearts and minds using inflammatory rhetoric if you seek to get people to believe in progressive ideals.  The automatic histrionic responses people get from proud liberals is probably one thing which keeps people from even attempting to understand progressive ideas.

I’ve thought that ever since Dan Cathy made his statement.  It will be interesting to see the long-term affects.

That guy in Mississippi in the 50's and 60's who joined the KKK and burns crosses because that was how he was raised.  He's okay?

"Scum, scum, scum.  Go back to where you're from."

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1z5PejkIyY[/youtube]

That’s clearly bigotry and hatred.

Someone’s 85 year old Catholic grandmother who doesn’t believe two men or women should marry is whom I’m referring to.  Would you consider her to be a bigot or intolerant?

bigot - a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Is she bigoted?  Then yes.  If she's not willing to tolerate them, then yes.  If she just disagrees with it, then I'd say she's disagreeable about it.

The problem is, the liberal position seems to be that any disagreement is ALWAYS the result of some sort of intolerance, hatred, or phobia.

Sure, if granny says: “God hates fags!” she’s a bigot, little room for error there.

If she says she thinks homosexuality or gay marriage is wrong, that doesn’t make her a homophobe, a bigot, nor intolerant.  It means she simply disagrees with that lifestyle.  She may think the gay guy living next door is charming as all get-out and has high tea with him daily but disagrees with his sexual preference.  That’s hardly hate or intolerance.

So you believe only the liberals have positions like that?  That's the problem?

Conservatives never think they are suffering from intolerance, hatred, or a phobia?

You and I will disagree about the old lady.

My Great-grandmother (on my mother's side) was British.  I remember my mom saying that Great-grandmom had to register at the Post Office each year.  If she said something like that, she might have been saying that God hates cigarettes.  She's been gone a l-o-n-g time now so I can't ask her.

Liberals seem to have it down to a knee-jerk science.

Liberals feel the same way about the conservatives.

"The liberals are being intolerant.  Quick, go buy some processed chicken parts at a fast food restaurant.  Show your support against those anti-Christians.  They hate us."

I like the spin. A guy makes an intolerant statement. ("If you support gay marriage, you shake your fist at God" and "invite God's judgement on our nation"), but if anyone says anything different, they are the intolerant one.

Nice circular logic.

Look at what he said. It is just as clear as the Westboro Baptist Church posters.

I think both sides have the knee-jerk thing down.  It's just that some take it a little further than others.

I remember this young popular guy back in 2008 who made the same claim that he believed "marriage should be between a man and a woman."  He even invoked the fact that this spiritual belief was rooted in his Christian faith.  Liberals loved him.  Not a single politician tried to limit his rights or cause him harm because of that.  I wonder what ever happened to that guy?

Oooh, oooh, oooh.  Pick me! Pick me!!!

(http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/obama-white-house-humor-women-earn-less-than-men.jpg)

The socially conservative GOP side of the coin would be "If they're female, they best stay home and cook me dinner."

Hey T, need a lift to the Chick Fil-A tomorrow over by us for tomorrow's protest? I can drop you off on my way to Jackie Cooper..

She may only be a typical white person, doncha know...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8gnmUyminI[/youtube]

That's the thing.  You assert that someone who's not a social conservative is gay?  That shows your scary closed thought process.

It always surprises me when someone with intellect does that.

Hey now. Fred Phelps is on to something...... Or is it on something? I never quite get that right.

No one said you were gay or even suggested it. I said, as I wrote earlier to Nate, go out and show your support for their cause against Chick Fil-A. It's easy to bomb throw from the sidelines, but when it comes to being around "those" people, you get all offended. That's what is scary.

I drove to CHick Fil-A to show support for their first amendment rights. Not because I am some gay bashing homophobe.

I have no idea where you get your thought process.  I've not said anything about this.

You're feeling like arguing with someone?  I'll pass.  This stupid smile is not worth my time.

I guess I misunderstood that post of yours, as well as the "go buy some processed chicken parts" comment. And no, I am way too busy to argue about how intolerant and bigoted a private company is based on one person speaking his mind today. 

I was pointing out that everyone, both sides of each coin, bitches.  Not just liberals and not just conservatives.

Fast food chicken tends to be processed chicken parts.

Why is it if she disagrees with the concept of gay marriage or even homosexuality it’s a character flaw and not a matter of disagreement?  I’m pretty sure if I had gone to my grandmother when I was younger and told her I was gay she would have told me she was disappointed with that, but she would not have treated me any different because of it.  Her being disappointed or disagreeing with that lifestyle is hardly the result of bigotry.

That’s the whole point I’m trying to get across:  someone who supports Klan ideals or is a Klan member or who vandalizes property with racial, ethnic or homophobic slurs obviously has a character issue when it comes to being a bigot or intolerant.  Or someone protesting something they don’t agree with- i.e. the Westies and their blatant hate speech against homosexuals, or even the people protesting Dan Cathy’s right to free speech on the premises of his business (no matter how mis-guided one may think it is as a business principal).

I don’t buy that it’s a character flaw for someone to believe gay marriage is wrong unless they are being militant about it and resorting to inflammatory language, harassment, or even engaging in physical harm.  Especially if it’s someone who grew up with a religion which does not recognize gay marriage and most all their life the societal norm has been traditional marriage.  I honestly don’t recall this being much of a political or societal issue until the last 15-20 years.  That’s what many of our senior citizens were brought up with.  You can’t simply start calling them bigots and intolerant because they don’t approve of same sex marriage when, for most of their life, marriage has been between man and woman.

I agree wholeheartedly with that. It's no secret I'm Roman Catholic, but I do not wear all of their tenets on my sleeve. Whatever the church's position is on SSM, I am not on board. In my career I have represented homosexuals and could not have cared ANY less about it--except when they got fired for being so.

As for this "kiss in" protest, I personally think it is as dumbassed as can be as a means of protest (I'm sure the traditional marriage folks will be swayed by that message), but if it makes them feel better have at it.

But queue up the 70s porn music for the hot blonde chicks. I'm kidding, just watched Grumpy Old Men the other day.

Why would she disagree with the concept of gay marriage if she isn't intolerant of homosexuality in some way?


There were over-reactions on both sides of that fence.  It eventually got all freaky when a talk show host took it upon himself to call out the hoards.


So there's a level at which it stops being okay and then you can bump it up into a level of hate?  A sort of maximum strength "disagree level"?  Above that it's intolerance and bigotry?

It would be rather hard to call the Catholic diocese in Tulsa homophobic since they operate the St. Joseph’s Residence for HIV/AIDS patients.

It provides care of AIDS patients that contracted the disease for accidental needle sticks and tainted blood transfusions.... :P

What is the expected result of the same sex kiss day? And what are the hours? And how does this hurt the restaurants?
Cause I know what yesterday was meant to do, and it looks like it worked. Except I believe the staff should get some kind of bonus putting up with all that madness.

Disagreeing with something isn’t the same as intolerance.

Here’s what I’m driving at:  You and I can disagree on an issue, yet still invite each other over to each other’s houses or meet out for a beer.  If one or the other decided he couldn’t take the other’s viewpoints anymore and that social relationship ended, that would be intolerance.

Same as a grandmother not approving of her grandson’s lifestyle choice, but not shutting him out of their life.  They used to call that “Hate the sin, love the sinner.”  Intolerance would be her calling the grandson a fag and that she wants nothing to do with him until he washes off teh gheys.

Yes, there is very much a difference between disagreeing with someone else’s lifestyle choices, religious views, or television watching habits and ginning that disparity into something much more inflammatory and hateful.  The gay lifestyle isn’t for me, yet I have friends and family members who are gay and whom I have ZERO problem with.  Does that make me a bigot or intolerant simply because I don’t go for Italian sausage?  Would it be considered bigotry or intolerance if I resisted an advance from another man?  How about I’m just plain not down with that?

I disagree with most of President Obama’s policies and view his term as mostly a failure in priorities and actions which would have helped more Americans.  It matters not to me that he’s 1/2 black or 1/2 white, yet there are people who are convinced that since I disagree with his principles and policies I’m intolerant, racist, and simply a bigot.  I also consider it a failure of his to not disavow such nonsense in the first place. 

If I were marching in front of the White House with a sign which read: “Throw this ****** bum out of office!” I would most definitely deserve those labels plus a few more.

Certainly, there are people at the extreme fringes who make moronic character comments.  It seems though the favorite tactic of progressives has  become to try and intimidate others into changing their deeply held personal beliefs via intimidation or guilt by hurling character epithets at them like “hate”, “intolerance”, “racist”, “Islamophobic”, “homophobic”, etc. ad nauseum.

BRAVO! C-Man BRAVO! I like the way you think. Ever thought about running for Office?

Sorry, your pictures seemed to imply that you thought that tolerance of Dan Cathy's views requires that I eat at Chick-Fil-A. Perhaps I was mistaken. I don't really care what Dan Cathy says. Everybody's got the right to say whatever stupid smile comes into their head. What I do care about is that WinShape spends bags of money every year actively opposing SSM specifically and gay rights in general. That's intolerance in action.

If these guys were campaigning against interracial marriage, I doubt you'd be so sanguine about it. Because you're not a racist donkey.

Thankfully, it seems the federal courts are getting a clue and at least the insanity that is preventing gay people from getting the same insurance benefits and other such discrimination will be stopped. That's the thing, discrimination is intolerant, no matter how you try to frame it. People who don't want to get gay married shouldn't get gay married. People who don't want to officiate at a gay wedding shouldn't officiate. Done, problem solved.

You changed the conversation.

Where'd "Yes, there is very much a difference between disagreeing with someone else’s lifestyle choices, religious views, or television watching habits and ginning that disparity into something much more inflammatory and hateful.  The gay lifestyle isn’t for me, yet I have friends and family members who are gay and whom I have ZERO problem with.  Does that make me a bigot or intolerant simply because I don’t go for Italian sausage?  Would it be considered bigotry or intolerance if I resisted an advance from another man?  How about I’m just plain not down with that?" come from?

I'm with you on that.

You'd asked about the old lady.  I answered about the old lady.

Dan Cathy committed the same oral diarrhea that celebrities do that makes me cringe.  “Just fry your fuggin’ chickin, I really don’t care what your stance is on gay marriage.”  Same as when an actor or singer goes off on a political tangent.  “Shut up and sing”.

I confess to ignorance when it comes to WinShape.  I’d never heard of them before and have no clue who they are or what they do.  I’m also not a very good activist when it comes to my wallet.  I don’t have enough time to figure out who uses profits from my purchases on things I don’t approve of.  MC and I primarily try do business with local businesses whenever possible and practical.  Hell even those people may contribute to causes which aren’t anything I’d associate with.  I generally boycott businesses based on shitty or indifferent service or if the value doesn’t equal my outlay. 

That’s about as far as it goes for me, though comments on here and other places about the owner of one of the local coffee houses being a rabid homophobe and general troll has kept me away.  Simply for the reason that if he feels it’s necessary for his customers to know his personal views that obnoxiously, I really don’t care to sit in and listen.

People who don’t appreciate Dan Cathy’s statement are welcome to not eat there or to ignore it and enjoy the tasty chikkin sandwich with pickles.  Same for those who think of it as some sort of solidarity to eat there yesterday or not.

It’ll never happen.  I’m FAR too bigoted, intolerant, and racist for that to ever happen.  8)

You are not. You should think about public office.

I can disagree with you on politics, but still support you in an election. I support many republican friends who are elected officials because I know that they are honest and hard-working. Most issues are not partisan until they get to Washington DC. Just don't run as a conservative for federal office and I would consider a vote and contribution to candidates like you.

So here is the follow-up this video (below) that I think Gueed originally posted yesterday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPLNgkP9nzc&feature=player_embedded

TUCSON, AZ--(Marketwire - Aug 2, 2012) - The following is a statement from Vante:

Vante regrets the unfortunate events that transpired yesterday in Tucson between our former CFO/Treasurer Adam Smith and an employee at Chick-fil-A. Effective immediately, Mr. Smith is no longer an employee of our company.

The actions of Mr. Smith do not reflect our corporate values in any manner. Vante is an equal opportunity company with a diverse workforce, which holds diverse opinions. We respect the right of our employees and all Americans to hold and express their personal opinions, however, we also expect our company officers to behave in a manner commensurate with their position and in a respectful fashion that conveys these values of civility with others.

We hope that the general population does not hold Mr. Smith's actions against Vante and its employees.

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/vante-of-tucson-az-regrets-actions-of-former-cfo-1686870.htm

Huckabee launches his 2016 presidential run with fast food chicken?

Huckabee (Not Palin) is The Real Chick-Fil-A Booster

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/02/huckabee.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/02/huckabee.html)

I didn't read it that way.  You could very well just support gays.

(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/315420_451995038156535_1736333236_n.jpg)

Got to wonder how Vante feels this compelled them to fire the man for exercising his free speech.
http://wizbangblog.com/2012/08/02/business-executive-records-himself-badgering-a-chick-fil-a-employee-suprised-everyone-thinks-hes-a-jerk
Does this not make them hypocrites?

I prefer this one:

(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/391428_336403753114001_1063401171_n.jpg)

Why should Vante feel any different than they did yesterday? Their CFO exercises his first amendment right to be a d!ckhead and becomes one of the 99%.

Classic!  Thanks!

I think you have a reading comprehension problem. You might want to get that checked out unless you've been hitting the Marshall's pretty hard tonight, in which case you are excused.  ;D

(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/547690_458310377533396_1692223401_n.jpg)

He was quite within his rights to explain how he felt to the employee of Chic-fil-a.  The company he was an officer of, was also quite within their rights to fire him if  his actions did not reflect their code of conduct for officers of the company.  He seems to express himself well and will probably get a job working for a company that is a better fit for his expressive nature. 

His goal was not to send a message to Chic-fil-a.  His goal was to gain attention for himself, and he succeeded. If he really wanted to express his opinion about Chic-fil-a in a viral video, he could have done so without engaging an innocent employee, who by the way, handled the situation like a champ!  His motivation was not to simply make a statement, his motivation was to cause someone anguish. I probably would have thrown ice water in his lap and been fired myself.  She will probably get a raise for her conduct.

More likely they were paying for pullet.  Funny nonetheless.

You heard about the farmer with a donkey, a hen, and a rooster, didn’t you?

“Here, hold my cock & pullet while I scratch my donkey."

  As a gay person myself this whole thing has been very hurtful.  I can't help but think that somewhere in some of those lines there has been a young gay boy or girl taken there by their parent, and I bet none of you can imagine how terrible and anguished that child must feel in that situation.  Its very likely that behind one of the counters serving those people in those lines there was a young gay person just trying to do their job and make a paycheck.  Can you imagine how hurt they are feeling?  

Being gay isn't a "lifestyle choice".  

My first thought is to think "Ok, it's fine that people can express their opinions and beliefs, and then we can turn around and disagree with them and voice our opinions."  But you know, this is real, being gay isn't an "opinion", a disagreement about one political philosohy or another, or anything like that, this is about something fundamentally different.  This company supports, to the tune of millions of dollars, groups that are actively trying to change laws, that publicize false "studies", that try to "pray the gay away" and push gay people to be straight, and that intentionally spread lies, that has supported laws in other countries to imprison gays, etc..  The marriage issue is only a fraction, one part, of that agenda, of the owner of Chick-fil-A's beliefs and agenda.  

If we were to play "reverse day" and just for a while imagine that somehow straight people were the minority, and there were people saying that straight people should be deported, that they shouldn't be allowed to marry and their relationships were wrong, that they should try to be gay, that they shouldn't be allowed to raise children, and in other countries when laws were being considered to give straight people and couples the same rights as gays, they would fight against them or even support laws to imprison straight people, etc.  Lets imagine that I and others would go up to Conan and say "We love and care about you Conan, but we "hate" the sin of you choosing to be straight". We love you but you shouldn't have a relationship with Mrs C, it's wrong and evil.  You can never marry. We love you but you shouldn't be allowed to have and raise children.  We love you but we don't ever want to see you holding hands with Mrs C and you shouldn't even think such things, you should be dating boys.  And it's ok that if you go to a job interview and they find out your straight that they can choose not to hire you for that reason. Or that if your current boss finds out your straight they may fire you and it's ok for people at work, including your boss to say things against straight people, comment about how sick and evil they are, etc.  And imagine you being a little straight kid hearing your parents say bad things about straight people, lies about them, and your church doing the same thing, people at school picking on straight people, you hearing about straight people in other countries being killed for being found out that they are straight.  Most stories, movies, cartoons, fairy tales, poems, etc. are about gay relationships and whenever someone dares write one about straight relationships,,, well there are groups working to ban them.  You can celebrate and support gay marriage and relationships, but straight marriage and relationships are wrong and immoral.  They say they love you Conan, though they don't know your straight, and as you sit there with your parents at church you listen to your pastor giving a sermon saying that straight people will go to hell,,, both your parents chime inwith a hearty "AMEN to that!".  Then one day you hear about a company that takes millions of dollars of its profits and gives them to a group that uses them to spread lies about straight people and change laws to deny them the same rights that gay people have, that says that straight people and their relationships would destroy our country and it would be horrible if they were allowed to marry, that supports other countries creating laws to imprison straight people, etc..  And then the owner of that company, that supports that group, says so and that he believes that straight people should not marry and then you see thousands and thousands of people lining up to support that man, his company, and their beliefs and agenda.  But never mind, it's ok, the "straight issue" including marriage, is just a, free speech issue, a disagreement on opinions about someones sick "lifestyle choice".  But they of course love you Conan, they just "hate" the sin of you being straight.

 

Well said, artist.

To lighten the mood, today I heard the whole conversation called Chick Fellatio. 

Marriage is a legal issue. You can raise the other moral issues to confuse people, but in reality it's about two people making a legally binding agreement to live together in a committed lifestyle maybe raising a family.

William, I sent you a private email in full reply to your post.

That said, (and not directed toward you, this is in general) people need to quit loosely throwing around terms like bigot, intolerant, hateful, and other words which relate to character simply because someone has a different tradition or view.  I really don’t see how that’s any different than epithets hurled at people relating to race or sexual orientation.  That seems to be a relatively new tactic to try and intimidate others into more progressive thought.   

I beginning to think people want a reason to be pissed off and social media and forums like this gives them an easy way to express it. (Actually Mrs. C’s thought, I borrowed it from her).

I can't pretend to understand your pain, but I understand where you are coming from with this post.  It does make me think, and makes me sad that there are intolerant people in the world.  The good news is that there are fewer and fewer of them, and incidents like this are an excellent opportunity for people to educate the public.  But if they cross the line between protest and their own intolerance, they shoot themselves in the foot.

I fully support the right, and the exercise of the right of people to protest Chic-fil-a.  I support the right for them to boycott, educate others, and motivate any and all people to share in their boycott.

I, and about 50% of the nation do not agree with Dan Cathy's views.   I'm not a big fan of Chic-fil-a.  BUT. . .When politicians take it upon themselves to limit a person, or company's ability to do business because they don't share the same beliefs, religion, or philosophy of that person, that's where I, and others draw the line.

Dan Cathy has the right to believe as he wishes, just as you do.
Dan Cathy has the right, as does his company to give money to whatever nut job charity he wishes, just as you do.

There are half a dozen politicians that are vowing to block Chic-fil-a from opening stores in their cities or jurisdictions.  That is just as bad as if the city of Tulsa were to say, Mr. Franklin, we can't approve your business permit because you are gay.  That's the thing about liberty, you have to extend it to everyone, even those you disagree with.  Most of the folks that were interviewed yesterday said they were there to support Dan Cathy's freedom of speech, not because they hated gay people. 

Channeling the KRMG schmoes does not carry water, Crownan.  You need to cool down. I know it's a blast furnace out there, but prejudice, discrimination, and hate are not acceptable when it comes to a Nations melting pot. Philosophical differences may allow for discussion but there's a reason we are a nation of laws making the field of play level. By allowing marriage of two people, you are merely equating and leveling. I want a reason to straighten your types out and make you recognize that we are not a perfect union, but we could be a more perfect union if those who fear difference would just get some education. That's why I am on these social media avenues and forums...

An intelligent person should know better.

I agree that those terms can be used too loosely and thus it can degrade the terms when they are used appropriately.   

When you finally recognize where you are hateful, intolerant, and a bigot please let the rest of us know.  I and others on here can give you a few hints.

You make fun of people’s weight, religion, and character and you resort to character attacks on those with whom you disagree on issues.  What part of that exemplifies love, respect, and understanding of your fellow man or woman?

Artist. Just as a general question. Are you going to be participating in todays protest?
My wifes boss is gay and she said he wouldn't waste his time going.

I also did not participate Wednesday in their appreciation day because I really don't like Chick-Fil-A.
Give me the good old Rex's boneless chicken any day.

But you can't revoke someone's rights because they choose to be an idiot!

Which one is your Mother? :D ;D :o

(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/558215_505126709501087_1016059709_n.jpg)

I will keep asking, why is the issue not about contract law instead of all this diversionary bs?

I agree with the rights but I don't believe being an idiot is a choice.  I believe idiocy is thrust upon them.

You might want to clarify a little better then.

If you are referring to the civil aspect of marriage, or the license, certainly gay couples should be welcome to all benefits the rest of us have been able to enjoy: retirement, insurance, right of survivorship, government benefits.  But they also face the pitfalls of divorce, just like the rest of us.

Is that what you are driveling at?

Then what is the issue?

Beats the hell out of me. I don’t have an issue with it.

That has been a substantial part of the point all along.  So why has there been, and continues to be, such resistance to it?

Because in this country today these issues divert attention away from what's really important to the future of our country. That and the difference factor.

But you will continue to support the right of Chick Fillet owners to market in this manor....

You eat that processed traumatized chemically induced fowl?

Slow down in your frenzy - think about what you are writing for an extra few seconds - you missed a great opportunity in the second sentence....   fowl versus "foul".

You can't take away their right to "market" because what they say is distasteful.  That's just not the way to go about it. 

The force of government cannot be applied to make one group of people agree with another, or to suppress the beliefs or speech of an individual.  That represents a step backwards.  The proposed boycott and educational initiative on the part of many Americans was the proper move. 

The moment government got involved and threatened individual rights over this issue was the moment the gay rights movement was dealt the real blow.  Gay people should be more outraged at those politicians for attempting to steal the issue and in the process, making a clumsy mess of things that resulted in a backlash that was more powerful than the original response to Cathy's stance.

Now they (and you) have been made to look like enemies of free speech, instead of champions.

Jon Stewart on the issue:
“Pretty sure you can’t outlaw a company with perfectly legal business practices because you find their CEO’s views repellant. Not sure which amendment covers that, but it’s probably in the top one,” Stewart said. “I think maybe the mayors hadn’t thought this thing through.”


Get these bozos out of office before they trash another just cause!

This is an ignorant and laughable cop out. If there were anyone out there trying to force other people to get gay married, your point would make a lot of sense. However, there are not. Your tradition does not excuse hurtful behavior towards others. I am happy to respect your tradition. Unfortunately many feel the need to control others and prevent them from entering into contractual relationships using their tradition as an excuse. That's straight up intolerant. Just like it would be intolerant for me to say first methodist should be shut down because they refuse to marry gay couples.

I get that you're not one of the folks who is trying to keep gay people from having the usual rights and responsibilities of marriage. However, Truett is one of a very large number of folks who think gay people shouldn't get even that much. Somewhere around 20 states have constitutional amendments banning not only gay marriage but any contract that acts like marriage.

Regarding Chick-Fil-A specifically, I'm pretty sure the mayors in question also have the right to express an opinion on Dan Cathy's views. Funny how Dan gets to say whatever he likes and any consequences are somehow unfair and the result of intolerance, but people can't express an opinion on what he said.

I support his right to free speech even though I thought the statement was moronic.  He’s free to alienate or endear his customer base however he sees fit.


I think many people have a problem with the term “marriage” being applied to it.  Some people think much of the hullabaloo would go away if gay rights advocates would settle for “civil union”.  Or not.  Part of that is ignorance or fear that eventually churches could be forced to perform gay marriage. 

Fundamentalists seem to be of the mistaken impression that Christianity has a monopoly on the term “marriage".  Never mind that the term and concept has been used in society long before the New Testament was written.  There’s also historical evidence that same sex marriage was accepted and recognized in some ancient societies.

Gas citing Jon Stewart as a conservative voice of reason.  Didnt see that coming.

Nathan, the quote is applicable to far more than the issue of gay marriage and I didn’t supply it to excuse Dan Cathy’s remarks nor anyone who is an obvious bigot.  Have you missed people being call bigots and racist because they don’t agree with President Obama’s policies or because they won’t vote for him?  It’s cheap intimidation.

Back to the gay marriage issue and traditional thinking:  There are people who don’t approve of gay marriage simply because they were raised in a different sort of society or religion than you or I.  I would suspect an Amish person’s view on gay marriage is hardly out of malice or spite, but simply a part of their religious traditions.  Unless their pastors are telling them to go out and "kill the gay” you’ve got a difficult argument to claim it’s tantamount to bigotry or hate. 

I can’t believe you haven’t noticed this become a pet tool to intimidate less “progressive” thinkers.

Perhaps they are seeing Stewart as the new fair and balanced.

Not sure how the church's could be forced to do it...seems a stretch.  I guess I could get a minister's license and perform the marriages for them....


True.  Another hijacking just like the Southern Baptist Convention getting hijacked....

That’s the point, they can’t be forced to do it.  That church & state thingy is a cornerstone of the Constitution.

Conan, discrimination is no less bigoted because it is done without malice or out of ignorance. I try not to say that people are racist or bigoted because I can't know what's going through their head. It's not important anyway. The problem is the racist, sexist, homophobic, and otherwise bigoted things people say and do.

I'm not sure who has actually said that any particular opposition to Obama is racist. I have heard people speculate that the aggressively defiant way in which some birthers, Tea Partyists, and others act, even when Obama is pushing policies they previously agreed with is due in part to racism. I don't doubt that there is some of that, but I doubt that is a majority of the opposition, merely a significant minority.

Like it or not, there is still a lot of latent racism in this country.

Reason is reason.  It has no political affiliation or philosophical angle.

True, most of the time it comes from conservatives, but not always!  ;)

That would be a noble statement, Gaspar, if you didn't conflate reason and your opinion. It's reason if you agree and drivel if you don't.

They do Nate, but when they pledge to block his business from acquiring permits, that goes beyond expression.  In fact, it is illegal.  Not just a little illegal, but a lot.

It has also set the stage for discrimination lawsuits.  If Chic-fil-a wants to open a new store in Chicago (two planned), Boston, other locations, and they are denied for any reason, you can be assured this will end up in court and because the stupid stupid stupid mayors, council members, and aldermen, have publicly made these comments.  Chic-fil-a will win.  In fact, they can and probably will launch a series of discrimination lawsuits just to protect themselves.

It's a freekin mess, and Chic-fil-a has come out a winner because of stupid stupid stupid politicians.  

"Welcome to President Bush, Mrs. Bush, and my fellow astronauts." ~ Dan Quayle

 :D Yeah, that would fall into the "not always" category.

You're going to have a lot of fun with this aren't you?  ;)

There's not much of a point.  We have daily reminders on every type of press.

I could give equal time for the other side as well.

Upholding spiritual or religious tradition within one’s own home or church isn’t discrimination, IMO.  I don’t view the Catholic Church refusing to change 2000 years of tradition and doctrine as discrimination. 

You and I will have to disagree on that point.

What about the catholic churches that have changed?  If enough of the catholic churches change, will the remainder be considered discriminatory?

(female priests for example)

You bring up a valid issue.  At what point does observing religious tradition become discriminatory?  Whew, that could be a real barn-burner.

No, not participating.  That's not quite my style.  There is a place for different types of protesting and such, and kudos to the people who have that kind of spunk.  My style is more, being a good person in general and then people finding out that I and my partner are gay and realizing... perhaps all those prejudices aren't true.  And of course on occasion if the opportunity is there and all, like on here, I will say a paragraph or two lol.  

What does one's home or church have to do with government recognition of gay marriage, Conan? Or the chickfila thing, for that matter?

Gaspar, prove two things. First, that any mayor stated that he or she would prevent chickfila from opening a store (as opposed to expressing disapproval). Second, prove that a mayor who said such a thing actually has the power to effect their threat. If you can't, it's just a bunch of noise, just like all the other noise we hear from politicians.

You are conflating issues, Nate.  Go find some Carib and get off the computer.

I would have to say when it involves the action of mistreating another individual based on his or her group affiliation.

I could agree with that.

I'm not on a computer and they don't seem to have carib at dfw. If AA would hire some damn pilots I might manage to get somewhere I can buy some.

  I think people are missing a lot of the context here.  Most I know of aren't angry solely about what the guy said, but what he and his company actively does and supports.  Most I know of aren't even hung up about the marriage issue and are frustrated that that seems to be the focus.  

But back to that context.  It wasn't but a short time before his comments that it was all in the news, or at least was big in the news for the "gays" about the millions that Chick-fil-A has spent supporting organizations that have actively worked to,,, hurt people.  Through his company the owner actively supports organizations that promotes things he believes in, like putting people in jail for being gay. He financially supported the "Kill the gays" bill in Uganda. Works to actively promote the lie that all gays are mentally ill. Supports reinstating sodomy laws. Opposes efforts to reduce gay bullying. Pushes efforts to create laws that will make it illegal to broadcast any content that opposes his Christian values. Etc. etc. etc.  The marriage comment thing is just a fraction of a lot of other issues he and the organizations he supports promote and stand for.   His open comments in an interview soon after all this other stuff hit the news, only served as a lightningrod for the rest.   People were already upset before he said anything.  

It's one thing to believe something, to say something, and write something, but it's another entirely, especially on an issue thats so important, to then take the next step and actively try to DO things based on it that can really hurt people.  

People were saying they would boycott Chick-fil-A, not mainly because of the marriage comment, but mainly because your money would go to support those other beliefs and efforts to change laws and such.  It almost appears to be a tactic to try to change the subject to "well they are just all upset about what the guy said", rather than what it was originally and mostly about.

What he said. I get side tracked too easily.

First I heard of it was a few weeks ago on the KMOD morning drive.  Phil Stone made a wisecrack about “Well no wonder someone with a mens and women’s name would be opposed to same sex marriage.”  

At the time I thought: “Do we really care what Dan Cathy says?  I could care about as much as what Bono has to say about American politics.  Meh, some moron spouting off his social or political views at the risk of his business.”

Thanks for shining more light on the issue.  

/edit- Not to doubt the veracity of what you are saying regarding who CFA funds, but I thought I would snope it and see if there’s more to the story.  Perhaps because I find it incredulous (though not impossible) that there would actually be a foundation(s) which support hurting or killing gay people.  The snopes article is an interesting read.

Some years back, I had a hard time believing all the crazy exit product that goes on in Africa, and to a lesser degree developing nations elsewhere. There are a lot of really foobared up people in the world. That's where TTC's anti-religion screeds have their kernel of truth. Messed up people have no qualms about using religion as a cover for their crazy. Sometimes they even believe it.

On the other hand, most of your garden variety churchgoers don't fall into that trap.

Anyway, there are quite a few retreats here in the US designed to suck the gay out of you. Sadly, people are often forced into them by family and so-called friends. Suicide is tragically frequent in many of them. WinShape funds some of them. They don't set out to kill people, though. Some Ugandans do.

A story about today's kiss in.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2183234/Chick-fil-A-CFO-Adam-Smith-fired-verbally-abusing-employee-gay-rights-protest-Same-Sex-Kiss-Day.html

Got to be a trademark violation in this somewhere...

(http://o1.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/PATCH/resize/600x450/http://hss-prod.hss.aol.com/hss/storage/patch/35debbb6c9419c8b92cb64af5898e806)

You just knew this was going to happen:

http://supportcfarachel.com/

Unfortunate use of words or well-timed pun.

W: “I’m staying neutral on this subject… my personal beliefs don’t belong in the workplace.”

She's showing more integrity than her employer,
or for that mater, her boyfriend milking this.

Here comes the dooshbaggery:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=x8G4jI3VI8U[/youtube]

Vante made it clear they took action against him directly as a result of his protected speech.  
Dont expect to put your kids through college from any future earnings from their stock.

Guys expressing their opinion using their right to free speech in the same way as the Chick-Fil-A CEO does, but without the tax deductible money?  Yeah, sounds like dooshbaggery to me....(sarcasm, if anyone missed it.)

There are just no words... but there's video!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs7Y9iYf_uk[/youtube]

Figured this gay activist that apparently claimed gaybashers hurt him should have the true source of his injuries revealed:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8Y9ffb3cCnY#![/youtube]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2185852/Joseph-Baken-claimed-beaten-gay-admits-police-receive-video-hitting-HIS-OWN-head-flipping-curb.html#ixzz233yAhgK1

waiting for it...

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=19357.msg248076#msg248076

my values not yours...Nov.6. So sorry. :( :-*

I was on laughing hysterically at this, and other takes< when I saw it on John Stewart. Here's those clips:

http://eater.com/archives/2012/08/08/watch-jon-stewart-take-on-fast-feud-nation.php

Chick-fil-A agrees to end anti-gay donations, mandates equal treatment of gays

http://tinyurl.com/94wlyu4 (http://tinyurl.com/94wlyu4)


So does that mean the support failed?

I think it means they must underestimated how many people in the gay community enjoyed tasty chikken before Dan Cathy stepped in it.

All those lines couldn't offset the numbers that didn't line up.


(Ok, I admit it...I ate at Chic-Fil-A yesterday, and was ashamed all afternoon... but I had people in from out of town to entertain...)

You entertained at Chic-Fil-A?  Really?  You must be a legendary tightwad.

Why not Flemings, at Utica Square? They even have a choice of indoor or outdoor restrooms.

The visitor has no access to CFA within about 75 miles of home, so...CFA it was.  We are both from same company, so he paid for himself.  And the company expense account police frown on very expensive lunches.  That's why they make so much money, hire so many people, and give us a relatively stable work environment.  And good stock appreciation.  Pretty cool.

I have friends and family who come to town and the first thing they want to do is go to Taco Bueno.  Go figure...

that is common, I agree

I'm going to assume all the folks who waited in line at Chick-fil-a are lined up to help out East. 

It's the fried chicken thing to do.

Chick Fil A still going strong it seems...

http://twitchy.com/2013/03/28/libs-hardest-hit-people-set-up-tents-to-wait-for-chick-fil-a-grand-openings-in-nj-calif-and-utah-pics/

My out of towners love Braums. Me. too.

Breakfast bagel!!

And the malts!!!  That's why I have 30 lbs too many - it's all those malts I'm carrying around.... 

Only equaled by Mayfield's dairy in south/east US.  Same kind of local dairy company.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYIUuyoSVAs#t=30[/youtube]

Texas lawmaker says Chick-fil-A has a fundamental right to have a store in every airport
https://thinkprogress.org/texas-lawmaker-jeff-leach-chick-fil-a-rights-airport-bill-3477dd646b53/

He's an example of the anti-arabic-numerals-taught-in-schools crowd.

It got him on FOX news.  Mission accomplished.

This is kind of an aside, but how would you express a binary number with Roman numerals?

Lots of ones and .....

Gee, I guess besides reducing the Greek numeral set of 26 down to 10, and fixing the more obvious problems with Roman numerals,  we also owe the Arab's a huge debt of gratitude for that tiny little hole they put in the number line!  0. 

Or ever try to multiply Roman numerals?   We were taught one method in 5th grade summer school (NOT in Oklahoma!) and it was painful....here is a tutorial to help with that...
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=how+to+multiply+roman+numerals#kpvalbx=1


Got the poll asking who thinks we shouldn't force teaching Arabic numerals in school.  57% agree!   S M H !!

NM

Probably the same hoaxters that got people to beliieve the OK sign was something evil.



The OK symbol is a perfect example of finding the right balance between reporting while trying not to amplify an obvious 4chan troll. Launched on 4chan as “Operation O-KKK,” the OK symbol’s goal was simple: spread it enough as an anti-Semitic gesture, both online and offline, and hope the media picked up on the campaign. A document was posted on 4chan, as reported by The Boston Globe, instructing members to effectively troll the mainstream public until it became a thing people couldn’t ignore.

“[W]e must flood Twitter and other social media websites . . . claiming that the OK hand sign is a symbol of white supremacy,” the document reads. “Leftists have dug so deep down into their lunacy. We must force [them] to dig more, until the rest of society ain’t going anywhere near that [expletive].”

The issue, according to Segal, is that it’s impossible to prove intent. Reporting it as a blatant anti-Semitic symbol plays into the 4chan trolls’ game, but ignoring that some self-identified white nationalists are using the gesture is equally harmful. The answer is still unclear, but it helps explain why niche memes and radicalization attempts are on the front pages of The New York Times, The Washington Post, or The Boston Globe.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/23/17991274/npc-meme-4chan-press-coverage-viral