• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Chick Fill Aye on same sex marry age

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,385
1,517
126
Obviously your definition of right and wrong are different from mine.

To a thief it is right to to take things from others.
My view of "right" doesn't include trampling on the rights of others.

Your analogy fails because a thief takes something away from someone else. Gay marriage does no such thing.

In your analogy opponents of gay marriage are thieves because they believe it is their "right" to take things away from others (ie taking away marriage from gays)
 
Last edited:

Ryan

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
27,518
1
81
One day you will realize just how wrong you are. It isn't black or white. There are many many shades of gray in between. If you cannot see this there is no use in trying to hold a conversation with you.
You are either for protecting the rights of your fellow citizens, or not.

I imagine that before the civil rights movement, you would say the same thing if I called a supporter of Jim Crow laws a racist.

"I mean - they just support separate but equal...it's not as if they want to make them slaves again...they just believe blacks need to use a different toilet. There are many shades of gray on this issue....."
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
You are either for protecting the rights of your fellow citizens, or not.

I imagine that before the civil rights movement, you would say the same thing if I called a supporter of Jim Crow laws a racist.

"I mean - they just support separate but equal...it's not as if they want to make them slaves again...they just believe blacks need to use a different toilet. There are many shades of gray on this issue....."
I agree with this completly.

I also reject the jim crow laws on the same exact points that i reject current laws and when i see that over 30 states have basicaly abolished womes rights to their own bodies...

This is Saudi Arabia, ruled by religious fundamentalists?

Say what you will about England but the day we institute religious law the way you have done for decades and which has led to it being close to impossible for a woman to have a right to her own body then you can stop calling yourself a free nations.

US, somewhat better than china?
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
Obviously your definition of right and wrong are different from mine.

To a thief it is right to to take things from others.
You're rights do not include determining by law that everyone should abide by your rights.

As i recall, you're a fundie kinda idiot, kinda like the Taliban in that you want your faith to rule the world, right?

Well, after these years, does it ever get better? You sure didn't get smarter but seriously, a man who keeps hitting himself will sooner or later figure out that perhaps he should stop doing that.

So... you didn't figure that out just yet...
 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,547
651
126
That is also your opinion. The majority of society doesn't agree ( yet ) with Gay marriage or it would already be the law nationwide. I do agree with you that it is coming sooner or later. This goes hand in hand with the morals in America slipping away. My "bronze age world" may be crumbling, but your ultra liberal utopian world will catch up with you and bite you squarely in the ass, give it time. It is already biting many European countries.

I will not cower anywhere, much to your dismay. Just because I do not agree with something doesn't mean I fear it. No, I do not hate gays nor do I hold any animosity towards them. It isn't their fault no more than a mentally ill person can help it that they are mentally ill.
:biggrin:

Scared of gay people? Afraid they might touch you and you might get AIDs?
 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,547
651
126
The Mayor of Boston plans to block Chick-fil-A from setting-up shop in Boston.

http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/downtown/2012/07/boston_mayor_thomas_m_meninos.html

Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino's July 20 letter to the president of Chick-Fil-A has become an internet sensation, drawing thousands of comments on a Boston Facebook page.

It all started when Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy told the Baptist Press this month that his company is ‘‘guilty as charged’’ in support of what he called the biblical definition of the family. Menino later said he would block the chain from opening in Boston because of Cathy's opposition to gay marriage.

A Boston city official confirmed the authenticity of the letter Wednesday evening.

Here is Menino's letter to Cathy:

To Mr. Cathy,

In recent days, you said Chick-fil-A opposes same-sex marriage and said the generation that supports it has an "arrogant attitude.''

Now -- incredibly -- your company says you are backing out of the same-sex marriage debate. I urge you to back out of your plans to locate in Boston.

You called supporters of gay marriage "prideful.'' Here in Boston, to borrow your own words, we are "guilty as charged.'' We are indeed full of pride for our support of same sex marriage and our work to expand freedom to all people. We are proud that our state and our city have led the way for the country on equal marriage rights.

I was angry to learn on the heels of your prejudiced statements about your search for a site to locate in Boston. There is no place for discrimination on Boston's Freedom Trail and no place for your company alongside it. When Massachusetts became the first state in the country to recognize equal marriage rights, I personally stood on City Hall Plaza to greet same sex couples coming here to be married. It would be an insult to them and to our city's long history of expanding freedom to have a Chick-fil-A across the street from that spot.

Sincerely,

Thomas M. Menino
Mayor, City of Boston
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
18,364
2,221
126
what are these "many shades of grey" of which you speak?

waiting....


...
..
.

Maybe we can't see them--because they don't exist?

perhaps the delusion is strong with you? perhaps you have fear in your heart?
Lol.

:D

You really are a vile piece of human filth, aren't you?
I haven't said anything vile.

There are many shades of gray in almost everything. It isn't as simple as I hate gays or I love gays. I personally don't care what they want to do, but I certainly do not hate them. I am not against them having rights either, they can have all the " Civil Unions " they want. They shouldn't be allowed to call it a marriage because it isn't one.

You are the one slinging shit in the thread with name calling etc... What would that make you? a lot like JohnOfSheffield above.
 
Last edited:

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
18,364
2,221
126
My view of "right" doesn't include trampling on the rights of others.

Your analogy fails because a thief takes something away from someone else. Gay marriage does no such thing.

In your analogy opponents of gay marriage are thieves because they believe it is their "right" to take things away from others (ie taking away marriage from gays)
You cannot take away marriage because they never had it...

They could have a civil union. That would be fine with me and many others I am sure.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
It isn't as simple as I hate gays or I love gays. I personally don't care what they want to do, but I certainly do not hate them. I am not against them having rights either, they can have all the " Civil Unions " they want. They shouldn't be allowed to call it a marriage because it isn't one.
According to who? Please give secular rationale for your reasoning given that the government is not in the business of legislating religious definitions for legal terminology. If you can't do it without falling back on "Christian" morality, you're attempting to codify your religious views as law. I trust you know the First Amendment well enough to know why that is considered distinctly unAmerican.
 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,547
651
126
You cannot take away marriage because they never had it...

They could have a civil union. That would be fine with me and many others I am sure.
Huh? I know gay people, some of them married thru a religious ceremony. Oh noes!!!
 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,385
1,517
126
You cannot take away marriage because they never had it...

They could have a civil union. That would be fine with me and many others I am sure.
orly now?

The status of same-sex marriage in California is unique among the 50 U.S. states, in that the state formerly granted marriage licenses to same-sex couples, but has discontinued doing so. The period of granting such licenses began on June 16, 2008, due to a ruling by the Supreme Court of California based on an equal protection argument and ended November 5, 2008, due to the passage of Proposition 8,[1] an amendment to the California Constitution that limited marriages to those between one man and one woman.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
18,364
2,221
126
orly now?

The status of same-sex marriage in California is unique among the 50 U.S. states, in that the state formerly granted marriage licenses to same-sex couples, but has discontinued doing so. The period of granting such licenses began on June 16, 2008, due to a ruling by the Supreme Court of California based on an equal protection argument and ended November 5, 2008, due to the passage of Proposition 8,[1] an amendment to the California Constitution that limited marriages to those between one man and one woman.
I don't live in California. Thank God!

Why did California change their mind?
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
18,364
2,221
126
According to who? Please give secular rationale for your reasoning given that the government is not in the business of legislating religious definitions for legal terminology. If you can't do it without falling back on "Christian" morality, you're attempting to codify your religious views as law. I trust you know the First Amendment well enough to know why that is considered distinctly unAmerican.
Where did I say I was a religious person. I simply do not agree that a gay union is a marriage.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
18,364
2,221
126
Huh? I know gay people, some of them married thru a religious ceremony. Oh noes!!!
I know a few gay people too. Big deal.

What religion was it?

I never mentioned religion. The only people in this thread that have are all for gay marriage.

I haven't been in a church since I was about 15 years old. So you can all hold your religious BS arguments.
 

Joseph F

Diamond Member
Jul 12, 2010
3,523
2
0
I don't care about gay "marriage', as long as they don't call it "marriage". I would be fine with a law being signed, allowing them to have a "civil union", or whatever, with the same rights as they would get, otherwise.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
Where did I say I was a religious person. I simply do not agree that a gay union is a marriage.
Fine, you're not religious. But you conveniently ignored the entire premise of my post: Please provide a secular reason for opposing gay marriage. Please note that saying you do not agree that a gay union is a marriage is not a reason, it is a stance. I would like to hear your rationale defending that stance.
 

rchiu

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2002
3,846
0
0
Fine, you're not religious. But you conveniently ignored the entire premise of my post: Please provide a secular reason for opposing gay marriage. Please note that saying you do not agree that a gay union is a marriage is not a reason, it is a stance. I would like to hear your rationale defending that stance.
Okay, name one society, one country, one race, that is sustained by gay marriage. Or better yet, one that can survive without traditional marriage. Then you would see how important traditional marriage is to the human society, and gay marriage is no where close to have the same function, same benefit for the society, and most importantly how gay marriage is not the same as traditional marriage.
 

Ryan

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
27,518
1
81
I haven't said anything vile.

There are many shades of gray in almost everything. It isn't as simple as I hate gays or I love gays. I personally don't care what they want to do, but I certainly do not hate them. I am not against them having rights either, they can have all the " Civil Unions " they want. They shouldn't be allowed to call it a marriage because it isn't one.

You are the one slinging shit in the thread with name calling etc... What would that make you? a lot like JohnOfSheffield above.
Oh shit - I called this one.

pcgeek 60 years ago - "It's ok for blacks to use public bathrooms and water fountains, as long as they use the ones designated for blacks".
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
Okay, name one society, one country, one race, that is sustained by gay marriage. Or better yet, one that can survive without traditional marriage. Then you would see how important traditional marriage is to the human society, and gay marriage is no where close to have the same function, same benefit for the society, and most importantly how gay marriage is not the same as traditional marriage.
So much fail in a single post...

Sustaining society is not a requirement for making something permissible. One couple's marriage (heterosexual or otherwise) doesn't affect anyone else's marriage. Everyone is responsible for their own actions.

"Traditional marriage" bears the same responsibilities it always has, whether gay marriage is allowed or not.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY