Did you kiss more chicks or had chick fil a?

[rootX]

I would go for kiss more chicks

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19087889

Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee urged supporters of "traditional values" to eat at Chick-fil-A.

Meanwhile, gay marriage supporters have called for what they are dubbing "Kiss Mor Chiks" on Friday

Reading this made my day

Is eating at a fast food restaurant something traditional in US? I immediately thought of the obesity rate in the US.

 

[WannabeNewton]

Oh cmon rootX, the right to be obese and ruin your body at will is the most sacred of American rights and Chick - fil - A is a great proponent of that. Stuffing your face with chicken in support of the prevention of a group of people from being granted their rights is what this country is all about, the "traditional values" if you may.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I would prefer to kiss more chicks, but if I do my wife will filet my butt.

 

[Evo]

I'd kiss chickens.

 

[dipole]

I'll just eat KFC.

 

[lisab]

I don't eat fast food, in support of my health. But now I can not eat fast food in support of gay marriage .

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I don't eat fast food, in support of my health.

I don't eat fast food because I'm getting too old to catch it.

Can I just kiss a Dixie Chick?

 

[256bits]

The gay marriage supporters lack imagination.
Kiss Mor But Chiks

 

[johnqwertyful]

Gay marriage is such a non issue. More so than homelessness, hunger, poverty, rape, genocide, animal abuse, child abuse, elder abuse, spousal abuse, abuse or violence of any kind, a corrupt financial system, gangs, climate change, overpopulation is two guys getting married? THAT is the most important issue? The best use of your time is to go out and eat chicken? Or kiss someone in front of a fast food restaurant? THAT is the most important thing to you? If some son of a supernatural creature were to come back, he were to spend all his time protesting against gays? Instead of dealing with real problems?

 

[berkeman]

Is eating at a fast food restaurant something traditional in US? I immediately thought of the obesity rate in the US.

That would be a Yes and a Yes.

 

[Monique]

chick..fil..a? I thought it was a typo, that you smashed your keyboard while hitting reply.

 

[rootX]

chick..fil..a? I thought it was a typo, that you smashed your keyboard while hitting reply.

Exactly! I thought so too when I read it first time. I guess you say it chick-filae .. never heard of this before.

 

[rootX]

I don't eat fast food, in support of my health.

Ever since I turned 24, my health also wouldn't allow me to visit a fast food. Today morning, I tried to eat chittos but nearly puked. They have turned so disgusting I used to love them so much just a year ago :(

 

[Evo]

I love fast food, but I only have it 2-3 times a year. There is nothing wrong with fast food, a lot of it is healthier than the store bought junk many people serve at home.

Processed foods people buy at the grocery store are LOADED with sugar. Empty calories.

 

[DocHoliday]

I had never heard of a Chick-fil-A until this controversy. But I am for kissing more chicks.

 

[AnTiFreeze3]

Gay marriage is such a non issue. More so than homelessness, hunger, poverty, rape, genocide, animal abuse, child abuse, elder abuse, spousal abuse, abuse or violence of any kind, a corrupt financial system, gangs, climate change, overpopulation is two guys getting married? THAT is the most important issue? The best use of your time is to go out and eat chicken? Or kiss someone in front of a fast food restaurant? THAT is the most important thing to you? If some son of a supernatural creature were to come back, he were to spend all his time protesting against gays? Instead of dealing with real problems?

It's not as if all of these people were about to give a starving child in Africa a big spoonful of chicken-soup, and then threw it on the ground so that they could grab a picket-sign showing their support or distaste towards gay marriage. These are people who have reasons to be passionate about one side or the other, and are willing to take a stand for their rights (or their right to smother other people's rights).

Media attention does not infer that gay marriage is the only problem in the world being worked on. Your anger seems to be irrational; it is highly implausible to shove aside every issue in the world until we have fixed the bigger ones.

 

[Monique]

Exactly! I thought so too when I read it first time. I guess you say it chick-filae .. never heard of this before.

Yeah, chicken fillet. Their business should be booming with all this attention.

 

[wuliheron]

Gay marriage is such a non issue. More so than homelessness, hunger, poverty, rape, genocide, animal abuse, child abuse, elder abuse, spousal abuse, abuse or violence of any kind, a corrupt financial system, gangs, climate change, overpopulation is two guys getting married? THAT is the most important issue? The best use of your time is to go out and eat chicken? Or kiss someone in front of a fast food restaurant? THAT is the most important thing to you? If some son of a supernatural creature were to come back, he were to spend all his time protesting against gays? Instead of dealing with real problems?

The black slaves could not legally marry even each other and as recently as WWII it was illegal to marry anyone outside your race. For you it may not seem like an important issue, but among other things gays are being denied the right to visit their loved ones in hospitals because they are not legally immediate family. Tolerance, compassion, and equality under the law are fundamental to democracy and to deny their importance for such a significant minority is to invite mob rule and rebellion.

 

[BobG]

I would go for kiss more chicks

I think more than just the name of the fast food restaraunt was lost in translation.

The idea is for women to kiss more chicks. The men have to kiss other men.

I've never eaten at a Chick-fil-A. I probably won't change any of my habits over this.

 

[leroyjenkens]

I have a few problems with people saying they believe in traditional marriage.
Well, there is a tradition of homosexual marriage too, they just choose to disregard that tradition and only accept the tradition of heterosexual marriage. They'll say "marriage has always been between one man and one woman", but marriage was basically stolen by Christians at the Council of Trent and redefined how they saw fit.

That would be like me saying I believe in traditional voting (only white men can vote). Obviously non-whites were voting elsewhere in the world, and for me to say that I believe in white only voting, that means I would be choosing a specific tradition and disregarding the rest. Not only that, but the people who believe in "traditional marriage" wouldn't hesitate to criticize my belief in "traditional voting", and they would be perfectly justified in doing so.

Another reason I have a problem with people who believe in "traditional marriage" is the arrogance. Some of them claim that it will devalue the marriage institution. They don't want gay marriage to devalue their marriage.
They'll also ignore the fact that nearly 50% of marriages end in divorce, but make it seem like gays will be the downfall of the entire institution.
I know they have Christian beliefs and they the Bible is obviously against homosexuality, but they seem to rather want gays having sex out of wedlock, which is something else that Christians denounce.

And to say that we should disallow gay marriage simply because the Bible says so is a direct violation of the first amendment. These people don't seem to care if the Constitution is violated in their favor.

Some will be adamant about not redefining a word, as if they'll jump to the aid of any word that is at risk of being redefined. I'll go out on a limb and assume they wouldn't.

Over 50% of the American population supports same sex marriage, according to the polls, so it's kind of disappointing to see videos of people standing in line for hours to support Chick-fil-a for supporting "traditional marriage." And I haven't heard a single good reason from anyone to disallow gay marriage, yet so many people are against it.

 

[BobG]

Another reason I have a problem with people who believe in "traditional marriage" is the arrogance. Some of them claim that it will devalue the marriage institution. They don't want gay marriage to devalue their marriage.
They'll also ignore the fact that nearly 50% of marriages end in divorce, but make it seem like gays will be the downfall of the entire institution.

Where's the "like" button?

Unless a person's marriage ended specifically because their spouse finally "came out of the closet" and decided they were tired of pretending to be heterosexual, I can't really see how gay marriage has any impact on their marriage at all. Not to mention that if there wasn't so much pressure to conform to the "norm", then maybe the marriage wouldn't have started under false pretenses in the first place.

 

[Danger]

I've never heard of that restaurant chain, and I sincerely hope that they're never allowed into my country. Cudos to the New Hampshire franchise owner, but I'm guessing that there will be corporate repercussions from his bravery.
I like to look upon the bright side of this particular situation. The anti-gays morons will stuff themselves with cholesterol-laden chicken and die of heart attacks. Evolution in action.

edit: I couldn't help noting that the sole dissenting voter hasn't posted an excuse for his/her prejudice.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

If they need licenses in the city, it will be very difficult.

Because of this man’s (Cathy’s) ignorance, I will now be denying Chick-fil-A’s permit to open a restaurant in the 1st Ward.

I don't see how same-sex marriage will hurt me. I don't see how Chick Fil A's stance on the matter will hurt me. But I do see how this will hurt me. And these threats were in response to this simple statement?

I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian ... it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.

 

[Hurkyl]

Some will be adamant about not redefining a word, as if they'll jump to the aid of any word that is at risk of being redefined. I'll go out on a limb and assume they wouldn't.

You miss the point about this objection. A significant part of trying to legitimize the phrase "gay marriage" is so that the social connotations associated with "marriage" will carry over to "gay marriage".

Also, as I recall, when homosexuality became a major issue in the U.S., people would routinely counter negative opinions about gay unions with wordplay, glibly accusing the opiner of being "against marriage."

I quite expect the entire reason for line having been drawn at the issue of redefining the word "marriage" is in response to this sort of sophistry along with the back-door attempt at gaining social acceptance.
Another large part, of course, is for legal purposes. Extending the legal definition of marriage makes sense. Or, even better, to revisit the reasons behind laws regarding marriages and extend them to more general unions as appropriate.

But I really think this is a red herring. While important, the legal aspect is not what the controversy is about.

 

[Danger]

No one seems to acknowledge that someone demanding "traditional marriage" is defending slavery. After all, marriage originally was a man relinquishing ownership of his daughter to another man in exchange for money, property or power. (Traditional church marriages still have the father "give away" the bride.)

 

[wuliheron]

I don't see how Chick Fil A's stance on the matter will hurt me.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Promoting institutionalized bigotry and unequal rights under the law hurts everyone in a democratic society and, for example, was instrumental in leading up to the American civil war. There have been accusations that Chick fil a discriminates against hiring gays among other things. I know if I lived somewhere with a large gay population I wouldn't want them moving into my neighborhood and stirring up trouble anymore than I would want a KKK owned business in a black neighborhood.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

There have been accusations that Chick fil a discriminates against hiring gays among other things.

I googled for it and couldn't find it. Here's what I did find.

History of discrimination.

What have you got to back up your claim?

You do realize that when govt officials threaten to deny permits to businesses they disagree with, they repeat history.

 

[wuliheron]

I googled for it and couldn't find it. Here's what I did find.

History of discrimination.

What have you got to back up your claim?

You do realize that when govt officials threaten to deny permits to businesses they disagree with, they repeat history.

The Huffington Post is one of the largest and most popular journalism websites in the US. You may need to work on how to use Google effectively.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...ontroversy-employees-speak-out_n_1729968.html

As for individuals in the government getting involved in this mess, you can't have it both ways. Either the law is applied equally or it invites mob rule and rebellion. To expect anything different is absurd. If the law shows no respect for itself it looses any credibility it might have and its down to anything goes so long as you can get away with it.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

The Huffington Post is one of the largest and most popular journalism websites in the US. You may need to work on how to use Google effectively.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...ontroversy-employees-speak-out_n_1729968.html

I couldn't find anything in that article to support your statement that "There have been accusations that Chick fil a discriminates against hiring gays". The word accusation does not appear in the article and discrimination only appears once:

Several of the gay and lesbian employees interviewed by The Huffington Post said that they liked their work, and had never witnessed incidents of homophobia or discrimination on the job.

What did you find in the article that supports your statement?

 

[Choronzon]

edit: I couldn't help noting that the sole dissenting voter hasn't posted an excuse for his/her prejudice.

I believe that government officials using their authority to enforce their political views on private citizens is a greater evil than that private citizen giving money to religious organizations that advocate for his own religion.

As a matter of fact, i think Cathy deserves to be merely disliked for his actions, while those elected officials who have abused their authority deserve to be imprisoned for theirs.

Did I make myself clear enough?

 

[Evo]

I believe that government officials using their authority to enforce their political views on private citizens is a greater evil than that private citizen giving money to religious organizations that advocate for his own religion.

As a matter of fact, i think Cathy deserves to be merely disliked for his actions, while those elected officials who have abused their authority deserve to be imprisoned for theirs.

Did I make myself clear enough?

You're saying that Santorum and Huckabee need to be imprisoned?

 

[rootX]

I believe that government officials using their authority to enforce their political views on private citizens is a greater evil than that private citizen giving money to religious organizations that advocate for his own religion.

As a matter of fact, i think Cathy deserves to be merely disliked for his actions, while those elected officials who have abused their authority deserve to be imprisoned for theirs.

Did I make myself clear enough?

I agree. It's scary that government officials are making these kinds of statements:

Originally Posted by Thomas Menino (Mayor of Boston)
If they need licenses in the city, it will be very difficult.

Originally Posted by Proco Joe Moreno (Chicago Alderman)
Because of this man’s (Cathy’s) ignorance, I will now be denying Chick-fil-A’s permit to open a restaurant in the 1st Ward.

 

[wuliheron]

I couldn't find anything in that article to support your statement that "There have been accusations that Chick fil a discriminates against hiring gays". The word accusation does not appear in the article and discrimination only appears once:

What did you find in the article that supports your statement?

"Kellie, a 23-year-old gay woman from Georgia who also requested her last name be withheld for fear of being outed in the press, worked at two different Chick-fil-A locations in Georgia. She loved working at the first location, she said, where nobody ever said anything homophobic or discriminatory. But at the second location, in Atlanta, "there was a lot of general homophobia." Managers would frequently make homophobic jokes, she said, and she felt that if she were to tell her colleagues she was gay, she would be fired. Eventually, she quit."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david...reasons-it-isnt-what-you-think_b_1725237.html

"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..."

"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."

I suspect Chick Fil A is trying hard to stay within the letter of the law at least in public but, again, you might as well claim the KKK has equal opportunity hiring practices. Creating an environment that degrades employees, funding hate groups, and other practices are such obvious ways to practice discriminatory hiring practices no jury in the country would buy it if it were the KKK and blacks involved. I grew up as a military brat myself after the military had been desegregated and Uncle Sam made it very clear anyone spouting racist nonsense would not be promoted and could be summarily discharged.

 

[Hurkyl]

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 sounds like a stellar record for a 45-year old international fast food chain.

"Kellie, a 23-year-old gay woman from Georgia

You managed to cherry-pick one anecdote, and it wasn't even a wholly negative one! Your evidence simply doesn't support the bleak picture you are trying to paint.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

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.

Is this criterion being used against any other company that wants permits in Chicago or Boston? If not, then why this company and this company alone?

I suspect Chick Fil A is trying hard to stay within the letter of the law.

And apparently succeeding. Moreno and Menino are not even trying. I have seen nothing in your evidence other than a company president who views the world differently and speaks his mind.

What is wrong with this statement that would cause you to take away his right of free speech?

I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian ... it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.

By the way, you can't blame my googling skills for missing that one anecdote. It wasn't even about discrimination since the people who made homophobic jokes didn't know she was gay.

 

[wuliheron]

Is this criterion being used against any other company that wants permits in Chicago or Boston? If not, then why this company and this company alone?And apparently succeeding. Moreno and Menino are not even trying. I have seen nothing in your evidence other than a company president who views the world differently and speaks his mind.

What is wrong with this statement that would cause you to take away his right of free speech?

By the way, you can't blame my googling skills for missing that one anecdote. It wasn't even about discrimination since the people who made homophobic jokes didn't know she was gay.

As far as I'm concerned the politicians were all spouting the usual empty threats when they threatened to deny Chick Fil A a license to do business. The far right has been making endless threats against gays for fifty years and the first time someone threatens them back they get all defensive. They can dish it out, but they can't take it any better than the neighborhood bully. In any case, it brought national attention to the issue which is just fine by me.

Whether you know someone is gay or not is not the issue. You don't know if someone is Jewish or not either and employees being allowed or even encouraged to tell anti-Semitic jokes at work all the time, customers being allowed to make outrageous racist comments every day of the week, etc. are all unacceptable behavior in a public place of business. For too long the far right has promoted itself as the voice of dignity and decency only to support these kinds of anti-democratic intolerant and just plain ugly behaviors. Again, like the neighborhood bully who is all too eager to dish it out, but can't take the slightest blow to their own over-inflated ego and needs to be confronted.

 

[wuliheron]

That sounds like a stellar record for a 45-year old international fast food chain.

You managed to cherry-pick one anecdote, and it wasn't even a wholly negative one! Your evidence simply doesn't support the bleak picture you are trying to paint.

The evidence does paint a bleak picture. How would you like it if you worked in public place of business where the management allowed customers and employees to routinely mock and denigrate your religious beliefs, race, or whatever. Freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to say just anything you want including such restrictions as those against yelling fire in a crowded theater, harassing people at work, or inciting riots. If they were construction or dock workers or whatever I could understand, but not a public place of business that serves thousands of people a day. A consistent pattern of such behavior implies a real desire to discriminate against hiring such people.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

The far right has been making endless threats against gays for fifty years and the first time someone threatens them back they get all defensive.

Wrong when they do it, OK when we do it? Do you have a link for a public official threatening to deny a permit based on a disagreement with what was said by one of the employees? What, if anything at all, is wrong with the following statement?

I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian ... it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.

Nothing that I can tell, but perhaps you can enlighten me.

 

[Pythagorean]

context?

http://i.imgur.com/VSW8L.png

 

[russ_watters]

Whether you know someone is gay or not is not the issue. You don't know if someone is Jewish or not either...

Problem is, you said discrimination and you can't discriminate against someone if you don't know "what" they are. What you are describing is sexual harassment.

And while sexual harassment is technically illegal in workplaces, in the low-end of society it is a virtually continuous occurrance. One example of one person feeling uncomfortable hearing gay jokes is absurdly banal.

 

[wuliheron]

Wrong when they do it, OK when we do it? Do you have a link for a public official threatening to deny a permit based on a disagreement with what was said by one of the employees? What, if anything at all, is wrong with the following statement?

Nothing that I can tell, but perhaps you can enlighten me.

You must be joking. Just last year the governor of Texas threatened to secede from the union. In Italy they elected a XXX porn star to national office repeatedly just to mock the system and in many countries the legislators routinely have mock wrestling matches on the floor just to prove to their constituents they are fighting for them. Americans are no different and politicians would not continue the practice if it wasn't obviously effective. The idea that this may be too far and over the line is naive to say the least.

You can get on your high horse and say this is too far, but that's obviously a personal issue. In the days of Anita Bryant gay bars were routinely being raided by the police and shut down. Cops would bust down the doors of even private residences and arrest people for homosexual behavior or, in my state, not having proof of separate bedding. Whether legal or not slavery was an abomination and so is denying gays equal rights under the law and supporting hate groups that promote ideas like deporting them.

 

[russ_watters]

Can you see the difference between granstanding and deriliction of duty? If you think the politicians are just grandstanding, fine, but jimmy believes they are serious. So do I.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I couldn't find any examples either.

 

[wuliheron]

Can you see the difference between granstanding and deriliction of duty? If you think the politicians are just grandstanding, fine, but jimmy believes they are serious. So do I.

If you are expecting someone to hold your hand and tell you everything is going to be OK think again. You have every reason to be afraid because the right wing has been asking for payback for decades. The single most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until 9/11 was the radical right wing bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building. Last year NYC arrested 26 reporters in one day in violation of their constitutional rights and congress seriously debated allowing the military to arbitrarily suspend habeas corpus altogether and round people up in camps like so many cattle. Be very afraid. This is the mess the American public has allowed and even encouraged.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

If you are expecting someone to hold your hand and tell you everything is going to be OK think again. You have every reason to be afraid because the right wing has been asking for payback for decades. The single most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until 9/11 was the radical right wing bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building. Last year NYC arrested 26 reporters in one day in violation of their constitutional rights and congress seriously debated allowing the military to arbitrarily suspend habeas corpus altogether and round people up in camps like so many cattle. Be very afraid. This is the mess the American public has allowed and even encouraged.

Yes, our rights are being eroded. And your solution to this problem is to deny Chick-fil-A their free speech rights. How will that help?

I have selected 9 posts that are not part of this thread. Quote these posts as well, or deselect these posts.

 

[russ_watters]

If you are expecting someone to hold your hand and tell you everything is going to be OK think again. You have every reason to be afraid because the right wing has been asking for payback for decades. The single most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until 9/11 was the radical right wing bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building. Last year NYC arrested 26 reporters in one day in violation of their constitutional rights and congress seriously debated allowing the military to arbitrarily suspend habeas corpus altogether and round people up in camps like so many cattle. Be very afraid. This is the mess the American public has allowed and even encouraged.

Setting aside the conspiracy theory tone and inaccurate characterizations, I agree that those things are wrong. That's all just an OT rant, though, unless you mean to imply it should be OK for the Left to even the score.

 

[WannabeNewton]

Yes, our rights are being eroded. And your solution to this problem is to deny Chick-fil-A their free speech rights. How will that help?

I don't understand this double standard people in this country seem to have (I'm not saying you have it because I know you don't and when you say free speech you do mean it generally) where they use free speech as an excuse to attack gay rights or the act of being a homosexual and then get absolutely smitten and angry when someone makes a racist comment about blacks or asians or what have you. It is extremely infuriating and I see it on various public forums (most notably facebook). Why is it absolutely wrong and disgusting in the eyes of the media or the general public when someone says the aforementioned racial groups shouldn't have the rights they deserve but its ok to say it about gays?!

 

[wuliheron]

Yes, our rights are being eroded. And your solution to this problem is to deny Chick-fil-A their free speech rights. How will that help?

I have selected 9 posts that are not part of this thread. Quote these posts as well, or deselect these posts.

What on Earth does "deselect" mean and what on Earth are you talking about?

 

[wuliheron]

Setting aside the conspiracy theory tone and inaccurate characterizations, I agree that those things are wrong. That's all just an OT rant, though, unless you mean to imply it should be OK for the Left to even the score.

I'm saying when the foundations of democracy such as tolerance, equal rights, and freedom of the press are ignored it's anything goes. That's not a personal morality, but a simple fact of life.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

What on Earth does "deselect" mean and what on Earth are you talking about?

I wish I knew. I was hoping you or someone else might tell me the meaning of these words. If you reply to this post, you will see them just below the text input box.