Op-Ed When we boycot Starbucks, it's the will of Jesus, but when gays boycot CFA, it's bullying!!

[Rolyo85]

From my blog:

I am literally stunned into silence by this. Hypocrisy on a cosmic level: when we're boycotting Starbucks, Home Depot or JC Penny, it's "standing up for marriage", but when people do it to your side, it's "hateful gays bullying us". Really?

REALLY?!

Not to mention the flabbergasting temerity of saying that Dan Kathy's family is being "persecuted simply for their personal beliefs". Because nothing says "personal" quite as well as $2 000 000 donated to hate groups.

I just hope it's just Brown being evil, and not outright demented and not seeing the gigantic absurdity of what he's saying.

 

[maxpowr9]

Don't try to reason with irrationality. You have a better chance at winning a tennis match against a brick wall.

 

[Centexfarmer]

My Grandma always said, "Never argue with an idiot. Those paying attention won't be able to tell the difference."

My Sister was a bully growing up, and she still is today.

Every time that I fought back, or called her on her shit she instantly became the victim.

The other thing that my Sister has in common with these people is that she's feels like that she's a "Christian" because she uses the Bible as a bludgeon, instead of scriptural source for actually reading the word of God.

And these so called "religious leaders" Mike Huckabee included (and I personally kinda like the guy), say nothing in either the defense of scripture that's being taken out context to promote hate, to speak of God's Love, and Christ's forgiveness. They just keep using the Bible and Christianity, and scriptures taken out of context to make their idiotic, vitriolic and hate filled points.

There's a special kind of hell for those people, and I just have to keep praying for them.

 

[JB3]

You'd have a better chance herding cats than talking sense into these lunatics.

One of my normally libertarian friends posted this article on their Facebook wall, with this addition "On both sides of our latest culture war divide, we must learn to have level-headed disagreements without resorting to accusations of hate speech and boycotts."

In Defense of Eating at Chick-fil-A - Jonathan Merritt - The Atlantic

To which I responded:

It does not matter how well they run their business, how well they treat their employees, or the tastiness of their chicken. If the money that this company makes is spent on anti-gay hate speech, they deserve to be the recipient of a boycott and feel the ire of level-headed citizens. They have the right to believe whatever they want. But the moment that they dare to attempt to influence my rights as a citizen is the day that I have a right to respond as I see fit. Further, it was not just his statement against gay marriage, it was the tone and tenor of his comments, specifically regarding our generation.

"I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, 'We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,' and I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about,"

These are not the statements of someone that deserves anything other than our disdain. These are not level-headed comments made by a level-headed man. It is hate speech against a group of people that are currently denied their rights by people like Cathy. I would expect such statements from Fred Phelps and his followers, not from the leader of a corporation. His comments are offensive, disturbing, and rightfully deserving of every bit of backlash that he receives.

He has exercised his rights; now he will suffer the consequences of reasonable people everywhere exercising theirs.

 

[Centexfarmer]

You'd have a better chance herding cats than talking sense into these lunatics.

QFT!

Quoted For Truth right there.

As members of the LGBT Community we can't win for losing with this crowd.

The best that we can do is to publicly point out that the only "agenda" that we have is to be treated equally as Americans under the United States Constitution.

I can't understand why that seems to be such a difficult concept for so many of them to grasp.

 

[JB3]

QFT!

Quoted For Truth right there.

As members of the LGBT Community we can't win for losing with this crowd.

The best that we can do is to publicly point out that the only "agenda" that we have is to be treated equally as Americans under the United States Constitution.

I can't understand why that seems to be such a difficult concept for so many of them to grasp.

It's because we're homos. Nothing we say is true, apparently.

There's a chik-fil-a opening across the street from my summer job. I've been contemplating organizing a protest of some kind during their grand-opening.

 

[Rolyo85]

I just don't understand how one can see two things that are absolutely the same, and call one "stand for what is right", and the other "bullying". It isn't about ideology, it's about basic logic ffs!

This reminds me of a music theory teacher I had who claimed that among the ways to express a shift in dynamic are the following:

"poco piu forte" -> "a little more forte"
and
"poco piu piano" - > "a little less piano"

Both signifying increase in volume, clearly. One doesn't even need to speak Italian to see that the two phrases feature the exact same wording, and therefore they couldn't mean different things...

 

[maxpowr9]

^If you have the balls, show up in drag and see if they will serve you.

 

[Rolyo85]

They will serve him of course. The people who work at CFA aren't any more homophobic than those who work at any other fast food place, which means - not at all. It's the people on top who do the bullshit. Which is what makes all of this so sad - CFA is a great chain with a great business model and great fast food and service. If they weren't evil, they'd be awesome.

 

[JB3]

They will serve him of course. The people who work at CFA aren't any more homophobic than those who work at any other fast food place, which means - not at all. It's the people on top who do the bullshit. Which is what makes all of this so sad - CFA is a great chain with a great business model and great fast food and service. If they weren't evil, they'd be awesome.

It's a conundrum to be sure. I don't begrudge their employees for working there, since many don't have a choice and many don't share their employer's point of view. But they DO need to be aware of what their executives stand for, and their executives do need to be held accountable for their hate speech.

 

[Centexfarmer]

It's because we're homos. Nothing we say is true, apparently.

There's a chik-fil-a opening across the street from my summer job. I've been contemplating organizing a protest of some kind during their grand-opening.

No Sir! It's worse than that!

Because now they're trying to paint US as the "haters."

 

[Kulindahr]

You'd have a better chance herding flying cats than talking sense into these lunatics.

I think I improved the accuracy somewhat.

 

[JB3]

Oh, and just to be clear, I think the refusal to allow Chik-Fil-a to open stores (a la Chicago) is a dangerous path to go down. Boycott's are one thing; violating their rights is another.

 

[Rolyo85]

I'm sure nobody is going to do anything illegal here. It's all about making a stand.

 

[JB3]

I'm sure nobody is going to do anything illegal here. It's all about making a stand.

Refusing to allow a company to build a property solely based on their stance on gays, especially when the company has met all of the zoning requirements and worked out any other issues with the city, is illegal. That is what the alderman in Chicago has done. It is arbitrary, it is wrong, and it certainly will not stand.

Change of Subject: Alderman lays an egg in opposing Chick-fil-A

Look, CFA's leadership's stance on gays, and their contributions to anti-gay groups, is obviously wrong. That is not up for debate. But they DO have the right to contribute that money, and they DO have the right to express their opinion. Denying them the right to build a restaurant based on those views is wrong, plain and simple.

 

[Rolyo85]

Can you back the "illegal" claim with any evidence? I'm not being a douche, I am not informed and I'm curious.

 

[JB3]

Can you back the "illegal" claim with any evidence? I'm not being a douche, I am not informed and I'm curious.

Its discrimination based on their beliefs and a violation of Cathy's right to free speech.

 

[mightbe]

I'm pretty sure that an entire city council can actually flat-out refuse opening a franchise if reasonable terms won't (or can't) be met. If terms include complete protection against all forms of discrimination, I can see how they could hold their footing.

 

[Rolyo85]

Its discrimination based on their beliefs and a violation of Cathy's right to free speech.

Not in the least. He is free to speak whatever he wants. Right to free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

 

[justdra]

What about all the town's that try to refuse Walmart? I was in ATL this past week and all I seen were STOP WALMART signs. If Walmart has met all the requirements, what exactly can the town do to stop them from building?