Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 125
Like Tree4Likes

Thread: Chick-Fil-A literally hates gays. Eating there supports their anti equality bullshit.

  1. #91
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    They don't discriminate in their giving.
    No, just who they try to oppress with their religious crap.

    One piece taints the rest. 10% of your population is being held as second class citizens in the supposed land of the free and home of the brave, aided and abetted by groups like this.. but hey, they give some cash to your prom. That makes it better.

    I'm sure the punch will taste great to you, but to that 10% it's probably rancid and sour.

    If they aren't barred outright from attending.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  2. #92
    Elite Member sluce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Top Secret Spy for Leann Rimes
    Posts
    37,330

    Default

    Of course Grimm - we should throw out all the good a group does if we don't believe in just one part of their message. Chick-fi-let has never taken a stance of Gay marriage as a company. They have never told their employees to take a stance. They have never refused to hire people for being gay, black, Jewish, etc. They are not even donating to an event that is about gay marriage. They donate to many groups. But yes, go ahead and blow this one donation out of proportion. It doesn't help the cause at all. No sense wasting energy on a fight when there is no opponet.

    FYI - the gay kids are all welcome at the prom and post prom party.
    You don't engage with crazies. Because they're, you know, fucking crazy. - WitchCurlGirl

  3. #93
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    The cause? I think the gays themselves will keep their own counsel on what helps the cause or not.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  4. #94
    Elite Member sluce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Top Secret Spy for Leann Rimes
    Posts
    37,330

    Default

    Sad that you feel it is just a gay cause. Gays may be the ones who can't marry but many support the cause and are willing to fight for your rights. I am one of them.
    Last edited by sluce; February 1st, 2011 at 11:59 AM.
    You don't engage with crazies. Because they're, you know, fucking crazy. - WitchCurlGirl

  5. #95
    Elite Member Mel1973's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cuntopia
    Posts
    42,951

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sluce View Post
    Sorry Grimm. The group they donated too is more than just anti-gay marriage. It is just 1 piece of what Family Forum is. If they refused to donate to other organizations that weren't anti-gay I would feel differently. They are donating money and food to our Post Prom party in May. They never once asked our political beliefs. They do not limit their donation to just Christian schools. If they were only donating to groups that supported exclusion I would feel differently. They don't discriminate in their giving. They are also donating to the Hebrew School down the road.

    ETA - the event in question is a marriage retreat for Christian couples looking to strengthen their own marriages. It is not a political event to get people to be against gay marriage.
    To my way of thinking (and I could be wrong - highly unlikely but...), a person representing a group shows up at Chik-Fil-A asking for a donation ... person at Chik-Fil-A doesn't necessarily say "are you against gay marriage" but asks what they do represent. Person at Chik-Fil-A makes a decision and gives sandwiches. I do not imagine that every person/organization that asks for a donation is thoroughly checked out. I mean, just because Chik-Fil-A may support Planned Parenthood, doesn't mean they support abortions - you CAN support one thing that an organization represents (marriage retreats?) and not necessarily other things (being against gay marriage).
    Quote Originally Posted by sluce View Post
    Sad that you feel it is just a gay cause. Gays may be the ones who can't marry but many support the cause and are willing to fight for your rights. I am one of them.
    This!
    Kill him.
    Kill her.
    Kill It.
    Kill everything... that IS the solution!
    П(•_•)П
    twitchy molests my signature!

  6. #96
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    50,851

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sluce View Post
    Of course Grimm - we should throw out all the good a group does if we don't believe in just one part of their message. Chick-fi-let has never taken a stance of Gay marriage as a company. They have never told their employees to take a stance. They have never refused to hire people for being gay, black, Jewish, etc. They are not even donating to an event that is about gay marriage. They donate to many groups. But yes, go ahead and blow this one donation out of proportion. It doesn't help the cause at all. No sense wasting energy on a fight when there is no opponet.

    FYI - the gay kids are all welcome at the prom and post prom party.
    so you're saying it's ok to be against gay rights and that not believing in gay marriage is an acceptable belief?
    sorry, i'm with grimm on this one. i can't respect anyone or any organisation that is homophobic and active in seeking to limit gay marriage and gay rights in general, doesn't matter how 'good' they are in other areas.

    i looked the group up. the article posted here is wrong, it's actually called the pennsyslvania family institute. and here are some of the things the group supports:

    it posted an article on its page, about the 'fallacy' of gay marriage:

    When is a leg not a leg? When it’s not. « PA Family Institute Blog

    this is the article they think is a 'must-read': A Marriage Tail « Public Discourse

    another delightful article and view endorsed by this group:
    “It is not bigotry it is biology that discriminates between same sex couples and opposite sex couples.”

    “A marriage requires a husband and a wife, because these unions are necessary to make new life and connect children to their mother and father. Judge Walker’s slur will not stand the test of time and history, we demand that Congress and the Supreme Court act to protect all Americans’ right to vote for marriage”

    “It is not bigotry, it is biology.” « PA Family Institute Blog

    and from the mouth of the president of the institution chick-fil-a donated to, this gem:

    How Close We Came to Losing It: Pennsylvania, Marriage & The Courts
    By Michael Geer
    Joni Mitchell’s classic song from 1970, “Big Yellow Taxi,” says “Don’t it always seem to go, that you don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone.” Some say Philadelphia Eagles fans will soon feel that way about Donovan McNabb, and perhaps so. But this is about a much weightier matter. I think Pennsylvanians ought to know just how close they came to seeing the long-standing definition of marriage as the union of husband and wife gone.

    In a recent case involving a lesbian couple, a Berks County judge was asked to throw out Pennsylvania’s marriage laws. The legal brief argued that “it is time to change our definitions…” This was a direct challenge to how Pennsylvania’s government has always treated marriage.

    In specific, a lesbian woman from Berks County sought to divorce her same-sex partner. The two women were hitched in Massachusetts under that state’s law (changed by court order), and one asked a Pennsylvania judge to end their marriage, and while he was at it, to also end marriage as we know it in Pennsylvania.

    A judge with a political agenda (“activist judge”) could very well have used this case to strike down our Defense of Marriage Act, and ordered legalization of “same-sex marriage.” That very thing happened in Iowa one year ago.

    But this judge, Scott Lash, followed the law. He did not grant a divorce, reasoning that a judge cannot decree a divorce for persons who are not married in accordance with the laws of our state.

    The plaintiff’s attorneys argued that our marriage law was “unconstitutional;” that their same-sex marriage should be recognized and a divorce granted. Judge Lash found no grounds in the Constitution compelling him to strike down our law, and for the record he stated why natural marriage receives the recognition and protection in law that it does:

    The family is the basic unit of society. It represents one man and one woman coming together to form one being. From this union, comes offspring. Conversely, a same-sex relationship deviates from this traditional concept, for the principals are like beings, without physical complement. They cannot foster offspring, except through artificial or adoptive means.
    Of course, a same-sex couple can maintain a loving, monogamous relationship…. This relational commitment, however, does not and could not qualify as a “traditional marriage.”

    The judge is right about marriage. It serves a unique and vital role in society, bringing together men and women so children can have mothers and fathers committed to each other and to them. All the family experimentation over the past 40 years — no-fault divorce, the sexual revolution, cohabitation — have been documented failures, precisely because they ignored the public purpose of marriage.

    Perhaps it was that same ignorance that led eight members of the Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee last month to table (indefinitely delay) SB 707, the Pennsylvania Marriage Protection Amendment. Their vote keeps marriage at risk and denies citizens of Pennsylvania a vote on keeping marriage the union of husband and wife. Citizens in 31 states have voted on that question, and in all of them they solidly chose to keep marriage what it truly is.

    Five years ago, Iowa’s Supreme Court ruled on a case strikingly similar to the one here. But the Iowa court ruled the opposite way, and upheld a lesbian couple’s divorce. In response, Iowans who saw the handwriting on the wall pleaded with their elected officials to protect marriage through constitutional amendment.

    But like Pennsylvania, Iowa’s amendment process is arduous. Amendments must be approved in two successive legislative sessions before going to a vote of the people. If lawmakers fail to act, the people are denied a vote. Thus far, citizens of both states have been denied. In Iowa’s case, their Supreme Court followed its own lead, overturned that state’s marriage law, and legalized same-sex marriage.

    And so, without clear language in our state constitution defining marriage between husband and wife, marriage here remains vulnerable to the whims of judges. Protecting marriage should be front and center for Pennsylvania lawmakers. Without a state constitutional amendment, we are but one case away from radically changing marriage law against the will of the people.

    Marriage may not be paradise, but it is the proven foundation of society. Paving it over with a newer and trendier model will only further weaken that foundation, to the detriment of families, children and all of society. It could have happened last month in Berks County; it could happen in another court next month.
    Let’s protect it now.

    Michael Geer is president of the Harrisburg-based Pennsylvania Family Institute.

    How Close We Came to Losing It: Pennsylvania, Marriage & The Courts « PA Family Institute Blog
    and it's not just this organisation. chick-fil-a have also donated to focus on the family, a notoriously fundie group who also sponsors an 'ex-gay ministry group' and believes in so-called conversion therapy. not coincidentally, the pennsylvania family insitute is strongly endorsed and supported by focus on the family and that endorsement features prominently on the 'what others are saying' section of their website.

    Among the comments Dobson (and Focus on the Family) has made:

    "[Homosexuality] will destroy the Earth."
    "[Same-sex marriage] will lead to marriage between daddies and little girls."
    "The introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy."
    He has compared the recent steps toward gay marriage to Pearl Harbor and likens the battle against it to D-Day.
    Is Your Chicken Sandwich Homophobic? | Change.org News




    so do you think it's still ok to give them money just because they also donated money to the hebrew school across the street?
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  7. #97
    Elite Member sluce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Top Secret Spy for Leann Rimes
    Posts
    37,330

    Default

    Sput - I am saying they did not necessarily give them a donation of food because they are anti gay marrige. The corporation has taken no political stance on any issues. They allow all not-for-profit groups to submit a request for a donation. They give to pretty much every group that asks. It is the same with all the local grocery stores here too. We send a letter with a copy of our 501(c)3 certificate and they send us a gift card to buy things at the store. They do not ask if we have any political stances on any issue.

    I have no doubt that Chick-fi-let would also donate to Planned Parenthood if they submitted a request. My point is that they were not making a statement that they are anti-gay marriage by making a donation of food to this non-profit group. They were not taking a stance at all. They were simply making a donation so they can get a tax credit. Soon all companies will refuse to make donations because there will always be someone trying to make them a terget of their polictical views.
    You don't engage with crazies. Because they're, you know, fucking crazy. - WitchCurlGirl

  8. #98
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    50,851

    Default

    i have a hard time believing that a company whose owner is very vocal about his evangelical christian beliefs, closes on sundays, and donates to focus on the family and the pennsylvania family institute, would ever give cash to planned parenthood... come on, sluce. do you really think that would happen? based on everything we know about them...
    i would never give money to an organisation if there were aspects of their policies/activities that i fundamentally disagreed with. i don't think corporations just throw money around willy-nilly to whoever asks for it. especially if a company is openly religious, and evangelical and conservative at that.
    let's face it, if you give someone money it's because you agree with the majority of what they stand for. especially if you're giving money to όber-conservative religious organisations like these 2. that's never innocent. seriously, who doesn't know what focus on the family is and what they stand for? it's not like they mistakenly gave money to some cancer charity whose president then turned out to be a fundie-tard with some dubious beliefs...

    and if it were some kind of omission or mistake or they did hand out the cash without researching who they were giving it to, you'd think they'd come out (no pun intended) and make a statement to that effect. and they haven't.
    just because they don't micro-manage enough to make sure they don't have any gay kids behind their cash registers doesn't mean they don't hold these beliefs.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  9. #99
    Elite Member Mel1973's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cuntopia
    Posts
    42,951

    Default

    we aren't talking about money - we're talking about fucking chicken sandwiches donated.
    Kill him.
    Kill her.
    Kill It.
    Kill everything... that IS the solution!
    П(•_•)П
    twitchy molests my signature!

  10. #100
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    50,851

    Default

    yeah i know but it's the principle of the thing.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  11. #101
    Elite Member sluce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Top Secret Spy for Leann Rimes
    Posts
    37,330

    Default

    Ok then we know they support education, no matter the religious affiliation is. Maybe the Catholics can boycott them because they donated to those Jews. They also donated to a predominantly black school so the racists should boycott them too. I never knew there was sooooo much power in a Chick-fi-let sandwich. Thank goodness most people realize that life is filled with grey and don't hold so strongly to simple black and white.

    And Sput - yes I do believe that if our local Planned Parenthood was holding a conference and asked for a donation, they would be approved. Being anti gay marriage is a stance of the group that received the donation. Chick-fi-let has never taken a position. The owner can have his own beliefs but it doesn't mean the company is guided by those beliefs.
    You don't engage with crazies. Because they're, you know, fucking crazy. - WitchCurlGirl

  12. #102
    Elite Member burnt_toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fargo
    Posts
    2,554

    Default

    I get what you are saying Sluce - but I also think it's important for consumers to 'vote with their money' regarding a company's stance. If the backlash from this is severe enough, maybe companies will start looking at who they are supporting and 'voting with their donations' for causes they want to support.

    If I donated bread to an white supremacist just because they asked and didn't look into what the organization supported I would expect to be held accountable for donating to a hate group.

    I don't and won't buy from Chick-Fil-A but I didn't do it before either. They are clearly a Christian company who puts their religion into the running of their company. It's their right, but I won't support any Christian organization. I don't buy from Hobby Lobby for the same reason. My money won't go to religious organizations or hate groups .. period. If I know about it, I will put money elsewhere.

    It's a valid point that company donations are important for groups, but if every hate group fails because companies won't donate - so be it.
    Quote Originally Posted by stella blue View Post
    I saw one a while back that had two guys dressed like pterodactyls and some chick doing stuff while a little unidentified dinosaur watched. It was at that point that I realized (hoped?) I'd reached the end of the internet.

  13. #103
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    50,851

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by burnt_toast View Post

    If I donated bread to an white supremacist just because they asked and didn't look into what the organization supported I would expect to be held accountable for donating to a hate group.
    this. even if the white supremacist group also read stories to kids with cancer on the side and supported gay rights, that still wouldn't cut it.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  14. #104
    Elite Member Mel1973's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cuntopia
    Posts
    42,951

    Default

    you know, I gave a homeless guy on the street 20 bucks the other day. what a piece of shit I am for not grilling him about his religious affiliations, racial views and his stance on gay marriage.
    *makes a note to go get my money back*
    Kill him.
    Kill her.
    Kill It.
    Kill everything... that IS the solution!
    П(•_•)П
    twitchy molests my signature!

  15. #105
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    32,423

    Default

    Do white supremacist groups only accept white bread?
    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Lutheran Church embraces gays: abolishes all anti-gay policies
    By buttmunch in forum Faith and Religion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 19th, 2010, 06:50 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 21st, 2009, 12:37 PM
  3. Replies: 145
    Last Post: December 28th, 2008, 03:38 AM
  4. Anti-chick flick
    By ohmygoodness in forum Television and Movies
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: March 13th, 2007, 12:46 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 1st, 2006, 05:16 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •