Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 10      1   2   3   4   Next   »
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 22,989
Reply with quote  #1 

Announcing the Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day on August 1

July 26, 2012

Dear ******,

Christian-owned Chick-fil-A has come under assault once again, this time because CEO Dan Cathy recently affirmed his personal view that the Biblical view of marriage should be upheld.

The "Big Gay" machine has ramped up an un-relenting and vicious public attack against Chick-fil-A. Homosexual activists are spewing hate-filled bigotry and intolerance toward the company in unprecedented fashion.

Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day is our way of showing our support for a company whose leaders believe in marriage as that of one man, one woman.

Join millions of others in showing support for Chick-fil-A by visiting your local Chick-fil-A on Wednesday, August 1, 2012. The plan is simple. At least once on August 1, eat a meal at Chick-fil-A and politely let the staff and management know you appreciate the company's Christian value system.

Let us know you're supporting Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day by signing up today! We'll let Chick-fil-A know to expect record sales on August 1!


__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 22,989
Reply with quote  #2 
I believe we are all entitled to our beliefs and our principles.  He has not stated gays and lesbians are barred from his restaurant, he has just affirmed his beliefs.  [yes, I read the ramblings on the gay marriage news thread, just thought the email I recieved deserved its own thread] Mr. Cathy has lived long enough and paid his dues in this country to voice his opinion just like everyone else.  Don't like Chick-fil-a, go to mickey-d's
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #3 
I will be going.
__________________
Susan
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #4 
If one publicly and financially supported a ban on Mormonism, would this be a belief or an intrusion on the individual rights of others?  Plug in Catholicism, interracial marriage, or similar if you prefer.
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 5,007
Reply with quote  #5 

Bad example.
Freedom of religion is seen by most people and nations to be a fundamental human right.
Freedom of religion is part of the constitution.
Find an example of a company funding a cause that exists. Several support gay mariage. Several fund politcal parties.

There are organziations, universities, and sports leagues that supported segregation. Are people going to boycott them for what they did?
Shall we mention alabam university and it's place in history with segregation and supporting it. What about states that owned slaves and supported slavery. George washington owned slaves and financially supported slave owners in haiti putting down a slave rebellion. His slaves were in his will to be freed upon both he and his wives death but she freed them after his death.

Are there signs in chick fill A that say straights only? Did they say they did not like gays? No...they said they did not support gay marriage and will financially support the defense of marriage organizations. They aren't running anti-gay ad campaigns like a presidential election---they are promoting pro-traditional marriage stuff.

I remember white's only water fountains, businesses, back of the bus, etc. and these were protected by law and police. It wasn't a person running a business saying they do not support gay marriage and will fund defense of marriage---it was people and businesses saying you are black and we won't sit with you, eat with you, enter a theatre in same door as you, drink from same fountain nor use same restrooms. It was seperate baseball leagues like the negro league. It was universities like bama and mississippi requiring feds to force them to allow intergrating. It wasn't university presidents just supporting segregation they practiced it. I can see if chick fill A banned gays or refused to serve or hire gays. But they don't.


__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #6 
fhoenix - If I understand what you're saying, religion is home free so, therefore, it's a bad example.  Their rights have been solidly confirmed and the gay community will simply have to wait until their's are similarly confirmed.  I suppose then they can go back and object to those who appeared to be intruding on their individual rights.  OK, I'll substitute the other term...

If one publicly and financially supported a ban on interracial marriage, would this be a personal belief or an intrusion on the individual rights of others?
fhoenix

Registered:
Posts: 5,007
Reply with quote  #7 
Interracial marriage has been fully legal in all states in the USA since 1967.
No state or business could ban it now so none would be asked about it in an interview. There are businesses and companies that supported segregation but none financially supported a ban on interracial marriage. You see interracial marriage includes an asian and a black marrying not just whites and other races. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman--and since some states did not grant blacks the right to vote or hold office or do anything they added that they could not marry whites.
This is the same time period as whites only and blacks only areas, bathrooms, water fountains, schools , etc. so why would alabama let a black man marry a white woman when they won't even let them eat together, live together, ride together, go to school together, drink from same fountain, or enter a public building thru same door? Blacks would be arrested for holding the hand of a white or on a date with one. And a black person dating a white was shunned by blacks for being with a white and by whites for being black. No one to support your choice to marry interracially. There were no interracial parades, no ellen or other celebs who were interracially married since celebs during that time that were in interracial relationships or gay kept it private. Yes...back then gays were in closet and most interracial relationships were hidden. Hiding gay was easy. Look at the brady bunch.

There was no ban on interracial marriage for people to support. No one was redefining marriage since it was still a man and a woman and blacks were still marrying blacks. Mixing the races went hand and hand with integration and at that time many people did not want blacks and native americans mixing with whites, eating with whites, sitting with whites, etc. People still saw blacks as the former slaves and native americans as the savages they had to conquer and defeat. Now they are expected to live side by side with us and marry our sons and daughters?
No one in alabama had to finance a ban on interracial marriage. The state voted and it stood until feds in 1967 said any man can marry any woman. Back in the days before twitter, facebook, smart phones , internet , tv, etc. states made laws and people against the laws had to campaign on foot. Attend council meetings, pass out pamplets, and go door to door. Rotary phones, no email, tv went off air before midnight. No cable tv or youtube. Money didn't matter. No point and click or mass emails.
Community mattered and you had to convince them. Tv and stuff was not what it is today. You werent buying ads during movies and tv shows. Those who wanted to support interracial marriage had to convinve people in their communities. Didn't matter what people in another state thought or did...matters what people where you live think. National chains to support either way. Celebs werent on tv and internet or tweeting their opinion on the matters back them either. So we cannot comapre those issues. May as well compare groups that publically supported slavery and keeping it.

Are we going to boycott state's that do not allow gay marriage? It is state by state choice not federal. So picking on chick fill A is making them the target of frustrations with all the states that disallow gay marriage. People are trying to make an example out of them to get others to stop backing family values groups.....of course it isn't working since athletes, polititians, and celebs are now coming out in support of chick fill a and they are packing people in since the controversy. Christian groups and conservative groups have made them a destination spot to eat. Next week it is going to get ugly at chick fill a locations---with the appreciation day on 1st and the same sex kiss-in on the 3rd.....chicken wars.

__________________
‎"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -- Abraham Lincoln
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 22,989
Reply with quote  #8 
I have done it so I do not want to pick just any link here.
  Search "growing up without a father(figure)" and see how many great articles, essays, thesis and studies have been written about boys and girls growing up without fathers in their lives.  If you do not believe it affects a child you are just being naive, ignorant or close-minded yourself.  I didn't write the papers or do the research so it is not a biased opinion, it has been thoroughly examined.

People are so quick to think they know what Mr. Cathy is thinking.  This man has lifelong opinions and beliefs about traditional marriage and there are reasons for his beliefs.  If you are not ready to admit that children are better off in a traditional marriage then I can't help you understand either.  If gays want to marry and then sign off on not raising children I would be all for it.  I guess children growing up with 2 gay men would get a bonus of having 2 fathers. Babies daddies that run away from their responsibilities of parenting and support of their children is a story for another day.

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #9 
Thanks Keepinitreal! 
__________________
Susan
GrizzlyFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,049
Reply with quote  #10 
I will show my support by taking my softball team to eat at Chick-fil-a as often as possible. Of course the fact that they have the absolute best chicken helps as well!
__________________
If Obamacare is such a good thing, why did he have to lie about it to get it passed?
GrizzlyFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,049
Reply with quote  #11 
Ever notice that when libs scream TOLERANCE!! they are being intolerant of someone else's values?
Ever notice that when the libs tell us not to judge, they are judging the one who is judging?
Ever notice that libs are all about free speech until someone with a different opinion speaks freely?

__________________
If Obamacare is such a good thing, why did he have to lie about it to get it passed?
UGASBFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,038
Reply with quote  #12 
This whole thing is ridiculous. I am a gay male, and I will eat Chick-fil-a till I die.

I don't care if he likes me, I don't care if he doesn't think I deserve to get married, and I don't care what anyone else thinks. It's not personal; a person's belief is just that; their belief. I don't take what he has said personally, although I think some of it has came without tact... I'm gay, and he is a Christian. It is not the end of the world for me if this man doesn't support me. I got to where I am today with love from my family and my own perseverance... I'm not about to get my "panties" in a wad over something so minor.

That being said, this "Big Gay" pays for his food just like any other customer, straight or not, and I expect to be respected like one. If not... Okay, cool. It's really not the end of the world, and it won't stop me from living my everyday life. Chick-fil-a is a restaurant, not some virus threatening to kill off all that is living... People need to just breath and move on. It's not worth getting upset over.
spazsdad

Registered:
Posts: 4,901
Reply with quote  #13 
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGASBFan
This whole thing is ridiculous. I am a gay male, and I will eat Chick-fil-a till I die.

I don't care if he likes me, I don't care if he doesn't think I deserve to get married, and I don't care what anyone else thinks. It's not personal; a person's belief is just that; their belief. I don't take what he has said personally, although I think some of it has came without tact... I'm gay, and he is a Christian. It is not the end of the world for me if this man doesn't support me. I got to where I am today with love from my family and my own perseverance... I'm not about to get my "panties" in a wad over something so minor.

That being said, this "Big Gay" pays for his food just like any other customer, straight or not, and I expect to be respected like one. If not... Okay, cool. It's really not the end of the world, and it won't stop me from living my everyday life. Chick-fil-a is a restaurant, not some virus threatening to kill off all that is living... People need to just breath and move on. It's not worth getting upset over.

x 100

__________________
#SCOTUS
Lovemesomesoftball

Registered:
Posts: 5,786
Reply with quote  #14 
I like their policy on cow tipping

Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #15 
fhoenix - It's a difficult subject for some and I thought I'd try to show a different perspective.  There was a time interracial marriage was illegal and I suppose folks in that category were quite offended when people supported, both verbally and financially, causes trying to keep it illegal.  Keep in mind, Chik-fil-a is contributing money to the anti same sex marriage organizations.

There are many people today, including mayors, who get quite offended if and when anyone tries to intrude on a citizen's right to practice a religion, marry their black girlfriend, or, in this instance, marry their same sex boyfriend.  When some citizens are allowed to do something other citizens are prohibited from, there's a large segment of society that becomes concerned and unhappy with those who continue to promote such an unfair and discriminatory practice.  One might say being against interracial marriage is a "belief" but I hope one also recognizes how offensive and intrusive it might be in the eyes of many fellow citizens.  You need not agree with those other people but maybe you can look at from their perspective and gain some understanding why they object so strongly.  That's how I view it and I fully understand those who pay little attention to the so called "belief" explanation and see it as an intrusion.  Again, I need to understand why this belief is any different than a belief that races should not mix when it comes to marriage.  Is there a difference and does it matter?
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 22,989
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
Again, I need to understand why this belief is any different than a belief that races should not mix when it comes to marriage.  Is there a difference and does it matter?


Dewey you may not get all your answers from those on this forum.  Some further research may need to be done by you on some of your queries independent from this forum.

Now my question to you is, relative to the thread title, will you be joining us at Chick-fil-a on August 1st or do you plan to boycott?  Which will it be?

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #17 
Do they have Chik Fil-a in Iran?  That is a theologically emphasized state where "the good book" determines law. Those who maintain a plantation mentality prosper there. Tongue firmly imbedded in cheek, at least partially.  As for attending a rally for a cause, excuse me but I'm absent.  The guy has a right to say whatever he thinks, and let the chips fall where they may as they affect him personally and his business capitalistically.  Ever see the societal-political signs in Pennsylvania put up by the pizza guy - made him famous in certain circles?       Frank

PS - Dewey: I don't think it matters until one looks at marriage as a sacrament.  Then there are already established "rules" created by religion.  Previously, as fhoenix pointed out, there was the plantation social and racial perspectives to deal with. The real perspectives are religious, personal, and legal (not to mention financial).  Choose your poison in this argument.  Until we as human beings learn to emphasize samenesses and  perceive differences as ONLY differences that are overshadowed by our very humanness - "I'm six feet tall and my friend is five feet eight inches" - we will have these problems of race and creed in a political, legal, social, and religious perspective discussion .  "The first platoon is the best platoon".

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
vol52

Registered:
Posts: 966
Reply with quote  #18 
Dewey,

Perhaps you can help me here.  You keep referring to the "anti-gay" organizations to which Chick-fil-a has contributed. Is the sole purpose of these organizations to project an "anti-gay philosophy, or is that just one of many stances they take, like fidelity to one's spouse, successful ways to raise children, etc?  Or do you call them "anti-gay" because they funnel money to politicians who are likeminded?  Have you checked these organizations to see the extent of their "anti-gayness?"  Do you think the purpose of these contrbutions is solely about defeating the gay agenda, or is it possible, the main intent is to stengthen the traditional family unit, most of which may have little or nothing to do with being "anti-gay?"

For instance, I sincerely doubt that the primary purpose of Fellowship of Christian Athletes is to push an "anti-gay" agenda.  Maybe I'm wrong.

Thanks in advance,

__________________
Steve Rhodes
masare

Registered:
Posts: 2,642
Reply with quote  #19 
I hate chicken!

Lovemesomesoftball

Registered:
Posts: 5,786
Reply with quote  #20 
Vol52,

The "anti-gay" organization terminology is something I heard many bring up outside of this discussion board. I don't think it is fair to give a negative spin if some of the organizations are something like the YMCA, Christian Network Channel etc.

People have to think for themselves. These type of terminologies often lead to flawed logic and baseless conclusions.

If I donated money to BET so there are more opportunities to see see people of color in various roles  does that mean I donated to an Anti-white organization.
bluedog

Registered:
Posts: 9,725
Reply with quote  #21 
"If I donated money to BET so there are more opportunities to see see people of color in various roles does that mean I donated to an Anti-white organization."

According to Dewey, yes!
vol52

Registered:
Posts: 966
Reply with quote  #22 
LMSS:  I totally agree.  I didn't say it, but to me "anti-gay" is the new "homophobic."  The term seems to be overused and too encompassing, at least in this instance.
_______________
Steve Rhodes
bluedog

Registered:
Posts: 9,725
Reply with quote  #23 
"Again, I need to understand why this belief is any different than a belief that races should not mix when it comes to marriage. Is there a difference and does it matter?"

Well Dewey, Biblically speaking, yes, it does matter....The Bible does not tell us not to inter-racially marry.....Race is not a theme in the Bible....However, the Bible does tell us that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice which is unacceptable to our Creator...  
GoHawks

Registered:
Posts: 483
Reply with quote  #24 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedog
"Again, I need to understand why this belief is any different than a belief that races should not mix when it comes to marriage. Is there a difference and does it matter?"

Well Dewey, Biblically speaking, yes, it does matter....The Bible does not tell us not to inter-racially marry.....Race is not a theme in the Bible....However, the Bible does tell us that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice which is unacceptable to our Creator...  


Tells us lots of things



This HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION! 
Everyone CHOOSES what to believe.

Thankfully, like inter-racial marriage, this will not be an issue 10 years from now (probably sooner).  Young people get it, most middle-aged people are getting it, and the old bigots who'll never get it are dying off.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #25 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vol52
Dewey,

Perhaps you can help me here.  You keep referring to the "anti-gay" organizations to which Chick-fil-a has contributed. __________________
Steve Rhodes


vol52 - A doctor appt delayed my response.  My apologies.  Let me say two things.  One, if you read my post I made a concerted effort not to say "anti-gay" but to use organizations that have same sex marriage concerns or, as I put it, anti same sex marriage positions.  It's important to me that you know "anti-gay" is not a term I used in this particular debate.  Secondly, I admit to knowing very little regarding this Chik-fil-A controversy, other than reading an article that said they were contributing money to some organizations that are working diligently to prevent same sex marriage, and if the Company has done nothing at all to inhibit the advancement of same sex marriage, then I have no idea why folks find the need to hold them accountable.  However, it appears they've taken a public stance on the issue and may have put their money where there mouth is.  If that's not the case, then this is much ado about nothing.  My only goal here was to try and use some analogies to explain the perspective of those who feel their rights are being denied and how they may dispute the term "belief" as opposed to an "intrusion" as it relates to this issue.  Again I ask, would it be a belief or an intrusion of individual's rights to be against interracial marriage?  Many would call it an intrusion not unlike what many in both the general and gay community apparently feel today.

PS:  I see many chimed in on the term "anti-gay" before I had a chance to reply.  I repeat I did not nor would not use such a term in this particular discussion.

jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,071
Reply with quote  #26 
Quote:
Originally Posted by keepinitreal
  If you are not ready to admit that children are better off in a traditional marriage then I can't help you understand either.  If gays want to marry and then sign off on not raising children I would be all for it.  I guess children growing up with 2 gay men would get a bonus of having 2 fathers.


Holy sh!t, you did not just say that.  Did you seriously just say that?  REALLY, this is what the world has come to that you have to say this outloud?

Screw traditional marriage.  Traditional marriage is what has forced many cultures into selling their daughters off to a male of their choosing.  Traditional marriage is what allowed many biblical figures to sleep with others outside their marriage.  Traditional marriage is what allow my mother-in-law to be physically abused by her father ever day of her childhood life while her mother sat there and knowingly let it happen.  She was taken to the hospital 15 times before she was 18 and moved 3,000 miles away from him as soon as she turned 18 just to get away from the situation (and because of that she is the only one of the 4 to still be alive after 42).  She still walks around today with 2 fully unhealed ribs because of a dresser being shoved into her stomach.  It wasn't just her, it happened to her 3 siblings as well ... up to the point of including her sister dying at 21 weighing only 84 lbs, because her traditional parents continuously told her she was too fat and needed to lose weight (including her mother putting her on a lifesaver diet).  It's all good though, because they were a good Episcopalian family rooted in a traditional marriage.  That's the traditional marriage that this country has supported, yet you are telling me that denying good people the rights to raise children based on sexual orientation would be best so we can keep that view of traditional marriage alive.

Grow the h$ll up and realize that great kids can come from all different parenting situations, and horrible children can come from the ideal situation ... lest we look any further than the recent Colorado tragedy.
GrizzlyFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,049
Reply with quote  #27 
......and you tell me that America is not in a moral decline.
When good moral people stand up for their morals and are publicly rebuked by two Mayors, we have really fallen as a nation.

__________________
If Obamacare is such a good thing, why did he have to lie about it to get it passed?
vol52

Registered:
Posts: 966
Reply with quote  #28 
Thanks, Dewey.  I think the "anti-gay" term was rampant on all the sites I googled trying to determine who these organizations are.  My apologies for lumping you in with them. A personal opinion should not necessarily be considered an intrusion.  Financially supporting an entity might be considered an intrusion. Is that necessarily bad in all cases?

Looking at this from the other perspective, can promoting "gay marriage" be considered an intrusion on "traditional marriage?"

P.S.  Having just read jayrot's thoughts, let me define "traditional marriage" as simply between a man and a woman, excluding all the evils that this type of union presumes to entail, at least in his world (and I am not diminishing the horror of the examples that he lists).
___________________
Steve Rhodes
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,071
Reply with quote  #29 
As far as this stupid situation about Chick-fil-a, I'll copy/paste one of my classmate's opinions as it very closely matches my opinion:

http://bohemianbowmans.com/dear-chick-fil-a-i-just-want-to-eat-more-chicken/

Note they are a very traditional marriage.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #30 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vol52
Thanks, Dewey.  I think the "anti-gay" term was rampant on all the sites I googled trying to determine who these organizations are.  My apologies for lumping you in with them. A personal opinion should not necessarily be considered an intrusion.  Financially supporting an entity might be considered an intrusion. Is that necessarily bad in all cases?

Looking at this from the other perspective, can promoting "gay marriage" be considered an intrusion on "traditional marriage?"
___________________
Steve Rhodes


Thanks Steve.  If I could see any way traditional marriage, (I'm in one so I hope I would notice), was harmed by same sex marriage, you'd probably win my support.  Like my interracial marriage and religion examples, there will be a day when same sex marriage is completely acceptable and people will look back and reflect how there were organizations that worked hard to prevent what they strongly and correctly believed were their individual rights.  Many think that day has come and are offended they must continue to fight various entities thus delaying the same success previously won by those who wanted to practice a particular religion or marry a particular person.  I suppose they wonder how long is this going to take?
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.