Chick-fil-a

[HarryPotter]

lol

[Arems87e]

The tide of support for same-sex marriage is rising, and yes - if you have paid attention to the news at all, it does matter or CFA wouldn't have backstepped their position. And none of this controversy would be there if it didn't matter. But people care if others want to poop on other's civil rights - even if bigots want to write it off as self-righteousness.

People should just say, "they made their stand and now have to deal with it."

But there's people like Farbin who want to protect prejudice from social recoil.

Since the support for same sex marriage is rising that you claim, why is it then that whenever it's put up for ballot, it's always been voted down; even in the gay state of California. Majority of the country wants to leave the gays alone so they could be with whomever they want to. If an independent establishment doesn't shear your social view, then boycott, don't patronize the place and protest. It's going to have a negative effect on some people def. or it might bring new customers to the place, then move on.

You're so quick to calling people names such as BIGOT, ignorant and shit, and you are nothing but that yourself. After almost 30 pages of this discussion you're still yet to change a single mind. Both sides have achieve nothing but make each side vehemently adhere to their believe, which has been the case with me.

[bernzpeed]

[2761377]

They no longer are going to be doing something that they have done = backstep. They said they knew it wouldn't be popular but oh well, then said OH SHIT.

well, that's a letdown- i expected more from mr scholarly rectitude than a mealy-mouth evasion.

in spite of your wishful prognostications the fact that a solid majority of Americans have consistently voted against you on the issue shows that not anythime soon will one of the 1600 close.

good luck with your angst.

[rwh11385]

Since the support for same sex marriage is rising that you claim, why is it then that whenever it's put up for ballot, it's always been voted down; even in the gay state of California. Majority of the country wants to leave the gays alone so they could be with whomever they want to. If an independent establishment doesn't shear your social view, then boycott, don't patronize the place and protest. It's going to have a negative effect on some people def. or it might bring new customers to the place, then move on.

You're so quick to calling people names such as BIGOT, ignorant and shit, and you are nothing but that yourself. After almost 30 pages of this discussion you're still yet to change a single mind. Both sides have achieve nothing but make each side vehemently adhere to their believe, which has been the case with me.

Whenever it's on the ballot, it's a proposition or amendment that people are doing to limit other's rights. And even if it is a "gay state", there are still a lot of people who want to shit on gays.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Catholics-Mormons-allied-to-pass-Prop-8-3185965.php

-- 84 percent of those who attend church weekly voted yes.
-- 81 percent of white evangelicals voted yes.
-- 65 percent of white Protestants voted yes.
-- 64 percent of Catholics voted yes. Catholics accounted for 30 percent of all voters.

Catholic support increased from 44 percent to 64 percent - a jump that accounted for 6 percent of the total California electorate and equivalent to the state's entire African American population combined.

The shift in Catholics alone more than accounted for Prop. 8's 5 percent margin of victory.

How can a company shear my social view?


And you're wrong, I changed, or at least modified, one mind. Maybe you should open yours.

Page 9:

I totally see eye to eye with you, with the fact that you don't want to defend some one's willful actions, as compared to that of someone who was born with a "unique/ strange/ damaged/ abnormal" brain make up. And see, while I agree with that, I see it in the same light as I would another person with a similar issue in the way the brain is contracted, i.e. a serial killer, sadistic teenager, strongly depressed individual etc etc. In that, while it is something they cannot necessarily help, it is still something that I find morally, naturally and fundamentally wrong. And in the same way that the aforementioned groups of people need help and counseling, so too, I believe do those "born" gay. Again, that is my opinion, and not something I plan to, or want to force onto to somebody. I understand others viewpoints, and their world views. And I totally understand that you or anyone else may find it disgusting that I find gays/ lesbians wrong, especially the right to marriage, but that is simply my opinion.

Page 21:

While I still do not agree with homosexuality in a numerous amount of ways, it seems hypocritical to consider them equal, and to treat them the same etc etc, yet deny them a simple right like marriage, or any sort of right in this kind of sense. Especially when it does nothing but create controversy on both sides of the issue. And although this country has many seemingly theistic elements in its Constitution and laws, the fact that I don't necessarily agree with homosexuality, there is nothing that explicitly denies that freedom from a political perspective.

See, I'm not close minded or bigoted, it just takes personal research to convince me :D

[frankenbeemer]

If the cake shop refused to make cakes for African Americans for MLK day, would you expect people to protest? Would then it be alright? Is it just because it's the gays that are complaining do you find issue?

And for a business, being anti-gay marriage in Colorado is MORONIC. That'd be like someone in ID or UT being anti-Mormon.

It depends. I would not protest a business which refused to make MLK cakes if they refused because they believe MLK does not deserve a holiday. They may believe that other historical figures who do not have a holiday are more deserving than MLK. I would not feel the same if the reason was based on race.

As an aside, I don't think the population of Colorado is in homogeneous agreement enough to prevent the last sentence from being illogical, if not hyperbolic.

I usually agree with mrsleeve, but I am convinced that hetero or homo is no more a choice than race. That leads me to question myself. Would I applaud the City of Boston if they actively opposed the KKK opening a chicken sandwich shop there? What if they did not discriminate in their hiring and service, yet actively supported legislation to reintroduce segregation?

[Arems87e]

Congratulations! Seems like the only demographic that came out to vote were Evangelicals

[rwh11385]

well, that's a letdown- i expected more from mr scholarly rectitude than a mealy-mouth evasion.

in spite of your wishful prognostications the fact that a solid majority of Americans have consistently voted against you on the issue shows that not anythime soon will one of the 1600 close.

good luck with your angst.

Hmmm, was is this? Where exactly is your point?


I wasn't aware that the majority of Americans have ever voted about same-sex marriage, let alone several times.

[FunfGan]

I usually agree with mrsleeve, but I am convinced that hetero or homo is no more a choice than race. That leads me to question myself. Would I applaud the City of Boston if they actively opposed the KKK opening a chicken sandwich shop there? What if they did not discriminate in their hiring and service, yet actively supported legislation to reintroduce segregation?

I simply applaud CFA for owning up to their stands. But that's all I have to say on that, last time I talked on this issue I was accused of supporting the clan

[Arems87e]

Hmmm, was is this? Where exactly is your point?


I wasn't aware that the majority of Americans have ever voted about same-sex marriage, let alone several times.

Of course you're not aware cause like I said earlier, whenever it's been put on the ballot the people spoke. But if the result had been the other way, I'm pretty sure you'll be aware.

[frankenbeemer]

Same-sex couples seeking marriage rights are obviously determined to stay together, or they wouldn't be trying to get married. So why make their lives more difficult? Why pass laws that will prevent them from being able to file income taxes jointly, or visit each other in the hospital, or inherit one another's property?

[rwh11385]

Congratulations! Seems like the only demographic that came out to vote were Evangelicals

California opinion:


National:

http://www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1137a2GayMarriage.pdf

Strong public support for same-sex marriage exceeds strong opposition by a significant margin for the first time in ABC News/Washington Post polls, and African-Americans have moved more in favor, perhaps taking their lead from Barack Obama on the issue.

Overall, 53 percent of Americans say gay marriage should be legal, steady the past year but up from 36 percent in just 2006. Thirty-nine percent “strongly” support it, while 32 percent are strongly opposed – the first time strong sentiment has tilted positive. Six years ago, by contrast, strong views on the issue were negative by a broad 27-point margin.

Another result shows increasing exposure: Seventy-one percent of Americans now say they have a friend, family member or acquaintance who’s gay, up from 59 percent in 1998. People who know someone who’s gay are 20 points more likely than others to support gay marriage

Republicans and conservatives oppose gay marriage by more than 2-1, evangelical white Protestants by more than 3-1. While Democrats support it by more than 2-1, the balance is tipped, as is often the case, by independents: Fifty-eight percent support legalizing gay marriage; 43 percent do so strongly.

Is it fair for a nation founded on "separation of church and state" to have its marriage laws controlled by religious minorities?

[rwh11385]

Of course you're not aware cause like I said earlier, whenever it's been put on the ballot the people spoke. But if the result had been the other way, I'm pretty sure you'll be aware.

But has it been put on a ballot that the majority of Americans voted on? (Let alone enough times to be consistent.) Your statement was inaccurate because the majority of Americans haven't voted on a ballot about same-sex marriage at all - simply individual states.

The reason why votes about same-sex marriage are different from opinion is that where there is support in a state, it comes through the legislative branch or judicial, not a ballot. Ballots are used for hateful people who strive to attack other's civil rights.

I will give you that focusing on actions like Prop 8 or NC's amendment was clever to avoid the discussion of America's general sentiments and focusing instead on only the states in which there was a strong opposition about the freedoms of others - enough to bring about a veto referendum. But that doesn't mean it proves anything other than there are concentrations of people who want to eliminate civil rights for their own comfort. Looking to votes that happened in states looking to shut down same-sex marriage is not a fair nor accurate assessment of overall US support or opposition.

[Arems87e]

You can post thousands of favorable polls that's been taken from the beginning of time. Dude the only poll that matters is the one on election day. Take a 1000 people and ask them what they think of same-sex marriage and few months later put ballot in front of them , people's mind change when they're confronted with an actual ballot.

btw those poll sample you posting are biased. Anyone can ask questions to make a poll result favor their agenda. Sorta like me expecting you to believe a poll sample taken by the Catholic Church. I'm not here to argue with you to change your views, but I do wish you the best of luck on your mission.

[rwh11385]

You can post thousands of favorable polls that's been taken from the beginning of time. Dude the only poll that matters is the one on election day. Take a 1000 people and ask them what they think of same-sex marriage and few months later put ballot in front of them , people's mind change when they're confronted with an actual ballot.

btw those poll sample you posting are biased. Anyone can ask questions to make a poll result favor their agenda. Sorta like me expecting you to believe a poll sample taken by the Catholic Church. I'm not here to argue with you to change your views, but I do wish you the best of luck on your mission.

Again, selection bias of only choosing to look at states who worked hard to veto same-sex marriage or go out of their way to oppose it.

People's minds change when a shit ton of money and effort is spent on convincing them of something prior to an election. WHY DO YOU THINK CAMPAIGNS SPEND SO MUCH?!?

But as much as you want to ignore the drastic change in public opinion over the recent years, it doesn't make them untrue... just makes you ignorant.

So you don't like the few polls I posted... WHAT ABOUT IF I POST ALL THE POLLS?

http://pollingreport.com/civil.htm

Enjoy.