Chick-fil-a

[Kershaw]

lolol, i know we are really heated right now, but im pretty sure that was a joke.

and i should have clarified, "sadly, i dont think funfgan is a minority."

[kronus]

My point was that we can't, because legislating away people you don't like should not be an option in a functional democracy. Come on guys.

[Kershaw]

sadly, i dont think so. but im hoping one day soon most people will put bigotry in their past.

relevant: easy rider. what a great movie.

[rwh11385]

It bothers me that people with such bigotry exist. Can we make it illegal to have opinions like that?

Me too.


I don't think you can make ignorance or bigotry illegal, you can only hope they exit society through attrition and they don't train their offspring with Glenn Beck and Rush as well as homeschooling. People like FunfGan drag down society, but at least they are the minority these days.

[kronus]

Maybe it "bothers them". Kinda like how the concept of interracial marriage bothered people before it was legalized, accepted, and gotten over.

It bothers me that people with such bigotry exist. Can we make it illegal to have opinions like that?

[kronus]

That's not my point, I'm not using it in that sort of phrasing, such as the wickipedia page said, the people were separate but equal. Not simply a word to describe something. Again, men and women are separate but equal entities, are they not?

You're missing the point. After a lot of years of segregation (and also the whole apartheid thing in South Africa) and generally shitty times, "separate but equal" has come to be know as a pretty stupid idea that doesn't work in any situation it's applied to.

[rwh11385]

Whose happiness does it invade? Does it invade your happiness? Why does it invade your happiness? Sounds like a personal problem.

Maybe it "bothers them". Kinda like how the concept of interracial marriage bothered people before it was legalized, accepted, and gotten over.

[Kershaw]

whose happiness does it invade? Does it invade your happiness? Why does it invade your happiness?

ERMAHGERD, ERT ERNVERDERS MAH HERPERNERS BERCERS I CERNT STERP THERNKIN ERBERT TW MAHN SERXIN. I THERNK ERBERT THERS ERL DA TERM.

[kronus]

here's the issue, their pursuit of happiness invades many peoples happiness, so who is more correct? That is a question to seriously consider.

Whose happiness does it invade? Does it invade your happiness? Why does it invade your happiness? Sounds like a personal problem.

To quote our resident conservatives speaking about tax cuts and poor people, the right to "pursue happiness" does not entitle Americans to happiness. It entitles them to have an equal footing from which to pursue happiness.

Here's some things that the civil contract of marriage currently gets you in the states: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_..._United_States

[Kershaw]

you think im being semi-respectful? lol. how's this: stop being so hateful, bigoted, and dumb.

and ffs, go to college.

[rwh11385]

A word that in US history, while not defined in the US constitution, has been used to describe a union between man and woman. And seriously, I keep wanting take what you're saying seriously, but then you just plain attack me, making me question your knowledge. Thankfully Kershaw is here to answer semi respectfully. And here's the issue, their pursuit of happiness invades many peoples happiness, so who is more correct? That is a question to seriously consider.

How many words have colloquially described former slaves and used to deny them their civil rights? Did that make those things correct - because people thought that they were inferior or not worthy of equal rights??

AND HOW DOES TWO MEN MARRYING INVADE ANYONE ELSE's HAPPINESS??

The most correct thing is equal civil rights. Letting women vote did not reduce your ability to vote. But it may have upset some bigoted men who didn't think it was right, or wanted to keep tradition.

[FunfGan]

no, you really didnt.

i find it hilarious that you have heard the phrase "separate but equal" enough times in pop culture to be aware of the phrase, but you didnt actually know what it meant. Brown vs Board of Education is an incredibly important case to our history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal

That's not my point, I'm not using it in that sort of phrasing, such as the wickipedia page said, the people were separate but equal. Not simply a word to describe something. Again, men and women are separate but equal entities, are they not?

[FunfGan]

You're talking about a word. A word that TO YOU means one thing and that your personal comfort shall come before another man's pursuit of happiness. What a hateful selfish person you are. And one who is poor at answering questions:

A word that in US history, while not defined in the US constitution, has been used to describe a union between man and woman. And seriously, I keep wanting take what you're saying seriously, but then you just plain attack me, making me question your knowledge. Thankfully Kershaw is here to answer semi respectfully. And here's the issue, their pursuit of happiness invades many peoples happiness, so who is more correct? That is a question to seriously consider.

[Kershaw]

Nope, more like, "oh uh, somebody had a decent high school education".

no, you really didnt.

i find it hilarious that you have heard the phrase "separate but equal" enough times in pop culture to be aware of the phrase, but you didnt actually know what it meant. Brown vs Board of Education is an incredibly important case to our history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal

[mar1t1me]

OK....after wading through this thread I will simply say...

RE: Chick-Fil-A......I've been a customer since 1964 when I could eat solid food. The original Dwarf House All-Nite Diner was a few miles from home. They weren't nearly as Jesusy then, or at least didn't flaunt it.

Now, I still love the food, but now they play Jesus music. I gotta say, it feels somehow unsacred to be taking a shit in their bathroom while "praise music" is playing......hehe

So on to gay marriage.....yes gays should be able to marry. As Jefferson might have said...."it neither breaks my leg, nor picks my pocket". Marriage is, in the US, a civil contract, not a religious one regardless of how much the religious people stomp their feet and grumble. I say "don't want a gay marriage? Then don't have one!". There are enough other, more pressing social issues with which to deal with....