Recently, there were some people angry that the president of a Christian company might hold Christian views on social issues, and then millions and millions of people bought his chicken sandwiches to show their support for what he believes. The following is a short discourse between two Masters of their respective fields, Arkansas historian Adam Miller (MBA, pictured left; ladies, he is single) and director Stephen Clements (MA Political Science; ladies, he is not) concerning the issue. Enjoy the reality check. If you're easily offended, stop reading. Seriously, we'll probably make you cry.
Adam - Check it - my boss and another employee were bickering about Chick-Fil-A today. Was in and out of the office so I only caught part of the conversation. Apparently panties are in a wad over Chick a flick donating to "hate groups." After trolling thru Google I finally found Schindler's List of said hate groups, so designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Included amongst these were "Focus on the Family," the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and Exodus International. Discretion is the better part of valor, so I mentioned only that a real hate group would break windows and drag homosexuals out of their houses during the night, and that a Republican newspaper once called Federalist John Adams "a hermaphrodite," confirmed that that was indeed hate speech, and stated that there's nothing new under the sun, just eat wherever you like.
Your thoughts? Concerns? This is the first I've heard of Chick a flick contributions to hate groups. And by hate groups I mean whatever groups were compiled on that list on HuffPo that are decidedly unfabulous enough to deserve their scorn. Saying that the SPLC can go eat a dick is unlikely to sway anyone's opinion, and may seem overly homophobic, thus is detrimental to my argument. I don't recall Focus On The Family recreating Kristallnacht and forcing gays into churches at the point of a gun, either.
Stephen - The SPLC is a front group for socialist, atheist agitators, and I have seen them in action before. If you want to know what side a person with any morals or love of human freedom should support, just join whoever the SPLC is bad-mouthing.
Your elucidation of what "hate" actually looks like brings an incredibly needed reality check for this topic, because the people accusing CFA of "hate" must have no idea what it really is. I would also add that "not endorsing something" does not equal "hating something", and the slander that these morons cast about like its nothing proves how shallow and desperate they've gotten. Remember, the Democrat party (their federal surrogate) is losing money and power hand over fist, and the people of this country repeatedly reject the endorsement of their defining issue.
For the people who aren't gay and support gay marriage, I say this: you always laugh at me when I point out that once marriage becomes open for redefinition, there is no logical or legal reason to stop polygamy, marrying animals, or marrying children. So long as "consenting parties" is the operative mechanism, anything an be argued to have the ability to consent. So if you don't want all these groups (who really exist) to be able to marry how they want to, you're now a bigot. Congratulations!
To the gays who want the right to marry: nobody is denying you the same rights we all have, so shut your cock-holster/clam-shucker. And what does it say about you and your worth as a human being that you define yourself solely by how you like to get off? Shallow and worthless? Maybe so. Get a hobby. And why are you the only group who can't have a parade with clothes on?!
Adam - BTW you needn't even bring animals or children into it - just posit whether it would be acceptable for one consenting adult to marry his/her mother. Or both mothers if they live in Vermont. I sometimes wonder if Alexander the Great would laugh at the attempt to redefine "marriage."
BTWBTW I've shucked a few clams in my time, never considered the name. Now it's tattooed in my brain, so thanks for that.
Adam - Check it - my boss and another employee were bickering about Chick-Fil-A today. Was in and out of the office so I only caught part of the conversation. Apparently panties are in a wad over Chick a flick donating to "hate groups." After trolling thru Google I finally found Schindler's List of said hate groups, so designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Included amongst these were "Focus on the Family," the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and Exodus International. Discretion is the better part of valor, so I mentioned only that a real hate group would break windows and drag homosexuals out of their houses during the night, and that a Republican newspaper once called Federalist John Adams "a hermaphrodite," confirmed that that was indeed hate speech, and stated that there's nothing new under the sun, just eat wherever you like.
Your thoughts? Concerns? This is the first I've heard of Chick a flick contributions to hate groups. And by hate groups I mean whatever groups were compiled on that list on HuffPo that are decidedly unfabulous enough to deserve their scorn. Saying that the SPLC can go eat a dick is unlikely to sway anyone's opinion, and may seem overly homophobic, thus is detrimental to my argument. I don't recall Focus On The Family recreating Kristallnacht and forcing gays into churches at the point of a gun, either.
Stephen - The SPLC is a front group for socialist, atheist agitators, and I have seen them in action before. If you want to know what side a person with any morals or love of human freedom should support, just join whoever the SPLC is bad-mouthing.
Your elucidation of what "hate" actually looks like brings an incredibly needed reality check for this topic, because the people accusing CFA of "hate" must have no idea what it really is. I would also add that "not endorsing something" does not equal "hating something", and the slander that these morons cast about like its nothing proves how shallow and desperate they've gotten. Remember, the Democrat party (their federal surrogate) is losing money and power hand over fist, and the people of this country repeatedly reject the endorsement of their defining issue.
For the people who aren't gay and support gay marriage, I say this: you always laugh at me when I point out that once marriage becomes open for redefinition, there is no logical or legal reason to stop polygamy, marrying animals, or marrying children. So long as "consenting parties" is the operative mechanism, anything an be argued to have the ability to consent. So if you don't want all these groups (who really exist) to be able to marry how they want to, you're now a bigot. Congratulations!
To the gays who want the right to marry: nobody is denying you the same rights we all have, so shut your cock-holster/clam-shucker. And what does it say about you and your worth as a human being that you define yourself solely by how you like to get off? Shallow and worthless? Maybe so. Get a hobby. And why are you the only group who can't have a parade with clothes on?!
Adam - BTW you needn't even bring animals or children into it - just posit whether it would be acceptable for one consenting adult to marry his/her mother. Or both mothers if they live in Vermont. I sometimes wonder if Alexander the Great would laugh at the attempt to redefine "marriage."
BTWBTW I've shucked a few clams in my time, never considered the name. Now it's tattooed in my brain, so thanks for that.