My local Chik-Fil-A sold out of chicken as of 5:30 this evening

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

This Chik Fil-A battle between Christians vs everyone else is kind of funny. Personally, I think supporting inequality is an extremely Un-American trait, and I highly doubt Jesus was as discriminatory as the church that was set up in his name is nowadays... but this is a free country and everyone is welcome to their own opinion. My opinion is that Chik Fil-A has a decent Spicy Chicken sandwich. I'm not going to eat there to support a church... and I am not going to boycott because I really do believe in freedom of speech. I'm going to enjoy some chicken every once in a blue moon, and thats about it.

and why you're a part of the vast-vast majority I spoke of.

Mayor Emanuel is part of the small-small minority.

I doubt a businessman who closes Sundays, despite the loss in profits, wrong or right has a wee bit more dediction to his principals than a politician anyday!

[pointman]

The message that should be drawn from this mess is one to the ultra liberals like Emanuel and NYC mayoral wannabe Christine Quinn who demanded that NYC terminate its lease with Chik-Fil-A. While I and many disagree with Cathy's stupid position, the bigger issue is the liberal lack of tolerance for dissent of their position. Just because Cathy is an a-hole, does not mean that he can be penalized for his position.

It amazes me how quick liberals want to deny the first amendment rights of those who oppose their position. Just because you don't like the content of Fox news does not mean that you have a right to shut them down. Even Obama doesn't get that.

Hopefully the liberals will learn a lesson from this regarding their lack of tolerance for dissent, though, I sure won't be holding my breath.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

and why you're a part of the vast-vast majority I spoke of.

Mayor Emanuel is part of the small-small minority.

I doubt a businessman who closes Sundays, despite the loss in profits, wrong or right has a wee bit more dediction to his principals than a politician anyday!

Emaneul had to have known it is Un-constitutional to not allow stores because they are religious based. He was an idiot to have stated that... and the majority of liberals i have talked to do not support Emaneuls position at all.

Mike Huckabee, is more dangerous, IMO, than Rahm. This Far Right Religious platform of pushing InEquality is very very dangerous, and really really sad.

Don't support gay marriage? Well I have news for you, you will not be forced to become gay. Your life wont change one bit. Yet I am forced to tolerate the hatred towards gays and lesbians by not having equal rights.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Emaneul had to have known it is Un-constitutional to not allow stores because they are religious based. He was an idiot to have stated that... and the majority of liberals i have talked to do not support Emaneuls position at all.

Mike Huckabee, is more dangerous, IMO, than Rahm. This Far Right Religious platform of pushing InEquality is very very dangerous, and really really sad.

Don't support gay marriage? Well I have news for you, you will not be forced to become gay. Your life wont change one bit. Yet I am forced to tolerate the hatred towards gays and lesbians by not having equal rights.

Emanuel doesn't believe in the constitution and neither does Obama. Huckabee is a Howard Stern of conservatism and likely has visted a glory hole or two in his lifetime.

Which brings me back to an effective protest/statement gays can make by filming and identifying those hypocrites who say they are against gay marriage but visit an adult book store sticking their thing thru a hole.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Emanuel doesn't believe in the constitution and neither does Obama. Huckabee is a Howard Stern of conservatism and likely has visted a glory hole or two in his lifetime.

Which brings me back to an effective protest/statement gays can make by filming and identifying those hypocrites who say they are against gay marriage but visit an adult book store sticking their thing thru a hole.

That was such an insult towards Howard Stern!

I have a much better idea. Why don't all 50 states and the Federal Government just include same-sex couples in their "definition" of marriage... and all of this bickering can stop and people can move on with their lives, with equal rights and hopefully happiness.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

That was such an insult towards Howard Stern!

I have a much better idea. Why don't all 50 states and the Federal Government just include same-sex couples in their "definition" of marriage... and all of this bickering can stop and people can move on with their lives, with equal rights and hopefully happiness.

I agree and would go further and take all of government (State and Fed) out of marriage including the tax code. It's discriminatory towards singles and ugly people who have a hard time finding a mate.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I agree and would go further and take all of government (State and Fed) out of marriage including the tax code. It's discriminatory towards singles and ugly people who have a hard time finding a mate.

I am 100% fine with the government getting out of the marriage business.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I am 100% fine with the government getting out of the marriage business.

You name a business, ANY business and I'm fine with it.

[DaTruth]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

That was such an insult towards Howard Stern!

I have a much better idea. Why don't all 50 states and the Federal Government just include same-sex couples in their "definition" of marriage... and all of this bickering can stop and people can move on with their lives, with equal rights and hopefully happiness.

Would most same-sex couples be satisfied with civil unions creating the same rights and obligations that are found in traditional marriages and that are recognized in all states? It would be a marriage, short the name. I know that some argue that it won't be truly equal rights for same-sex couples until they can marry, but what difference does it really make if the same-sex coupling is called a civil union instead of a marriage, at least in legal terms. I sometimes wonder if the battle over same-sex marriages is as much about acceptance as it is about equal rights.

[skippy3481]

kev,
You can't own a franchise from cfa. Single,married,glbt, you work for them regardless. Smart people they are....

[GPK]

Originally Posted by skippy3481

kev,
You can't own a franchise from cfa. Single,married,glbt, you work for them regardless. Smart people they are....

You would know better than me, obviously. But the guy I know affiliated with 2 of them here in Roanoke is listed as the "Owner/Operator"? Difference?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by DaTruth

Would most same-sex couples be satisfied with civil unions creating the same rights and obligations that are found in traditional marriages and that are recognized in all states? It would be a marriage, short the name. I know that some argue that it won't be truly equal rights for same-sex couples until they can marry, but what difference does it really make if the same-sex coupling is called a civil union instead of a marriage, at least in legal terms. I sometimes wonder if the battle over same-sex marriages is as much about acceptance as it is about equal rights.

Personally, I think the gov should throw the "marriage" out. If you want to be legally committed, like you said, same rights and obligations, through the government, then call it a civil union. If marriage is a religious term.. let it up to religious people who want that word to go have their church ceramony. Why do agnostic or athiests have to use the religous term "marriage"?

It would be the most simple and fair solution. Which means it's guaranteed to not happen!


I was hungry for chick fi a yesterday, and stopped on the way back from visiting my little buddy in the Pediatric ICU in Gainseville. Right before I got up to the drive thru window, a hose blew in my car and antifreeze spilled everywhere, steam pouring from the hood. I couldnt wait to pick up the spicy chicken sammich, so I pulled around to the parking lot and shut my car off. While a friend helped me fix the car, the owner of the G-ville Chick Fil - A was pretty awesome, gave me a free meal and made sure everything was alright with my car. It was pretty cool, he seems to be a great guy.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Personally, I think the gov should throw the "marriage" out. If you want to be legally committed, like you said, same rights and obligations, through the government, then call it a civil union. If marriage is a religious term.. let it up to religious people who want that word to go have their church ceramony. Why do agnostic or athiests have to use the religous term "marriage"?

It would be the most simple and fair solution. Which means it's guaranteed to not happen!


I was hungry for chick fi a yesterday, and stopped on the way back from visiting my little buddy in the Pediatric ICU in Gainseville. Right before I got up to the drive thru window, a hose blew in my car and antifreeze spilled everywhere, steam pouring from the hood. I couldnt wait to pick up the spicy chicken sammich, so I pulled around to the parking lot and shut my car off. While a friend helped me fix the car, the owner of the G-ville Chick Fil - A was pretty awesome, gave me a free meal and made sure everything was alright with my car. It was pretty cool, he seems to be a great guy.

Nice story..Hope your buddy is doing well..

Had a similar thing happen couple years ago on way to Durham, the intake manifold blew fortunately near an exit and McDonalds..Pulled into their lot with steam and water flying everywhere...the mgr called the cops and said a terrorist tried to blow up his joint.....
Actually a Good Samaritan came along and lead me to a local garage and left the car and was fixed next day...still have the guys name and number..