You know what, #%@! Chick-Fil-A!

[milestailsprowe]

What kinda of stupidness are you trying to say. That people are now gonna marry animals and toasters?

This is about 2 Consent Adults making a decisions that allows for them to feel closer and get the benefits they sometime need for certain situations. A toaster can not allow and animal can not give consent because they can not communicate with Man.

Whats is with this stupidness. Why is everyone so upset over a CEO following their religion. 4 years ago if you were with gay marriage you were considering by the general population gay or related to someone gay. Now all of a sudden everyone is accepting the LGBT communtiy. Fickle people the Americans are.

 

[futuremd]

 

What kinda of stupidness are you trying to say. That people are now gonna marry animals and toasters?

This is about 2 Consent Adults making a decisions that allows for them to feel closer and get the benefits they sometime need for certain situations. A toaster can not allow and animal can not give consent because they can not communicate with Man

Ladies and Gentlemen, exhibit A: Someone who did not read the images.

The images are meant to debunk the notion held by many (see: Rick Santorum http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/05/rick-santorum-homosexuality-man-on-dog_n_1187103.html) that gay marriage leads to a slippery slope.

Whats is with this stupidness. Why is everyone so upset over a CEO following their religion. 4 years ago if you were with gay marriage you were considering by the general population gay or related to someone gay. Now all of a sudden everyone is accepting the LGBT communtiy. Fickle people the Americans are. 

No one cares about the CEO, its all about the company's stance and public donations of anti-gay politically active groups. 

 

[ninjahood]

one of da MAIN pillars that gay supporters lean on as a pro gay marriage argument is "2 consenting adults" ill tell you what, i'd be FOR gay marriage if it meant that

people who wanna practice incest, be in polygamist relationships, or major in a career of prostitution can also be anointed with da same amount of rights under da constitution.

lets just COMPLETELY rip da under pinnings of this "moral driven" society. da hell with that.

 

[tr1ll]

No one cares about the CEO, its all about the company's stance and public donations of anti-gay politically active groups. 

So what, exactly, are these anti-gay groups actually doing to gay people?

 

[milestailsprowe]

Ladies and Gentlemen, exhibit A: Someone who did not read the images.

The images are meant to debunk the notion held by many (see: Rick Santorum http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/05/rick-santorum-homosexuality-man-on-dog_n_1187103.html) that gay marriage leads to a slippery slope.


No one cares about the CEO, its all about the company's stance and public donations of anti-gay politically active groups. 

I got caught up in the banner saying "If we legalize gay marriage it will open the door to all sort of ridiculous things". If its about the donations then there are alot of corporations we should be outing for that too.

 

[essential1]

one of da THE MAIN pillars that gay supporters lean on as a pro gay marriage argument is "2 consenting adults" ill tell you what, i'd be FOR gay marriage if it meant that

people who wanna practice incest, be in polygamist relationships, or major in a career of prostitution can also be anointed with da THE same amount of rights under da THE constitution.

lets just COMPLETELY rip da THE under pinnings of this "moral driven" society. da THE hell with that.

Wait a prostitute can't marry? Because we're talking about marriage right now.

Incest is not going to be allowed ever because of the proven harm due to those with similar DNA reproducing.

Polygamy is throughout the bible.. So if our moral driven society is based on Christian Teachings which are the biggest "evidence" used by anti-gay groups to say Gay Marriage shouldn't be allowed, I guess Polygamy should be allowed now shouldn't it.

Also marriage is not part of the constitution. State constitutions, Yes. The Constitution of the United States it isn't part of it.

Once again... Swimming in knowledge Ninjahood

 

[dwalk31]

Redifining marriage does however open the door to say...incest and polygamy marriage (which currently aren't legal) Are those individuals also being deprived of there civil rights? Should a man be able to marry his adult sister, his brother? Should someone be allowed 10 wives or 10 husbands? I believe those are the more realistic "open the door" ideas... BUT that is besides the point. Chick fil-A has a right to their opinion. If the company was not serving gays I would understand the "outrage" but clearly their stance on marriage or campaigns they support shouldn't have been a shocker. People are saying the company is anti-gay which is an exaggeration. Anti-gay marriage/ redifining marriage in general is more like it. They still happily serve all their customers and treat them with respect. Regardless of orientation.

 

[futuremd]

one of da MAIN pillars that gay supporters lean on as a pro gay marriage argument is "2 consenting adults" ill tell you what, i'd be FOR gay marriage if it meant that

people who wanna practice incest, be in polygamist relationships, or major in a career of prostitution can also be anointed with da same amount of rights under da constitution.

I actually don't mind if CONSENTING adults want to practice incest as long as they take a course on genetics and statistics. 

I don't mind polygamy if they are CONSENTING adults want to practice insest.

I'm not sure about prostitution (as I've never thought about it), but I'm all for efforts to allow CONSENTING adults to do what they please in their own privacy. 

Surely you don't mean BIILICAL underpinnings, right? 

lets just COMPLETELY rip da under pinnings of this "moral driven" society. da hell with that. 

Remember the "moral" underpinnings that would have prevented you from staring too long at that little white princess on da corner? 

 

[futuremd]

No one cares about the CEO, its all about the company's stance and public donations of anti-gay politically active groups. 

So what, exactly, are these anti-gay groups actually doing to gay people?

Good thing you ask.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/chickfila.asp

I'd list a bunch of sources but that covers it pretty well.

Imagine if every time you bought a cup of coffee from starbucks they donated to a religious group whose goal was to repeal the civil rights act and instill segregation by invoking the Curse of Ham in the bible. They would promote their goals by pushing political agendas and donating to candidates who support this ideology.

Thats what they do to gay people. They donate to groups that would not only deny them the ability to access equal rights and protection under the law, but also repeal existing laws that grant gays legal autonomy in the first place.

Don't forget, a little over 100-150 years ago, homosexuality was illegal in most of the world in even 1st world countries. 

 

[dwalk31]

Wait a prostitute can't marry?
Incest is not going to be allowed ever because of the proven harm due to those with similar DNA reproducing.
Polygamy is throughout the bible.. So if our moral driven society is based on Christian Teachings which are the biggest "evidence" used by anti-gay groups to say Gay Marriage shouldn't be allowed, I guess Polygamy should be allowed now shouldn't it.
Also marriage is not part of the constitution. State constitutions, Yes. The Constitution of the United States it isn't part of it.
Once again... Swimming in knowledge Ninjahood

But by your logic why can't incest be legal? Gay incest wont produce any offspring. Even if it isnt gay incest they can opt to not reproduce... or don't they too have the right to be aware of the potential risks and make their own decisions? Its their body and they are consenting adults...I mean drinking while pregnant isn't illegal, heck neither is abortion which undoubtedly causes more harm to the offspring than say incest reproduction. Are you a bigot because of your opinion?

 

[timcity2000]

Redifining marriage does however open the door to say...incest and polygamy marriage (which currently aren't legal) Are those individuals also being deprived of there civil rights? Should a man be able to marry his adult sister, his brother? Should someone be allowed 10 wives or 10 husbands? I believe those are the more realistic "open the door" ideas... .

this argument is geting tired...

why does legalizing gay marriage LEAD TO these things? people who champion incest, polygamy, etc are welcome to take up those causes when and how they see fit. why wait on the legalization of gay marriage?

as has been stated many times in this thread and others... incest can have notable negative consequences. and i don't fully understand the tax/legal implications of polygamy, but i can't say that i oppose it if all involved are consenting adults.

 

[futuremd]

Redifining marriage does however open the door to say...incest and polygamy marriage (which currently aren't legal) Are those individuals also being deprived of there civil rights? 

Interesting questions.

I actually say, yes.

In the context of incest, I say if two consenting adults want to do it, go ahead as long as we educate them on genetics and why its probably not a good idea for them to have kids if they don't know the risks. 

In the context of polygamy, I think if people are consenting adults then why not? 

Society is currently defining and preferring monogamous heterosexual couples...does that mean that we HAVE to do things that way? 

Why do you do the things you do? 

Remember, just because something IS does not mean it OUGHT to be that way...otherwise we'd never "progress" or rather "evolve."

Should a man be able to marry his adult sister, his brother? Should someone be allowed 10 wives or 10 husbands? I believe those are the more realistic "open the door" ideas... BUT that is besides the point.

Yes.

But yeah, its besides the point because thats not the topic. 

Chick fil-A has a right to their opinion. If the company was not serving gays I would understand the "outrage" but clearly their stance on marriage or campaigns they support shouldn't have been a shocker.

Would they serve gays? Absolutely. They have no problem taking gay money, but they don't care about hindering the rights of their gay customers and employees. 

 People are saying the company is anti-gay which is an exaggeration. Anti-gay marriage/ redifining marriage in general is more like it.

Thats not true either. 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/chickfila.asp

They actually donated to "pray the gay away" "clinics" AND supported anti-gay legislation.  

They still happily serve all their customers and treat them with respect. Regardless of orientation.

Taking your money to screw you over when you go home isn't really "treating them with respect" is it? 

 

[ninjahood]

Redifining marriage does however open the door to say...incest and polygamy marriage (which currently aren't legal) Are those individuals also being deprived of there civil rights? Should a man be able to marry his adult sister, his brother? Should someone be allowed 10 wives or 10 husbands? I believe those are the more realistic "open the door" ideas... .

this argument is geting tired...

why does legalizing gay marriage LEAD TO these things? people who champion incest, polygamy, etc are welcome to take up those causes when and how they see fit. why wait on the legalization of gay marriage?
 

simple sir, it creates a precedent.

and da US courts LOVE precedents, makes their job easier...word to abortion rights, word to citizens united, word to da affordable care act, etc.

you legislate gay marriage on da basis of "2 people consenting" and welp..you just opened pandora's box...because honestly da only reason its illegal is SO many states is because of

its moral implications on society...if gay marriage gets da green light (which is basically da MAJOR no no on anyone who holds themselves to a high moral standard)

you might as well let ALL da ghouls and ghosts out da black hole...prostitution, incest, polygamy...ill ALL be legal within years of gay marriage.

 

[dwalk31]

this argument is geting tired...
why does legalizing gay marriage LEAD TO these things? people who champion incest, polygamy, etc are welcome to take up those causes when and how they see fit. why wait on the legalization of gay marriage?
as has been stated many times in this thread and others... incest can have notable negative consequences. and i don't fully understand the tax/legal implications of polygamy, but i can't say that i oppose it if all involved are consenting adults.

It's not an argument saying it will lead to these things.... merely a statement expressing the realistic "open door" issues compared to the comical drawing including toasters and dogs and other nonsense. The financial tax/legal implications of polygamy are immense. How many wives/ husbands will be added to social security pensions etc etc. You mention the "health issue" of incest offspring as an excuse simply because you are uncomfortable with the idea. Same as Chick fil A. Change is not easy. Changing/ redifing marriage is the true issue here. Not anti-gay...

 

[futuremd]

Redifining marriage does however open the door to say...incest and polygamy marriage (which currently aren't legal) Are those individuals also being deprived of there civil rights? Should a man be able to marry his adult sister, his brother? Should someone be allowed 10 wives or 10 husbands? I believe those are the more realistic "open the door" ideas... .

this argument is geting tired...

why does legalizing gay marriage LEAD TO these things? people who champion incest, polygamy, etc are welcome to take up those causes when and how they see fit. why wait on the legalization of gay marriage?
 

simple sir, it creates a precedent.

and da US courts LOVE precedents, makes their job easier...word to abortion rights, word to citizens united, word to da affordable care act, etc.

Word to...the voting rights act? Forgot that one? 

you legislate gay marriage on da basis of "2 people consenting" and welp..you just opened pandora's box...because honestly da only reason its illegal is SO many states is because of

its moral implications on society...if gay marriage gets da green light (which is basically da MAJOR no no on anyone who holds themselves to a high moral standard)

So being gay is against moral standards?

Ninjahood, have you ever had anal sex with your girlfriend or thought about it?

And what is a "moral" implication? 

you might as well let ALL da ghouls and ghosts out da black hole...prostitution, incest, polygamy...ill ALL be legal within years of gay marriage.

So?

I thought conservatives championed individual freedom...

 

[milestailsprowe]

But by your logic why can't incest be legal? Gay incest wont produce any offspring. Even if it isnt gay incest they can opt to not reproduce... or don't they too have the right to be aware of the potential risks and make their own decisions? Its their body and they are consenting adults...I mean drinking while pregnant isn't illegal, heck neither is abortion which undoubtedly causes more harm to the offspring than say incest reproduction. Are you a bigot because of your opinion?

Incest isn't legal and that would be a WHOLE other agreement what would be allowed in the public. I really don't see it getting a lot of backing. Abortion is another thing that is discussed for another time.

Drinking while pregnant isn't illegal but its one of the many things we warn against because there isn't much else that can be done to stop. A bartender isn't gonna has for a pregnancy test from females before drinking.

 

[futuremd]

this argument is geting tired...
why does legalizing gay marriage LEAD TO these things? people who champion incest, polygamy, etc are welcome to take up those causes when and how they see fit. why wait on the legalization of gay marriage?
as has been stated many times in this thread and others... incest can have notable negative consequences. and i don't fully understand the tax/legal implications of polygamy, but i can't say that i oppose it if all involved are consenting adults.

It's not an argument saying it will lead to these things.... merely a statement expressing the realistic "open door" issues compared to the comical drawing including toasters and dogs and other nonsense. The financial tax/legal implications of polygamy are immense. How many wives/ husbands will be added to social security pensions etc etc

So?

Again, the existing system doesn't recognize it, obviously.

The fact that there isn't a system for something doesn't mean it shouldn't or can't be changed to allocate it. Adjusting infrastructure is EASY. What did you think happened when new laws were enacted? 

The only reason for HAVING marriage is to reconcile business/tax decisions in the first place.

Thats why I think marriage is ultimately stupid and an archaic concept anyways in a modern society. But hey, if we're going to promote the concept of marriage as the primary legal union, then it is what it is... we might as well make the most out of it and recognize polygamy.

. You mention the "health issue" of incest offspring as an excuse simply because you are uncomfortable with the idea. Same as Chick fil A. Change is not easy. Changing/ redifing marriage is the true issue here. Not anti-gay...

Wrong again.

Incest is only tricky because of the genetic predisposition to a VERY high likelihood of homozygous recessive mutations becoming expressed in large proportions of offspring. Any kid in an intro-to-biology class will tell you that.

But if they're consenting adults, they're free to do what they want in my eyes.

Why would I HONESTLY be concerned with how they live their lives?

 

[dwalk31]

Wrong again.

Incest is only tricky because of the genetic predisposition to a VERY high likelihood of homozygous recessive mutations becoming expressed in large proportions of offspring. Any kid in an intro-to-biology class will tell you that.

But if they're consenting adults, they're free to do what they want in my eyes.

Why would I HONESTLY be concerned with how they live their lives?

But many are in fact uncomfortable with it (By the way incest couples do not HAVE to reproduce) Gay incest is ok but straight incest isn't??? . Anywho, I'm not arguing for or against it. Simply stating the issue here is ANTI- nontraditional marriage / redifining marriage. Not specifically anti-gay.

 

[relli45]

I really don't see how taking a stance against the purchase of chicken sandwich's helps there cause in anyway.  I honestly think this is the stupidest and pointless backfire in history, and the LBGT are bullies.  Everyone is not going to fall in line with their views, and they can't accept that which in my book is insane.  Dude was asked what he thought about the subject he gave his honest opinion in the most respectful way possible.  Respect it and move on with your movement, but some how the LBGT managed to triplied Chick fil A's profits

.  I'm just waiting for a recorded phone convo with the CEO of Zaxby's to surface.

 

[futuremd]

Wrong again.

Incest is only tricky because of the genetic predisposition to a VERY high likelihood of homozygous recessive mutations becoming expressed in large proportions of offspring. Any kid in an intro-to-biology class will tell you that.

But if they're consenting adults, they're free to do what they want in my eyes.

Why would I HONESTLY be concerned with how they live their lives?

But many are in fact uncomfortable with it (By the way incest couples do not HAVE to reproduce) Gay incest is ok but straight incest isn't???

. Anywho, I'm not arguing for or against it. Simply stating the issue here is ANTI- nontraditional marriage / redifining marriage. Not specifically anti-gay.

1. What does gay marriage have to do with incest?

2. I don't have a problem with incest legally being permitted as long as they're educated on the genetic reproductive risks

3. What is traditional marriage and where does that concept come originate?

4. If you're being "anti-traditional marriage" then preventing gays from getting that right, then yes you ARE anti-gay marriage. 

 

[futuremd]

I really don't see how taking a stance against the purchase of chicken sandwich's helps there cause in anyway.  I honestly think this is the stupidest and pointless backfire in history, and the LBGT are bullies.  Everyone is not going to fall in line with their views, and they can't accept that which in my book is insane.  Dude was asked what he thought about the subject he gave his honest opinion in the most respectful way possible.  Respect it and move on with your movement, but some how the LBGT managed to triplied Chick fil A's profits

.  I'm just waiting for a recorded phone convo with the CEO of Zaxby's to surface.

It doesn't matter what happened to CFAs profits, its that more people are aware of CFAs stance and can make a decision on where they stand on the matter. 

 

[essential1]

Dude was asked what he thought about the subject he gave his honest opinion in the most respectful way possible. 

This is respectful?

"I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, 'We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage'. I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about."

 

[ninjahood]

Redifining marriage does however open the door to say...incest and polygamy marriage (which currently aren't legal) Are those individuals also being deprived of there civil rights? Should a man be able to marry his adult sister, his brother? Should someone be allowed 10 wives or 10 husbands? I believe those are the more realistic "open the door" ideas... .

this argument is geting tired...

why does legalizing gay marriage LEAD TO these things? people who champion incest, polygamy, etc are welcome to take up those causes when and how they see fit. why wait on the legalization of gay marriage?
 

simple sir, it creates a precedent.

and da US courts LOVE precedents, makes their job easier...word to abortion rights, word to citizens united, word to da affordable care act, etc.

Word to...the voting rights act? Forgot that one? 

you legislate gay marriage on da basis of "2 people consenting" and welp..you just opened pandora's box...because honestly da only reason its illegal is SO many states is because of

its moral implications on society...if gay marriage gets da green light (which is basically da MAJOR no no on anyone who holds themselves to a high moral standard)

So being gay is against moral standards?

Ninjahood, have you ever had anal sex with your girlfriend or thought about it?

And what is a "moral" implication? 

you might as well let ALL da ghouls and ghosts out da black hole...prostitution, incest, polygamy...ill ALL be legal within years of gay marriage.

So?

I thought conservatives championed individual freedom...

silly putty sucks at trying to make me look bad...

1. i didn't forget da voting act, i just didn't feel like typing it, adding it basically reinforces my statement about precedent.

2. as da great jadakiss said "nah i dont pump on that block" as far as anal sex and duh of COURSE gay is considered immoral and wrong on many levels ...why do you think certain countries would sentence

you to DEATH for participating in homosexual activities...why you think that gay kid chucked himself over da good ol' GWB when he found out he was being video taped after a tryst with another man.

da cat felt he was morally unworthy to participate in this thing called life.

gay sex been around forever....i aint trippin over it b, its gross but hey i can care less.

3. like i said, i would LOVE for gay marriage to pass if it meant that all those other things becomes 100% legal..let's just rip da self proclaim moral fabric of da United States and use it as

lighter fluid for a new era in self regulation in terms of moral and social issues.

lets just take a giant piss on da moral fabric of da United states.....i'd LOVE to see that lol.

 

[tr1ll]

Right now the word, "bigot" is being typed...

 

[mints]

In relation to precedents when a gay marriage case finally makes its way to SCOTUS, won't Loving v Virginia have set a precedent as to the equal protection clause? I know the courts in New York rejected it, but lower courts get reversed by SCOTUS all the time.