Chick Fil-A Day!

[Wewak]

Perhaps we can enhance the day starting with review of yesterday and then letting go negative feelings. This world will not be a better place to live if we allow major events from our experiances of yesterday to control, influence and shape our actions for today and tomorrow. Instead let us take yesterday's experiance to build better world for today and tomorrow. The issue raise is "whether or not there should be seperation of religion from business and politics. It is argued that religion should be more concern about spiritual welfare, business on individual or cooperate welfare and politics on social welfare of society. A balance in society will depend on what you do today for tomorrow.

[New England and The Maritimes]

Has more sources then just liking to a Fox News article, which rarely link to any outside sources.

Thus your complaint is a false equivalency.

Moreover, who do think is going to cover this issue other then movements connected to gay rights?

Gee, I dunno, Politco at least tries to be neutral, another good place to go is RCP or Pollster.

Your bullshit is getting really tired. Seriously.

[Mussoliniopoli]

Gee, I dunno, Politco at least tries to be neutral, another good place to go is RCP or Pollster.

Your bullshit is getting really tired. Seriously.

Just put him on ignore he likes to fuck toasters or something. All he talks about is his love of electronic boinking and shit...really creepy.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Because you'd take FOX seriously if they cited Heritage Foundation, EXXON's latest reports, and the Weekly Standard? That's tantamount to what these people are doing, and you'd be horribly dishonest if you look at your monitor with a straight face and type "GLAAD/NCRM/GAY(good as you)/TWO (Truth wins out) aren't biased"

If they referencing something that can be checked by public record, yes.

OK good, that's the first step. Now back up the assertion by giving me the public record of their donation, rather than them saying its there.

Because, Open Secrets, which is balanced, reports none of those things on a search for Chick-Fil-A.

[Gauthier]

Gee, I dunno, Politco at least tries to be neutral, another good place to go is RCP or Pollster.

Your bullshit is getting really tired. Seriously.

He's like the reincarnation of Corny.

[Revolutopia]

If they referencing something that can be checked by public record, yes.

OK good, that's the first step. Now back up the assertion by giving me the public record of their donation, rather than them saying its there.

Because, Open Secrets, which is balanced, reports none of those things on a search for Chick-Fil-A.

http://www.businessinsider.com/most-anti-gay-companies-in-america-2012-7

Open Secrets are focused on politicians receiving contributions not all political contributions.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

OK good, that's the first step. Now back up the assertion by giving me the public record of their donation, rather than them saying its there.

Because, Open Secrets, which is balanced, reports none of those things on a search for Chick-Fil-A.

http://www.businessinsider.com/most-anti-gay-companies-in-america-2012-7

Open Secrets are focused on politicians receiving contributions not all political contributions.

The question is not IF they've been donating, but WHO they have been donating to. Donating to NOM is acceptable. Donating to "expel all gays from the country" is not.

[The Republic of Lanos]

So some mayors want to ban a business because the business leaders donate to certain causes and holding certain viewpoints? Obviously, this gives us the right to ban businesses that support viewpoints we don't like. Maybe we should ban GE from being here for supporting Obama. It's all acceptable if you're going to ban Chick-fil-A for it's opinions.

See what I did there? Exactly. The 1st Amendment applies to everyone, not to certain groups you like.

[Revolutopia]

Has more sources then just liking to a Fox News article, which rarely link to any outside sources.

Thus your complaint is a false equivalency.

Moreover, who do think is going to cover this issue other then movements connected to gay rights?

Gee, I dunno, Politco at least tries to be neutral, another good place to go is RCP or Pollster.

Name me all the verified cases or controversies where Huff has been caught making shit up and so forth.

Now compare that to Fox's records.

[Patriot Liberal]

If they referencing something that can be checked by public record, yes.

OK good, that's the first step. Now back up the assertion by giving me the public record of their donation, rather than them saying its there.

Because, Open Secrets, which is balanced, reports none of those things on a search for Chick-Fil-A.

EqualityMatters is certainly biased, but it also gives complete sourcing for its review of IRS forms. They could be legally punished heavily if they were to lie about IRS forms this blatantly. I doubt it is complete BS. http://equalitymatters.org/factcheck/201207020001

[Frisivisia]

So some mayors want to ban a business because the business leaders donate to certain causes and holding certain viewpoints? Obviously, this gives us the right to ban businesses that support viewpoints we don't like. Maybe we should ban GE from being here for supporting Obama. It's all acceptable if you're going to ban Chick-fil-A for it's opinions.

See what I did there? Exactly. The 1st Amendment applies to everyone, not to certain groups you like.

Did you read the article? Some mayors denounced Chic-Fil-A, and said it wouldn't be welcome in their cities. They didn't ban it.

[The Republic of Lanos]

So some mayors want to ban a business because the business leaders donate to certain causes and holding certain viewpoints? Obviously, this gives us the right to ban businesses that support viewpoints we don't like. Maybe we should ban GE from being here for supporting Obama. It's all acceptable if you're going to ban Chick-fil-A for it's opinions.

See what I did there? Exactly. The 1st Amendment applies to everyone, not to certain groups you like.

Did you read the article? Some mayors denounced Chic-Fil-A, and said it wouldn't be welcome in their cities. They didn't ban it.

A Chicago alderman wants to kick them out.

[New England and The Maritimes]

Did you read the article? Some mayors denounced Chic-Fil-A, and said it wouldn't be welcome in their cities. They didn't ban it.

A Chicago alderman wants to kick them out.

It's pretty well within his power to call them on anything and everything he can find. You'd be surprised at how many permits you find yourself needing when you piss in an alderman's cereal.

[Frisivisia]

Did you read the article? Some mayors denounced Chic-Fil-A, and said it wouldn't be welcome in their cities. They didn't ban it.

A Chicago alderman wants to kick them out.

Wants to. They didn't, and they shouldn't.

[Revolutopia]

http://www.businessinsider.com/most-anti-gay-companies-in-america-2012-7

Open Secrets are focused on politicians receiving contributions not all political contributions.

The question is not IF they've been donating, but WHO they have been donating to. Donating to NOM is acceptable. Donating to "expel all gays from the country" is not.

What the hell are looking for then?

[Wirbel]

And there goes your credibility. Reductio ad absurdum, the mathematical proof, strikes again.

Bob loves his filing cabinet, and if he wants to marry it, so be it. It's his deal, aren't you conservatives about personal freedom?

Don't call it marriage. You can call it something else. Marriage = Man + Woman

If homosexuals wish to live together... well... get the latin dictionaries! We need to come up with a new word. Also, if pro-gay people are mad at Chick-Fil-A, they should just not eat there. We don't need to propose government bans or anything...

[New England and The Maritimes]

Bob loves his filing cabinet, and if he wants to marry it, so be it. It's his deal, aren't you conservatives about personal freedom?

Don't call it marriage. You can call it something else. Marriage = Man + Woman

If homosexuals wish to live together... well... get the latin dictionaries! We need to come up with a new word. Also, if pro-gay people are mad at Chick-Fil-A, they should just not eat there. We don't need to propose government bans or anything...

Are you really this stupid? Really?

[Frisivisia]

Bob loves his filing cabinet, and if he wants to marry it, so be it. It's his deal, aren't you conservatives about personal freedom?

Don't call it marriage. You can call it something else. Marriage = Man + Woman

If homosexuals wish to live together... well... get the latin dictionaries! We need to come up with a new word. Also, if pro-gay people are mad at Chick-Fil-A, they should just not eat there. We don't need to propose government bans or anything...

Why come up with a new word? That makes gay marriage less than straight marriage. That would imply inequality, would it not?

[Revolutopia]

Bob loves his filing cabinet, and if he wants to marry it, so be it. It's his deal, aren't you conservatives about personal freedom?

Don't call it marriage. You can call it something else. Marriage = Man + Woman

If homosexuals wish to live together... well... get the latin dictionaries! We need to come up with a new word. Also, if pro-gay people are mad at Chick-Fil-A, they should just not eat there. We don't need to propose government bans or anything...

How about you call your religious ceremonies something else?

[Condunum]

Bob loves his filing cabinet, and if he wants to marry it, so be it. It's his deal, aren't you conservatives about personal freedom?

Don't call it marriage. You can call it something else. Marriage = Man + Woman

If homosexuals wish to live together... well... get the latin dictionaries! We need to come up with a new word. Also, if pro-gay people are mad at Chick-Fil-A, they should just not eat there. We don't need to propose government bans or anything...

Marriage is a government sanctioned relationship. It is not bound to Man + Woman.

[The Jahistic Unified Republic]

I wonder how many "bigots" at Chick-fil-a today would say that Ben and Jerry's is a good ice cream brand. Truth is, they probably are supporting the first amendment rather than the "Traditional Marriage" side.

[Dempublicents1]

If they referencing something that can be checked by public record, yes.

OK good, that's the first step. Now back up the assertion by giving me the public record of their donation, rather than them saying its there.

Because, Open Secrets, which is balanced, reports none of those things on a search for Chick-Fil-A.

http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990pf_p ... _990PF.pdf

There's the 2010 listings for the WinShape foundation (which is an arm of CFA). You can go through and add it all up yourself if you want, but Business Insider puts the anti-LGBT contributions for that year alone at about $2 million. Roughly the same amount in 2009. Assuming they've kept it up (we won't know until the documents become available), we can expect that they donated another $2 million in 2011 and are probably shaping up to do the same in 2012.

[Frisivisia]

I wonder how many "bigots" at Chick-fil-a today would say that Ben and Jerry's is a good ice cream brand. Truth is, they probably are supporting the first amendment rather than the "Traditional Marriage" side.

Why Ben and Jerry's?

[The Jahistic Unified Republic]

"Anybody who eats at S*it-fil-a deserves to get the cancer"-Rosanne Barr...

[Revolutopia]

I wonder how many "bigots" at Chick-fil-a today would say that Ben and Jerry's is a good ice cream brand. Truth is, they probably are supporting the first amendment rather than the "Traditional Marriage" side.

Why Ben and Jerry's?

Ben and Jerry's are a pretty progressive company.