View Full Version : Irony in a Chicken Sandwich
PanzerJaeger
08-03-2012, 07:02
It has been three days now, and I still cannot open any of my favorite news aggregators and not read about the Great Chick Fil A Eat for Traditional Marriage rallies across the country. I told myself I would not buy into it, but alas... a thought came to me that I wanted to express.
The rallies did not come about because Mr. Cathy stated that this generation is shaking its fist at the lord and inviting his wrath for changing the definition of marriage. Nor was the genesis the gay activist's backlash against his statements. No, the rallies were the result of a couple of liberal, big city mayors trying to pander to gay people by saying (with absolutely no legal backing) that Chick Fil A was not welcome in 'their' cities.
That was what pissed the Christians off. It was then that Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and all the other holy rollers decided to act. Since then, the language of persecution has been as thick as that delicious, atrociously unhealthy Chick Fil A honey BBQ sauce. How dare someone try to exclude them, their lifestyle, and their beliefs!
I just want to say to these people, and this is obviously rhetorical, what the flying hell do you think gay people have been fighting for, and what have you been voting against consistently year after year.....? Inclusion.
I get that the Christians don’t like the gays. That’s fine. It’s the victimhood that is so nauseating. They say the most heinous things about people with an unchosen preference, but are themselves incredibly sensitive toward the idea that anyone might not like them because of their chosen beliefs. Welcome to the world you've created for gay people for centuries.
How someone can go to the polls and vote to exclude people from enjoying a privilege that they enjoy and then bitch about the mere idea, however implausible, of Christians being excluded from something is beyond me.
I feel better.
Strike For The South
08-03-2012, 07:22
I support gay marriage only on the condition it is FABULOUS.
Also, I'm to drunk, to taste this chicken
I can understand why they are pissed off, it's totally ok to be against gay marriage you are not required to be pro. If someone sabotages your business efforts because you take a stance on something goes way too far. If someone is against it you should just respect that and let them do their thing. Nobody is getting hurt so what's the problem really.
Sasaki Kojiro
08-03-2012, 07:48
I just want to say to these people, and this is obviously rhetorical, what the flying fuck do you think gay people have been fighting for, and what have you been voting against consistently year after year.....? Inclusion.
You can't fight for inclusion. Inclusion comes from acceptance and acceptance comes on an individual, personal level. The politcal arena is not the place for that process, and in this case the people showing that they want to use the political arena have a terrible excuse for sense of sexual morality.
The fact is that christianity is virtually excluded from intellectual circles, and if the intellectual circles can decide social issues through top down legislation, the writing is on the wall. They aren't reacting with this amount of passion out of gay-hatred, but because of the big picture.
You don't think the protests over the trayvon shooting were just about the incident do you?
a completely inoffensive name
08-03-2012, 08:30
The fact is that christianity is virtually excluded from intellectual circles, and if the intellectual circles can decide social issues through top down legislation, the writing is on the wall. They aren't reacting with this amount of passion out of gay-hatred, but because of the big picture.
The intellectual circles don't decide social issues through top down legislation most of the time. Also, just because the intellectuals exclude Christianity, doesn't make them anti-religion. The "ivory tower" people for the most part advocate for secularism in the sense of a neutrality towards religion. New Atheism is just a fad among youth that need something to rile them up but don't like the various burdens that religious institutions bring.
rory_20_uk
08-03-2012, 11:51
Christianity in most forms is anti-gay. The Bible is pretty clear and the Catholics even have their direct supposed link to God who has never done anything to state the Bible needs a re-write.
Religion is based on belief which neither has to make sense, nor be PC.
~:smoking:
ICantSpellDawg
08-03-2012, 12:31
I don't care about persecuting people for their beliefs. I just don't want the government to do it. City governments saying that they would ban businesses or individuals who run businesses based on the things that they say is unconstitutional and runs against the fundamentals of our democracy and rights. I don't care about the sit ins and boycotts - as far as im concerned individuals have the right to persecute others all they'd like, as long as their actions don't break the law. I am a Christian, many people think my beliefs are stupid, but I believe that we are imbued with a sense of right and wrong as well as a connection with God from birth. You might be gay and many people think that your beliefs are stupid - that you were imbued with an attraction to people of the same gender... from birth. I view the homosexual movement like communism, federalism, capitalism, punk rock, etc. It is just another movement based on people's personal beliefs, most of which are stupid. I also happen to believe that homosexual people are misguided, but that they shouldn't be punished in law for who they diddle on their own time or what they say.
I agree with just about everything you say, but one thing. Homosexual people are not misguided, there is no guide, stupid word that 'misguided' as there is no such thing. For heterosexual persons such as us it is probably very strange that people can be attracted to the same sex or even disgusted by it but that's our problem, not theirs. We should just grow up, not them.
PanzerJaeger
08-03-2012, 14:07
You can't fight for inclusion. Inclusion comes from acceptance and acceptance comes on an individual, personal level. The politcal arena is not the place for that process, and in this case the people showing that they want to use the political arena have a terrible excuse for sense of sexual morality.
You can, and many groups who have shared common characteristics and been socially disenfranchised for it have done so.
The fact is that christianity is virtually excluded from intellectual circles,
Why do you think that is?
and if the intellectual circles can decide social issues through top down legislation, the writing is on the wall.
Obviously that isn't going on.
They aren't reacting with this amount of passion out of gay-hatred, but because of the big picture.
You don't think the protests over the trayvon shooting were just about the incident do you?
What is the big picture, apart from a bunch of Christians being persecuted by the gay agenda, getting mad as hell, and deciding they just aren't going to take it anymore? I kind of thought I nailed it in the irony of Christians throwing a hissy fit over the mere idea that they would be excluded, while actively making every effort they can to ensure that gay people are. But I was tired, so maybe I missed it.
The Trayvon protests were just as misguided as these, but they were based in actual feelings of social inequity that had some basis in reality. I cannot imagine a group less persecuted than white Christians, and yet the victim complex seems to be ever growing. What is the bigger picture that I'm missing?
Major Robert Dump
08-03-2012, 22:50
I don't have aproblem with a company head making these statements, as long as his company is not outwardly discriminiating against customers and employees, although I would think it would make a hostile work environment for employees and pave the way for lawsuits. The market will punish this guy, more quickly were it a publicly traded company. This President has shown some true lackluster business skill, especially considering all the pro-emplyee measures the company has taken and being one of the better fast food places to work. To have all that going and throw it away.....
I don't have a problem with people protesting, even though they are using a highly pussified version of what it means to be a hate group, typical of the lefts highly pussified version of what it means to be a racist or a sexist. And even though there is a total contradiction with the left calling people bigots for protesting mosques, when Islam calls for the execution of gay people
I don't have a problem with the left focusing on things like Chic Fil A, while outright ignoring the rash of violent hate crimes in Washington DC, presumably because that raises issues the left does not like to confront: bigotry by minority groups, the presses omition of the race of suspects in crime stories, the fact that a staggering percentage of blacks and latinos are anti-homosexual, and the anger the black community feels with the homosexual "civil rights" movement is compared to that of black
americans.
I don't have a problem with politicians being politicians, and speaking out against a company even though they can have no real effect on the companies decision to locat there, even though it is not their place as mayor to keep commerce out, and even though the mere idea that a Chicago mayor would say Chic Fil A values are not Chicago values is an EFFING LAUGH RIOT considering the atrocious crime rate, poverty rate, and unemployment rate in that city.
What I do have a problem with is this retard, going through a drive thru and berating a teenage girl for where she works. Is this what counts as activism these days?
http://www.businessinsider.com/vante-cfo-bullies-chick-fil-a-worker-then-promptly-gets-fired-for-it-2012-8
ICantSpellDawg
08-04-2012, 03:28
I don't have aproblem with a company head making these statements, as long as his company is not outwardly discriminiating against customers and employees, although I would think it would make a hostile work environment for employees and pave the way for lawsuits. The market will punish this guy, more quickly were it a publicly traded company. This President has shown some true lackluster business skill, especially considering all the pro-emplyee measures the company has taken and being one of the better fast food places to work. To have all that going and throw it away.....
I don't have a problem with people protesting, even though they are using a highly pussified version of what it means to be a hate group, typical of the lefts highly pussified version of what it means to be a racist or a sexist. And even though there is a total contradiction with the left calling people bigots for protesting mosques, when Islam calls for the execution of gay people
I don't have a problem with the left focusing on things like Chic Fil A, while outright ignoring the rash of violent hate crimes in Washington DC, presumably because that raises issues the left does not like to confront: bigotry by minority groups, the presses omition of the race of suspects in crime stories, the fact that a staggering percentage of blacks and latinos are anti-homosexual, and the anger the black community feels with the homosexual "civil rights" movement is compared to that of black
americans.
I don't have a problem with politicians being politicians, and speaking out against a company even though they can have no real effect on the companies decision to locat there, even though it is not their place as mayor to keep commerce out, and even though the mere idea that a Chicago mayor would say Chic Fil A values are not Chicago values is an EFFING LAUGH RIOT considering the atrocious crime rate, poverty rate, and unemployment rate in that city.
What I do have a problem with is this retard, going through a drive thru and berating a teenage girl for where she works. Is this what counts as activism these days?
http://www.businessinsider.com/vante-cfo-bullies-chick-fil-a-worker-then-promptly-gets-fired-for-it-2012-8
Excellent points
What I do have a problem with is this retard, going through a drive thru and berating a teenage girl for where she works. Is this what counts as activism these days?
According to a few different sources, that dude got himself fired (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/vante-of-tucson-az-regrets-actions-of-former-cfo-2012-08-02). And deservedly so.
ICantSpellDawg
08-04-2012, 04:44
like
Major Robert Dump
08-04-2012, 17:45
LOL he asked a girl who probably makes $8 an hour "how can you live with yourself?"
PanzerJaeger
08-04-2012, 20:36
LOL he asked a girl who probably makes $8 an hour "how can you live with yourself?"
Well, at least he didn't touch (http://www.9news.com/rss/story.aspx?storyid=278414) her. Chick Fil A helps pay for the intellectual framework that has been built up to support anti-gay hatred. That's the bigger picture here. While screaming at the kids who work the windows is idiotic in the extreme, I do not know how grown up could justify building a career at such an company.
...I do not know how grown up could justify building a career at such an company.
I do. Like at any other company, that's how.
LOL he asked a girl who probably makes $8 an hour "how can you live with yourself?"
You are looking at closer to $5-6 per hour. The poor girl probably has no choice in the matter at all.
a completely inoffensive name
08-05-2012, 02:06
You are looking at closer to $5-6 per hour. The poor girl probably has no choice in the matter at all.
Federal minimum wage is $7.25. With many states having a higher one. So $8 is about right.
Federal minimum wage is $7.25. With many states having a higher one. So $8 is about right.
Must have gone up since I last checked, but isn't it less for being in the service industry anyway, in the same league as waitresses and pizza delivery, where they are meant to make up the other half in tips.
Was thinking about the old $5.15 per hour minimum wage with the $2.15 for the service industry/"tipped" employees.
ICantSpellDawg
08-05-2012, 04:53
I do. Like at any other company, that's how.
My company is obsessed with this PC garbage. I don't support them or their business practices - they are an ethical vacuum company which backs this nonsense while persecuting employees with health problems with plan increases that rival or exceed annual increases. They donate their employee's money to selected "charities" and claim the tax and PR benefits for themselves. They have the audacity to suggest that they contribute any money to the fund. Their match merely covers the taxes saved by using their people's income pre tax and saving their own contribution, so it doesn't cost them 1 penny and they get credit for it. Disgusting. They just recently fired a seriously disabled man after he worked there for 40 years just because they could. Companies serve a purpose, but giving them any moral high ground or low ground is nonsense, they are amoral money earner who would kill you and sell you for parts if they could get away with it. But they create jobs, so we try to harness their evil powers for good.
I don't like companies preaching to me one way or the other. They can stuff it. They have no authority.
Federal minimum wage is $7.25. With many states having a higher one. So $8 is about right.
Is that after taxed? That sounds really low anyhow
Is that after taxed? That sounds really low anyhow
Before tax. 7.25 is really only livable if your single and lucky enough to get full time hours.
a completely inoffensive name
08-05-2012, 06:30
Before tax. 7.25 is really only livable if your single and lucky enough to get full time hours.
Pretty much. If you work 40 hour weeks on $7.25 for let's say 50 weeks out of the year, you make $14,500 a year. (11,700 Euros).
In the continuous 48 states the poverty line for a single individual is estimated at $11,170. So you better hope that your federal and state taxes don't take more than a combined 23% of your income or you are officially in poverty.
Of course this also doesn't take into account the wildly different cost of living between say California and say, South Dakota.
Before tax. 7.25 is really only livable if your single and lucky enough to get full time hours.
Ouch. You aren't very good at quid pro quo over there.
The real killer is that you just can't find full-time work at minimum wage in this economy. Some people, sure, but for most it is simply unavailable. What really sucks is when you try to do 2 minimum wage jobs at the same time, and they both insist that you be on call (something that is also, sadly, quite standard these days).
This is why you get an education.
The real killer is that you just can't find full-time work at minimum wage in this economy. Some people, sure, but for most it is simply unavailable. What really sucks is when you try to do 2 minimum wage jobs at the same time, and they both insist that you be on call (something that is also, sadly, quite standard these days).
Yea, a lot people my age that I know and work with that aren't going to school have to take two jobs in order to support themselves. Another downside of working two low paying jobs is if your workplaces decide to up your hours you get stuck working overtime but without overtime pay, and sometimes you end up working 16 hour days. Not fun.
What really, really sucks is when you're working 2 minimum-wage jobs that require you to be on-call and you're trying to persue an education in your meager off-time at a local community college.
Yes I would agree that sucks. I'd suggest cutting it down to one job and taking out a little more if loans so you don't lose your mind.
The real killer is that you just can't find full-time work at minimum wage in this economy. Some people, sure, but for most it is simply unavailable. What really sucks is when you try to do 2 minimum wage jobs at the same time, and they both insist that you be on call (something that is also, sadly, quite standard these days).
You can absolutelily live from a minimum wage here, including an annual holiday if you are smart about it. You get all sorts of benefits, you can basicly keep all your money if you are in the lower tiers of society.
Yes I would agree that sucks. I'd suggest cutting it down to one job and taking out a little more if loans so you don't lose your mind.
I'd probably suggest getting the first boat out of the USA. =P
Major Robert Dump
08-05-2012, 07:35
Well, at least he didn't touch (http://www.9news.com/rss/story.aspx?storyid=278414) her. Chick Fil A helps pay for the intellectual framework that has been built up to support anti-gay hatred. That's the bigger picture here. While screaming at the kids who work the windows is idiotic in the extreme, I do not know how grown up could justify building a career at such an company.
Just wow. You know nothing about that girl, her plans, or what it is like to work a crappy, low wage job to have to survive. Congrats. If people only worked for companies where their views jived with the owners views 100%, we would not have many employed people.
I find this line of thinking amusing coming from you. Cathy is doing nothing illegal, and organizations having unsavory agendas is nothing new in this country. No one is advocating violence, although it appears that you are trying to make that llink with your gay bashing story above. The story doesn't give a description of the attacker BTW, and we all know what that is secret code for.
Is this the same PJ from the drug testing thread? I confuse.
Just wow. You know nothing about that girl, her plans, or what it is like to work a crappy, low wage job to have to survive. Congrats. If people only worked for companies where their views jived with the owners views 100%, we would not have many employed people.
I find this line of thinking amusing coming from you. Cathy is doing nothing illegal, and organizations having unsavory agendas is nothing new in this country. No one is advocating violence, although it appears that you are trying to make that llink with your gay bashing story above. The story doesn't give a description of the attacker BTW, and we all know what that is secret code for.
Is this the same PJ from the drug testing thread? I confuse.
But what the hell anyway, I hope they are proud about themselves, nice, way to go.
Strike For The South
08-05-2012, 15:48
Yea, a lot people my age that I know and work with that aren't going to school have to take two jobs in order to support themselves. Another downside of working two low paying jobs is if your workplaces decide to up your hours you get stuck working overtime but without overtime pay, and sometimes you end up working 16 hour days. Not fun.
This is illegal in Texas. If it's illegal here, it's illegal everywhere else. Allot of you guys seem content to take a good old fashioned raping. You have more power than you think.
Just wow. You know nothing about that girl, her plans, or what it is like to work a crappy, low wage job to have to survive. Congrats. If people only worked for companies where their views jived with the owners views 100%, we would not have many employed people.
I find this line of thinking amusing coming from you. Cathy is doing nothing illegal, and organizations having unsavory agendas is nothing new in this country. No one is advocating violence, although it appears that you are trying to make that llink with your gay bashing story above. The story doesn't give a description of the attacker BTW, and we all know what that is secret code for.
Is this the same PJ from the drug testing thread? I confuse.
Exactly. I'm sure that girl is there because she needs to be. I love the great disconnect when the people from the ivory tower come and mingle when the common folk. Leaving a job because of moral reasons is a sliding scale and one old southeners opinion on gay rights would not even move my needle.
I work for people who hold the same views as Cathy. I don't care, its a backwater belief to be sure, but their opinion on gay marriage has nothing to do with me completing my job in a safe, legal, or ethical manner.
Sometimes buisness requries you to work with some people you may not square with. But unless you are Richard Branson or George Clooney, you dont get to set your own rules.
Sometimes buisness requries you to work with some people you may not square with.
Not to get overly philosophical, but this is one of the defining characteristics of humankind and civilization; the ability to organize and cooperate with people we don't much like.
(I would wax poetic, but I'm balancing a screaming baby and typing one-handed.)
PanzerJaeger
08-05-2012, 19:45
Just wow. You know nothing about that girl, her plans, or what it is like to work a crappy, low wage job to have to survive. Congrats. If people only worked for companies where their views jived with the owners views 100%, we would not have many employed people.
I find this line of thinking amusing coming from you. Cathy is doing nothing illegal, and organizations having unsavory agendas is nothing new in this country. No one is advocating violence, although it appears that you are trying to make that llink with your gay bashing story above. The story doesn't give a description of the attacker BTW, and we all know what that is secret code for.
Is this the same PJ from the drug testing thread? I confuse.
You obviously missed the part where I said it was idiotic to harass the kids working at Chick Fil A. I am not attempting to defend the actions of the guy in your video, only to give some perspective on why Chick Fil A elicits such emotion from gay people and their supporters. It has nothing to do with Mr. Cathy's opinions, but his actions. Chick Fil A donates to hate groups. You may call them 'pussified', but that only demonstrates that you have no flowershaped clue what you are talking about on this issue. I won't even bother with all the anti-gay rhetoric (http://www.glaad.org/cap/tony-perkins) or legislation (http://swampland.time.com/2011/11/04/why-does-michigans-anti-bullying-bill-protect-religious-tormenters/) that they lobby for in the United States, because that's just for pussies. How about their donation in 2009 to Exodus International, which later that year traveled to Uganda to tell the stupid Africans that gay people were destroying their families (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html?_r=1). The result? The widely condemned 'Kill the Gays' bill. Well, it wasn't completely condemned. The Chick Fil A sponsored Family Research Council (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20006856-503544.html) lobbied Congress against approving a resolution denouncing Uganda's plan to execute homosexuals. If you don't think that there is a clear link between these groups and the anti-gay violence that is so common in this country and around the world, you are either deluding yourself or you love eating flowershaped meringues. After reading your wonderful posts for years, I'll assume it is the former. When you tell a bunch of idiotic Christian zealots that gay people are 'vile, pawns of the enemy', that they are immoral, that they are terrorists, and that the blood of US Marines is on their hands, most will be content to applaud because they are pussies who understand such comments are just an adult version of playground name calling. There will always be those few warriors for Christ who actually believe what they are being told, however. And if you believe all the things that Chick Fil A supported hate groups say about gay people, why wouldn't you want to hurt them? It's called 'incitement to violence', by the way.
No, I'm sorry, this is not about working for someone with different opinions than your own, or 'the ability to organize and cooperate with people we don't much like'. What Chick Fil A does is not normal corporate lobbying. Very few corporations give any money toward social issues, and even fewer donate directly to hate groups. Their activities go so far beyond a 'principled stance on marriage' (LOL) that the assertion of such is patently ridiculous.
You obviously missed the part where I said it was idiotic to harass the kids working at Chick Fil A. I am not attempting to defend the actions of the guy in your video, only to give some perspective on why Chick Fil A elicits such emotion from gay people and their supporters. It has nothing to do with Mr. Cathy's opinions, but his actions. Chick Fil A donates to hate groups. You may call them 'pussified', but that only demonstrates that you have no fucking clue what you are talking about on this issue. I won't even bother with all the anti-gay rhetoric (http://www.glaad.org/cap/tony-perkins) or legislation (http://swampland.time.com/2011/11/04/why-does-michigans-anti-bullying-bill-protect-religious-tormenters/) that they lobby for in the United States, because that's just for pussies. How about their donation in 2009 to Exodus International, which later that year traveled to Uganda to tell the stupid Africans that gay people were destroying their families (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html?_r=1). The result? The widely condemned 'Kill the Gays' bill. Well, it wasn't completely condemned. The Chick Fil A sponsored Family Research Council (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20006856-503544.html) lobbied Congress against approving a resolution denouncing Uganda's plan to execute homosexuals. If you don't think that there is a clear link between these groups and the anti-gay violence that is so common in this country and around the world, you are either deluding yourself or you are a fucking moron. After reading your wonderful posts for years, I'll assume it is the former. When you tell a bunch of idiotic Christian zealots that gay people are 'vile, pawns of the enemy', that they are immoral, that they are terrorists, and that the blood of US Marines is on their hands, most will be content to applaud because they are pussies who understand such comments are just an adult version of playground name calling. There will always be those few warriors for Christ who actually believe what they are being told, however. And if you believe all the things that Chick Fil A supported hate groups say about gay people, why wouldn't you want to hurt them? It's called 'incitement to violence', by the way.
No, I'm sorry, this is not about working for someone with different opinions than your own, or 'the ability to organize and cooperate with people we don't much like'. What Chick Fil A does is not normal corporate lobbying. Very few corporations give any money toward social issues, and even fewer donate directly to hate groups. Their activities go so far beyond a 'principled stance on marriage' (LOL) that the assertion of such is patently ridiculous.
Mhm, aren't we just full of self-righteousness... yeah, it's practically bursting out.
Here's a quote from Exodus International website:
"We will not support any legislation that deprives others of life and dignity based on their sexual orientation or the expression of such within the confines of a consensual adult relationship. Finally, we stand with the LGBT community both in spirit, and when necessary, legally and physically, when violence rears it’s head in Uganda, Jamaica or anywhere else in the world."
Kill the gays my ass.
PanzerJaeger
08-05-2012, 20:50
Did you actually just quote the statement the organization put out after its well documented involvement in the 'Kill the Gays' bill was brought to light? Yes, because when an organization comes under pressure over something it has done, the press release that follows is entirely accurate and truthful. I can believe that MRD is misinformed on this issue, but you... One Tribesy for you! :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Did you actually just quote the statement the organization put out after its well documented involvement in the 'Kill the Gays' bill was brought to light? Yes, because when an organization comes under pressure over something it has done, the press release that follows is entirely accurate and truthful. I can believe that MRD is misinformed on this issue, but you... One Tribesy for you! :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
It is because in standing for the rights of LBGT citizens, you are now a member of the liberal pinko commie socialist club by those on the right of the spectrum. Welcome ~:wave:
Kidding aside, the reality is, both you and MRD both have good points and I feel you misunderstood him.
Profits from Chick Fil A have gone into anti-LBGT legislation, that is a fact. However, MRD was pointing out the fact that most employees of Chick Fil A have no employment prospect and especially the situation at the moment in America it is very difficult to find work, so people usually grab the nearest thing to employment, get paid ridiculously low wages and toll away just so they have some money to put food on the table. Majority of these people do not have the opportunity or choice of working elsewhere.
Did you actually just quote the statement the organization put out after its well documented involvement in the 'Kill the Gays' bill was brought to light? Yes, because when an organization comes under pressure over something it has done, the press release that follows is entirely accurate and truthful. I can believe that MRD is misinformed on this issue, but you... One Tribesy for you! :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Can you prove otherwise?
PanzerJaeger
08-05-2012, 21:54
Profits from Chick Fil A have gone into anti-LBGT legislation, that is a fact. However, MRD was pointing out the fact that most employees of Chick Fil A have no employment prospect and especially the situation at the moment in America it is very difficult to find work, so people usually grab the nearest thing to employment, get paid ridiculously low wages and toll away just so they have some money to put food on the table. Majority of these people do not have the opportunity or choice of working elsewhere.
I don't know how many times I have to repeat that I was not refering to the minimum wage kids that sling their greasy slop. My first post on the matter clearly refered to 'middle management' and above. Those people do have other options.
Can you prove otherwise?
As I said, it is well documented (http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v24n4/us-christian-right-attack-on-gays-in-africa.html).
For two days in early March 2009, Ugandans flocked to the Kampala Triangle Hotel for the Family Life Network's "Seminar on Exposing the Homosexuals' Agenda." The seminar's very title revealed its claim: LGBT people and activists are engaged in a well thought-out plan to take over the world. The U.S. culture wars had come to Africa with a vengeance.
To put on the conference, the Uganda-based Family Life Network – led by Stephen Langa with the goal of "restoring" traditional family values and morals in Uganda – teamed with two U.S. hatemongers from the Christian Right, Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively and Dan Schmierer of the ex-gay group Exodus International.[1] Vocal opposition in international circles did not stop the country's high profile religious leaders, parliamentarians, police officers, teachers, and concerned parents from attending. Indeed, parliamentary action to wage war on gays was on the conference agenda. It was not enough that homosexuality is illegal in Uganda. As someone stated from the podium,
[The parliament] feels it is necessary to draft a new law that deals comprehensively with the issue of homosexuality and …takes into account the international gay agenda….Right now there is a proposal that a new law be drafted.[2]
The unsuspecting audience heard Lively promote his book, The Pink Swastika, and his argument that not only are gays seeking to take over the world, but they also threaten society by causing higher rates of divorce, child abuse, and HIV/AIDS. Legalizing homosexuality is on par with accepting "molestation of children or having sex with animals," he said. As Lively puts it, LGBT issues cannot be considered human rights issues. "The people coming to Africa now and advancing the idea that human rights serves the homosexual interests are absolutely wrong," he said. "Many of them are outright liars and they are manipulating history; they are manipulating facts in order to push their political agenda." Lively even tarred abortion rights as "a product of the gay philosophy" meant to promote sexual promiscuity in order to "destroy the family." In sum, he warned, U.S. homosexuals are out to recruit young people into homosexual lifestyles so they must be stopped.
As I said, it is well documented (http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v24n4/us-christian-right-attack-on-gays-in-africa.html).
Soooo, criticizing homosexual behavior == kill t3h gh3y?
The guy is not fond of homosexuals and is not afraid to admit it. So what? He's not the one who drafted the Uganda law, nor did he incite any violence against homosexuals. If Ugandan parliament is full of retards, that's not his fault.
Montmorency
08-05-2012, 22:06
It's somewhat ironic that the only Chick-fil-A in New York State is in Greenwich Village. :mellow:
Major Robert Dump
08-05-2012, 22:14
You obviously missed the part where I said it was idiotic to harass the kids working at Chick Fil A. I am not attempting to defend the actions of the guy in your video, only to give some perspective on why Chick Fil A elicits such emotion from gay people and their supporters. It has nothing to do with Mr. Cathy's opinions, but his actions. Chick Fil A donates to hate groups. You may call them 'pussified', but that only demonstrates that you have no fucking clue what you are talking about on this issue. I won't even bother with all the anti-gay rhetoric (http://www.glaad.org/cap/tony-perkins) or legislation (http://swampland.time.com/2011/11/04/why-does-michigans-anti-bullying-bill-protect-religious-tormenters/) that they lobby for in the United States, because that's just for pussies. How about their donation in 2009 to Exodus International, which later that year traveled to Uganda to tell the stupid Africans that gay people were destroying their families (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html?_r=1). The result? The widely condemned 'Kill the Gays' bill. Well, it wasn't completely condemned. The Chick Fil A sponsored Family Research Council (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20006856-503544.html) lobbied Congress against approving a resolution denouncing Uganda's plan to execute homosexuals. If you don't think that there is a clear link between these groups and the anti-gay violence that is so common in this country and around the world, you are either deluding yourself or you are a fucking moron. After reading your wonderful posts for years, I'll assume it is the former. When you tell a bunch of idiotic Christian zealots that gay people are 'vile, pawns of the enemy', that they are immoral, that they are terrorists, and that the blood of US Marines is on their hands, most will be content to applaud because they are pussies who understand such comments are just an adult version of playground name calling. There will always be those few warriors for Christ who actually believe what they are being told, however. And if you believe all the things that Chick Fil A supported hate groups say about gay people, why wouldn't you want to hurt them? It's called 'incitement to violence', by the way.
No, I'm sorry, this is not about working for someone with different opinions than your own, or 'the ability to organize and cooperate with people we don't much like'. What Chick Fil A does is not normal corporate lobbying. Very few corporations give any money toward social issues, and even fewer donate directly to hate groups. Their activities go so far beyond a 'principled stance on marriage' (LOL) that the assertion of such is patently ridiculous.
My response was to your comments that you do not see how any grown up could choose a career at Chic Fil A. Not everyone can afford to walk away from employment because their bosses politics appalls them. If that were the case, we would lose 50% of our federal workers every four years. I happen to find mass scale financial crimes and cheats just as appalling as people who advocate the discrimination against others, because of the far reaching and permanent effects it has on people's lives and the future of the country, but I would never belittle someone for toiling awayfor Bank Of America or AIG, no matter how many lives they have destroyed. I do, however, refuse tot ake insurance cases from AIG because I can afford to.
The oringinal gay violence story you linked had nothing to do with Chic Fil A or the christian organizations. You may think it does, just like Fallout 3 made that guy shoot up the movie theater. Go ahead and make the connection if you want. Of course there are Americans who listen to these groups and act on their impulses, just like there are plenty of people who are anti-gay but not the least bit religious. Just like there are people who do things so idiotic and stupid we constantly walk a fine line of having or thoughts policed and our freedoms skimmed because we have to protect the masses from the savage few.
Regarding their activities in foriegn countries, with people who are ignorant, illiterate and superstitiously religious: Appalling isn't it? Just like so many of the other things US companies, political groups and the government itself supports. I am curious where this passion of yours was when we had ROEs in Iraq that advocated shooting anyone with a cell phone after an IED exploded, when we put people in jail for a non violent drug crime, when we bombed the civilians in Belgrade to avoid fighting the Serbs on the battlefield, and when we gave corporations the rights of a human being to buy and sell US poloiticians at their whim? I dunno, maybe the passion is there and I just missed it.
I am well aware of the garbage this organization puts out and the things they support, and would never associate with them. And I have said time and time again that Cathy is an idiot, and would never survive if he had share holders.
Nothing I saw on Tony Perkins list of quotes was all that worse than the crap spewed back and forth between the parties and their pundits, to include the stuff about the military. Typical American loudmouth. Carry on.
So this guy is supporting hate groups by proxy. Nothing new here. I seem to recall there were Republican congressmen who were ddeply involved with the Kill The Gay Ugandans issue, yet they continue to serve in office. Why aren't you attacking the people who voted for Jim Inhofe?
You seem to think I am completely unaware of what is going on and a "flowershaped meringue" when in fact the only thing I took issue with was your disdain for someone's choice of employment in a period of 9% unemployment and the worst economy of our life. So I will leave you to it.
Papewaio
08-05-2012, 23:26
Gentlemen. Please shake hands, look each other in the eye and play nicely.
Just don't shake hands at chicken fill a as they might get the wrong idea and try and beat you to death with a drumstick.
a completely inoffensive name
08-06-2012, 00:03
Gentlemen. Please shake hands, look each other in the eye and play nicely.
Just don't shake hands at chicken fill a as they might get the wrong idea and try and beat you to death with a drumstick.
NO U! WHY DONT YOU TAKE THE CHICKEN AND EAT SUCH THAT THE 8 DOLLARS BECOMES OPPRESSIVE???
PanzerJaeger
08-06-2012, 00:55
Soooo, criticizing homosexual behavior == kill t3h gh3y?
The guy is not fond of homosexuals and is not afraid to admit it. So what? He's not the one who drafted the Uganda law, nor did he incite any violence against homosexuals. If Ugandan parliament is full of retards, that's not his fault.
There is none so blind as he who will not see. When you knowingly and willfully accept an invitation to speak about the evils of the gay lifestyle at a conference where legislation to kill gay people is on the agenda, I think it is safe to say that you are complicit in such legislation. These guys were invited to provide the 'scientific' basis for the bill, which included meetings with the parliamentarians about the bill, and they gladly accepted.
That is some of the whackiest I've ever heard. Some people are nuts.
They would be doing exactly the same thing in the US if they thought they could get away with it.
My response was to your comments that you do not see how any grown up could choose a career at Chic Fil A. Not everyone can afford to walk away from employment because their bosses politics appalls them. If that were the case, we would lose 50% of our federal workers every four years. I happen to find mass scale financial crimes and cheats just as appalling as people who advocate the discrimination against others, because of the far reaching and permanent effects it has on people's lives and the future of the country, but I would never belittle someone for toiling awayfor Bank Of America or AIG, no matter how many lives they have destroyed. I do, however, refuse tot ake insurance cases from AIG because I can afford to.
The oringinal gay violence story you linked had nothing to do with Chic Fil A or the christian organizations. You may think it does, just like Fallout 3 made that guy shoot up the movie theater. Go ahead and make the connection if you want. Of course there are Americans who listen to these groups and act on their impulses, just like there are plenty of people who are anti-gay but not the least bit religious. Just like there are people who do things so idiotic and stupid we constantly walk a fine line of having or thoughts policed and our freedoms skimmed because we have to protect the masses from the savage few.
Regarding their activities in foriegn countries, with people who are ignorant, illiterate and superstitiously religious: Appalling isn't it? Just like so many of the other things US companies, political groups and the government itself supports. I am curious where this passion of yours was when we had ROEs in Iraq that advocated shooting anyone with a cell phone after an IED exploded, when we put people in jail for a non violent drug crime, when we bombed the civilians in Belgrade to avoid fighting the Serbs on the battlefield, and when we gave corporations the rights of a human being to buy and sell US poloiticians at their whim? I dunno, maybe the passion is there and I just missed it.
I am well aware of the garbage this organization puts out and the things they support, and would never associate with them. And I have said time and time again that Cathy is an idiot, and would never survive if he had share holders.
Nothing I saw on Tony Perkins list of quotes was all that worse than the crap spewed back and forth between the parties and their pundits, to include the stuff about the military. Typical American loudmouth. Carry on.
So this guy is supporting hate groups by proxy. Nothing new here. I seem to recall there were Republican congressmen who were ddeply involved with the Kill The Gay Ugandans issue, yet they continue to serve in office. Why aren't you attacking the people who voted for Jim Inhofe?
You seem to think I am completely unaware of what is going on and a "flowershaped meringues" when in fact the only thing I took issue with was your disdain for someone's choice of employment in a period of 9% unemployment and the worst economy of our life. So I will leave you to it.
First of all, the idea that because I haven’t taken a vocal stand, in the backroom, against every unethical action undertaken by every organization that has ever existed means that I have no place to speak out against any unethical action is patently absurd. I suggest that you rethink that one.
Also, your comparison to AIG et al is similarly poorly thought out. What those financial companies did was greedy, reckless, unethical, and certainly very damaging. However, getting caught up in the creation of an asset bubble involves completely different motivations than donating to hate groups. AIG executives did not hate the American people, and were not acting out of malice – only self-interest. Chick Fil A gets nothing out of its donations other than the satisfaction that they are hurting gay people.
Second, this is not 2009 anymore. People working as executives in a large corporation like Chick Fil A have plenty of other employment options. Please spare me the sob story about 9% unemployment, as it has no bearing on the people being discussed.
Third, ‘Nothing I saw on Tony Perkins list of quotes was all that worse than the crap spewed back and forth between the parties and their pundits, to include the stuff about the military. Typical American loudmouth. Carry on.’ You must be joking. Not even in the deepest, darkest corners of MSNBC or Fox Business are such things uttered. Here’s a thought exercise for you. Replace ‘homosexuals’ with ‘blacks’ or ‘Jews’ and see how easy such statements are to shrug off.
Fourth, ‘So this guy is supporting hate groups by proxy. Nothing new here.’ LOL. What a pathetic attitude. I’m sorry, maybe I’ve become a bleeding heart, but if I were to find out that the organization I work for donates to groups that are equivalent to the KKK, I would seek other work. Your assertion that all companies do this kind of thing and it’s no big deal is, quite frankly, bullshit. This is not normal corporate behavior, and there are plenty of companies that do not engage in such activity, most actually.
Finally, while I did not directly call you a "flowershaped meringue", I would like to apologize. While RVG was attempting to mock me (in his own adorable way), he was very correct – my passion on this issue is very strong. It was uncalled for, and I am sorry.
There is none so blind as he who will not see. When you knowingly and willfully accept an invitation to speak about the evils of the gay lifestyle at a conference where legislation to kill gay people is on the agenda, I think it is safe to say that you are complicit in such legislation. These guys were invited to provide the 'scientific' basis for the bill, which included meetings with the parliamentarians about the bill, and they gladly accepted.
Right, because one thing that an African parliamentary needs before drafting a law is a nod from a white man in a suit. It's convenient to blame the honkey for this one, but ultimately incorrect.
Right, because one thing that an African parliamentary needs before drafting a law is a nod from a white man in a suit. It's convenient to blame the honkey for this one, but ultimately incorrect.
I don't see where PJ made that argument; he's saying that by confirming and affirming anti-homosexual rhetoric to people who intended to kill homosexuals, Perkins bears some responsibility. Seems like a no-brainer to me. Any neo-colonial Only White People Do Bad Things rhetoric is coming from you, not Panzer.
...by confirming and affirming anti-homosexual rhetoric to people who intended to kill homosexuals, Perkins bears some responsibility.
How? Is Perkins a mind reader? How was he supposed to know that they intended to kill homosexuals? And why is his public disavowing of the Ugandan bill cannot be considered genuine? He said that the spread of homosexuality must be stopped, he never explicitly or implicitly mentioned any sorts of violent methods.
How? Is Perkins a mind reader? How was he supposed to know that they intended to kill homosexuals? And why is his public disavowing of the Ugandan bill cannot be considered genuine? He said that the spread of homosexuality must be stopped, he never explicitly or implicitly mentioned any sorts of violent methods.
Well, how about a simple rule: When travelling to a place where the price of machetes spikes during election season, don't use eliminationist rhetoric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliminationism). That would keep everybody on the correct side of the line.
I find it very hard to believe that you would be so understanding and forgiving if a different group were targeted.
Let's say, for example, that a prominent leftist from the USA traveled to Cambodia and gave a speech about how landowners were the enemy and should be eliminated. Then, surprise, landowners are killed. In this scenario, do you think the person giving the speech should feel, oh, I don't know, shame and horror?
How? Is Perkins a mind reader? How was he supposed to know that they intended to kill homosexuals?
He should have known and could have known that some will actually do such a thing
Well, how about a simple rule: When travelling to a place where the price of machetes spikes during election season, don't use eliminationist rhetoric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliminationism). That would keep everybody on the correct side of the line.
I find it very hard to believe that you would be so understanding and forgiving if a different group were targeted.
Let's say, for example, that a prominent leftist from the USA traveled to Cambodia and gave a speech about how landowners were the enemy and should be eliminated. Then, surprise, landowners are killed. In this scenario, do you think the person giving the speech should feel, oh, I don't know, shame and horror?
I bolded the most important word, the one that Perkins did not use. He used the word stopped, not quite the same. Furthermore, the Ugandan law is one of a kind in its severity with no precedent even by African standards. Perkins had no reason to believe they'd take the law that far, making his disavowing of the law genuine.
Furthermore, the Ugandan law is one of a kind in its severity with no precedent even by African standards. Perkins had no reason to believe they'd take the law that far, making his disavowing of the law genuine.
And interestingly, as recently as mid-2010, Perkins was defending the bill on-air. FRC has since deleted the transcript, but the internets have a long memory (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alvin-mcewen/family-research-council-e_b_602594.html). Transcript:
Hello, I am Tony Perkins with the Family Research Council. At the recent National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama took the podium calling for greater civility in Washington, which in my opinion is a laudable goal. However, his comments quickly turned to his preoccupation with defending homosexuality. The President criticized Ugandan leaders for considering enhance penalties for crimes related to homosexuality. The press has widely mischaracterized the law which calls for the death penalty, not for homosexual behavior which is already a crime, but for acts such as intentionally spreading HIV/AIDS, or preying upon vulnerable individuals such as children, which has been a problem in Uganda for years because the large number of orphans. The President said that "We may disagree about gay marriage, "but surely we can agree that it is unconscionable to target gays and lesbians for who they are." Mr. President as long as you characterize efforts to uphold moral conduct that protects others and in particular the most vulnerable, as attacking people, civility will continue to evade us.So to summarize: the bill isn't that bad, think of the childrens, and if them queers would stop spreading AIDS we wouldn't have these here problems.
Note also that when the US congress was preparing a condemnation of the Ugandan bill, the FRC labelled the condemnation as pro-homosexual promotion (http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/06/christian-love-family-research-council.html).
Also note that despite the fact that primary sources for their lobbying have been published, FRC later claimed they had not, in fact, lobbied against the Congressional resolution (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20006856-503544.html). In other words, who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?
Sounds to me like they've been all over the map on the Ugandan law, and are documented as lying about it at least once. And now they have a statement up about how they don't like it and would never support it. Panzer's skepticism is entirely justified.
Major Robert Dump
08-06-2012, 15:39
First of all, the idea that because I haven’t taken a vocal stand, in the backroom, against every unethical action undertaken by every organization that has ever existed means that I have no place to speak out against any unethical action is patently absurd. I suggest that you rethink that one.
Never said that. And the idea that I have not flown off the handle and up your butt every time you hold an opinion that I disagree with confuses me as to where this sudden strike of anger is coming from. There are equally pissy things going on in and around this country than a loud mouth's financial support for the anti gay movement, so right now I am trying to figure out what the oppression/travesty exchange rate is for, say, gay dudes in Uganda vs Dow Chemical's cancer babies. This would make an interesting poker game.
Also, your comparison to AIG et al is similarly poorly thought out. What those financial companies did was greedy, reckless, unethical, and certainly very damaging. However, getting caught up in the creation of an asset bubble involves completely different motivations than donating to hate groups. AIG executives did not hate the American people, and were not acting out of malice – only self-interest. Chick Fil A gets nothing out of its donations other than the satisfaction that they are hurting gay people.
So intent is more important than outcome? The lesser of evil intents is it? Because no one ever died from stress induced illnesses, or committed suicide, or flew off the deep end, or committed crimes against society because they had everything ripped from them and the people responsible not only did not lose their jobs, but were rewarded and excused. And no certainly no "greedy, reckless, unethical, and certainly very damaging" actions (and the state's failure to hold them accountable) have never, ever resulted in people being hurt or killed in the workplace. Ever.
So, if it's all about the Benjamins, that makes it less bad. Got it.
Second, this is not 2009 anymore. People working as executives in a large corporation like Chick Fil A have plenty of other employment options. Please spare me the sob story about 9% unemployment, as it has no bearing on the people being discussed.
I have no idea how we got from a girl in the drive thru, to "middle management and above" (post 50) and now to executives.
Huge difference between middle management and executives, and I would dare say that NO, middle management type may very well NOT have other immediate career options, assuming your definition of MM is the in-store managers and assistants and franchise owners. Maybe an "executive" quitting over this will get him or her some brownie points on the resume and maybe even some positive PR with the press, but to suggest that a store manager or assistant can just bail on his job and find another pronto is a bit of a stretch, and to think some guy who spent a quarter mill getting franchised will just walk away from his investment is also crazy. Ultimately it is their own fault for not doing better research on the team with which they signed on, but I'm not going to lambast them for it. No SOB story here, and it very much has bearing on the story because if it were not for the piss poor economy I am sure more of CFAs employees might have already bailed. Were I a headhunter for the QSR industry, I would be reaching out to CFA employees, assuming there were jobs to be filled.
Third, ‘Nothing I saw on Tony Perkins list of quotes was all that worse than the crap spewed back and forth between the parties and their pundits, to include the stuff about the military. Typical American loudmouth. Carry on.’ You must be joking. Not even in the deepest, darkest corners of MSNBC or Fox Business are such things uttered. Here’s a thought exercise for you. Replace ‘homosexuals’ with ‘blacks’ or ‘Jews’ and see how easy such statements are to shrug off.
Really? Because I seem to recall tales of the military being destroyed and troops being killed when DADT was repealed. I seem to recall this guy on MSNBC name Kieth Olbermann and good old Murtha who liked to paint combat troops with a very broad brush and call them all murderers. I seem to recall Glenn Beck thinking all muslims are extrememists and backing a hold on immigrants, which could very well stoke the fires of crimes against immigrants. I seem to recall a PResident who first denied hearing, then later changed it to "hearing but disagreeing with" his pastor's Kill Whitey rhetoric.
Oh, and there are a disturbing number of members of Congress lining up to support CFA as we speak, and FOX Host Mike Huckabee was behind the CFA appreciation day rallies.
Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond practically died in office. Tom Delay was a known crook and thief yet served term after term because he brought money to his district and only resigned so he could prepare to defend himself over his appalling participation in crimes against the country and against migrant workers in the Mrianne Islands that included forced abortions.
As stated before, Jim Inhofe has been a very vocal supporter of FRC, and did not sever ties when he was "informed" of the issue in Uganda. The FRC held a rallies in 2010 in which Gingirch, Santorum and bunched of others gave speeches. The FRC was already up to no good in Africa then, this was no secret. This is not a new issue. Where have you been?
Fourth, ‘So this guy is supporting hate groups by proxy. Nothing new here.’ LOL. What a pathetic attitude. I’m sorry, maybe I’ve become a bleeding heart, but if I were to find out that the organization I work for donates to groups that are equivalent to the KKK, I would seek other work. Your assertion that all companies do this kind of thing and it’s no big deal is, quite frankly, bullshit. This is not normal corporate behavior, and there are plenty of companies that do not engage in such activity, most actually.
You're right. It is pathetic. It comes from not caring anymore.
No, you're right, most companies don't donate to hate groups. But they do donate to causes that many people disagree with, or to figures that in turn use the funds for appalling measures. Again, back to the guys mentioned above.
This reminds me of the sudden interest everyone had for Joseph Koney, whose exploits I have been following for the better part of my life, wondering why no one does anything about it, and then when I responded luke warm to the sudden surge of interest this year, suddenly I am the heartless sonofabitch? I think not.
And please, stop with the KKK stuff. Really. Huge difference.
Finally, while I did not directly call you a "flowershaped meringue", I would like to apologize. While RVG was attempting to mock me (in his own adorable way), he was very correct – my passion on this issue is very strong. It was uncalled for, and I am sorry.
No problem. I get a little swarmy when I think people are attacking the working stiff.
Transcript: ...The press has widely mischaracterized the law which calls for the death penalty, not for homosexual behavior which is already a crime, but for acts such as intentionally spreading HIV/AIDS, or preying upon vulnerable individuals such as children, which has been a problem in Uganda for years because the large number of orphans...[/ind]
Now, here in the States you can get 25 years in the clink for knowingly transmitting HIV and/or not telling the person you're screwing that you're HIV positive. The law also doesn't look kindly on diddling kids (just ask Jerry Sandusky). While the punishment is a bit too harsh, Perkins makes a good point about it being misrepresented: they aren't trying to criminalize homosexual behavior, it's already illegal there. They are trying to limit the spread of HIV and prevent sexual abuse of minors.
This thread makes me glad I live in Australia, where we have higher minimum wage, and a lower unemployment rate. Though I do see some people who have to work crap shifts for crap money, it certainly isn't as bad as America seems to be.
Perkins makes a good point about [Uganda's law] being misrepresented [...] They are trying to limit the spread of HIV and prevent sexual abuse of minors.
Uh-huh. The Ugandan law has been "misrepresented." Really.
Note that under the new Ugandan law, homosexuality is divided into two categories: "aggravated homosexuality", in which an offender receives the death penalty, or "the offense of homosexuality" in which an offender receives life in a Ugandan prison.
"Aggravated homosexuality" is what you're referring to, where the queer in question is HIV-positive, uses "intoxicating substances" (such as beer), is a "repeat offender," or has sex with a minor. That's the death penalty right there.
Just generally being fabulous nets you life in prison.
Explain to me how the bill is being misrepresented (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Anti-Homosexuality_Bill).
Just generally being fabulous nets you life in prison.
Homosexuality has been criminalized in Uganda long before this law.
Homosexuality has been criminalized in Uganda long before this law.
As you've already said; repetition is not a reasoned argument.
Under the new Ugandan bill, homosexuals get to choose between life imprisonment and death. That's what's got people riled up. The bill is not, as you and the FRC claim, primarily about preventing the spread of HIV. Rather, if I buy you a beer and consensually bugger you behind the chemical sheds, it's death for me and life in the clink for you.
This has people understandably upset.
Moreover, the FRC is on record lobbying against any condemnation of the Ugandan death-to-gays bill, and then lying about their lobbying once word got out. (This was not a casual effort, their filings show they paid $25,000 to lobbyists in their attempt to modify or kill the bill.)
Further muddying the issue, the Ugandan kill-the-gays bill's sponsor, MP David Bahati, says on video (http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/27/23051) that "many American Evangelicals who publicly condemn the bill have told him they privately support it."
I don't see how you can defend FRC on this one.
-edit-
Since we're wandering a bit from the OP: I support Dan Cathy's right to free speech on every level. I also think mayors claiming they can block private businesses (that are breaking no laws) from establishing in their city limits to be insane. The First Amendment overrides their bullying. That said, the Family Research Council is a horrible hate group co-founded by a self-hating closeted man (http://www.towleroad.com/2010/05/george-rentboy-rekers-statements-from-family-research-council-narth-and-rekers-himself.html). The FRC also has a well-documented history of misrepresenting their actions, their staff, and their history. So not only are they a hate group, they are a lying hate group.
Also note that whenever a representative of FRC is forced to openly debate, they tend to get crushed (http://gay.americablog.com/2010/08/when-david-boies-destroyed-tony-perkins.html). Hence the lying, I suppose.
Under the new Ugandan bill, homosexuals get to choose between life imprisonment and death. That's what's got people riled up. The bill is not, as you and the FRC claim, primarily about preventing the spread of HIV. Rather, if I buy you a beer and consensually bugger you behind the chemical sheds, it's death for me and life in the clink for you.
Not true. We'd both get 7 years in jail. See for yourself (at the very bottom): http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/petermontgomery/6065/ugandan_bishops_push_notorious_anti-gay_bill/
Not true. We'd both get 7 years in jail. See for yourself (at the very bottom): http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/petermontgomery/6065/ugandan_bishops_push_notorious_anti-gay_bill/
You are ignoring the "intoxicants" part of the bill, which is not listed in this particular blog, but well-documented.
Also note that under the proposed revision of the bill (the one with less death penalty) you would go to prison for not reporting my "suspected homosexuality" within 24 hours.
I see that most of the conditions for the death penalty are still intact.
You are ignoring the "intoxicants" part of the bill, which is not listed in this particular blog, but well-documented.
Also note that under the proposed revision of the bill (the one with less death penalty) you would go to prison for not reporting my "suspected homosexuality" within 24 hours.
I see that most of the conditions for the death penalty are still intact.
Beer won't qualify. It would have to be a drug according to the letter of the law, and there needs to be a malicious intent.
"...(g) offender applies, administers or causes to be used by any man or woman any drug, matter or thing with intent to stupefy overpower him or her so as to there by enable any person to have unlawful carnal connection with any person of the same sex..."
http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/10/15/15609
Beer won't qualify.
So beer would not fall under the classification of "any drug, matter or thing." Fascinating.
Look, we're getting into the weeds here. I would like to understand what, exactly, you are asserting.
Are you saying that:
The Ugandan bill isn't that bad?
The FRC did not lobby to prevent censure of the Ugandan bill?
Or something else?
So beer would not fall under the classification of "any drug, matter or thing." Fascinating.
You also need the "intent to stupefy." The bill is quite horrible, which is probably why it has not become the law and is unlikely to do so without being heavily amended.
Sasaki Kojiro
08-06-2012, 18:51
The chick-fil-a deal is just the latest opportunity for political people who have contempt for each other to express it. The left probably got a boost from the "evil corporate food chain" tie in and the right from "free speech/free enterprise/government imposing liberal agenda" tie in. The end result is very naturally a grown man berating a teenage girl on video and thinking he's awesome for it. I doubt most of the chick-fil-a people can find uganda on a map but the other side will work themselves up into a "delicious" outrage imagining hordes of christians seething with gay hatred wishing they could institute the death penalty.
It's disgusting that people run straight from "serious" talk about how to prevent gay suicides one month, to wildly exaggerating the degree to which gay people are hated the next month. Great strategy geniuses.
The end result is very naturally a grown man berating a teenage girl on video and thinking he's awesome for it.
I would say that fellow's asinine behavior is entirely on him, not on the general political atmosphere. I've seen people break into acts of shocking rudeness for many different reasons. Politics does not need to be invoked.
Great strategy geniuses.
Who are you addressing? Anyone in this thread?
-edit-
Seems there's asinine behavior aplenty to go around. This man sets a lawn on fire to protest General Mills and gayness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs7Y9iYf_uk
Kralizec
08-06-2012, 20:05
Note to self: never accept a beer from Lemur.
Note to self: never accept a beer from Lemur.
I was trying to find some sort of amusing image response, so I Googled "beer" and "buggering." My mistake. I think I will hide from the internets now.
Vladimir
08-06-2012, 20:34
Why's PJ going all Adolf in this thread? There is a lot of quoting pre-moderator edited posts.
Papewaio
08-06-2012, 23:34
I think we can all agree that alcohol can have a stupefying effect on people. After all it can be so stupefying that people can be in such a state as not to be consensual because they are not able to say yes. DrivIng the porcelain bus is very unattractive but it's a pretty concrete example of how far we as a society go with alcohol.
=][=
Executing someone for sex between adults is beyond reasonable it is quite pathetically backwards. Whilst free speech is protected I don't think hate crimes or enshrining them in law should be allowed.
Kralizec
08-07-2012, 11:22
The chick-fil-a deal is just the latest opportunity for political people who have contempt for each other to express it. The left probably got a boost from the "evil corporate food chain" tie in and the right from "free speech/free enterprise/government imposing liberal agenda" tie in. The end result is very naturally a grown man berating a teenage girl on video and thinking he's awesome for it. I doubt most of the chick-fil-a people can find uganda on a map but the other side will work themselves up into a "delicious" outrage imagining hordes of christians seething with gay hatred wishing they could institute the death penalty.
It's disgusting that people run straight from "serious" talk about how to prevent gay suicides one month, to wildly exaggerating the degree to which gay people are hated the next month. Great strategy geniuses.
Taking it out on the employees is wrong. Other than that the company entirely deserves the crapstorm it finds itself in.
Corporate lobbying and involvement in politics is suspect in general, but it's existance is a fact and we'll have to put up with it as long as its transparant and does not regress into bribery or other forms of corruption. In this case a company is propping up a cause that it has absolutely no financial stake in, for no other reason that its owner wants to influence politics to conform to his own notions of morality. The owner even tries to do this abroad and willingly associated itself with an oppressive, bigoted government in Africa.
I have no problems with a boycot against such a company, nor would I work for it if I had alternatives. Free speech doesn't entail that everybody else has to like you or that they can't treat you differently for it. Some politicians try to benefit from the outrage by making BS statements? Colour me surprised. That some moron is on video bullying a low-paid employee is even less interesting.
Taking it out on the employees is wrong. Other than that the company entirely deserves the crapstorm it finds itself in.
Corporate lobbying and involvement in politics is suspect in general, but it's existance is a fact and we'll have to put up with it as long as its transparant and does not regress into bribery or other forms of corruption. In this case a company is propping up a cause that it has absolutely no financial stake in, for no other reason that its owner wants to influence politics to conform to his own notions of morality. The owner even tries to do this abroad and willingly associated itself with an oppressive, bigoted government in Africa.
I have no problems with a boycot against such a company, nor would I work for it if I had alternatives. Free speech doesn't entail that everybody else has to like you or that they can't treat you differently for it. Some politicians try to benefit from the outrage by making BS statements? Colour me surprised. That some moron is on video bullying a low-paid employee is even less interesting.
It's not a boycott, it's denying settlement. I probably would't get along with them but they shouldn't be denied settlement because they have an opinion on something, that is kinda totalitarian. Or better very totalitarian. As long as there is no call fr violence any opinion whatever it is should be respected and certainly not be discriminated in such a way. Bah@activism
Aaaaaaaaand ... now the Cheerios arsonist is fired (http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2012/08/minnesotas-cheerios-arsonist-is-fired.html).
I guess it's for the best for all of these middle-management types to do viral videos and get canned. Makes room on the promotion chain for the rest of us.
Major Robert Dump
08-07-2012, 20:55
No one is being denied settlement. A Mayor cannot keep a business out all by himself. He needs the City Council and/or a referendum to get this done.
Many communities have successfully kept out Wal Marts, businesses they feel will pollute the coomunity (literally and morally), and even things like half way houses, rehabs and mental homes.
All these mayors were doing was posturing, which whipped the christians into a posturing fenzy as well, which was the whole point of the OP
Vladimir
08-08-2012, 17:21
Aaaaaaaaand ... now the Cheerios arsonist is fired (http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2012/08/minnesotas-cheerios-arsonist-is-fired.html).
I guess it's for the best for all of these middle-management types to do viral videos and get canned. Makes room on the promotion chain for the rest of us.
Lemur: Fair and balanced.
Major Robert Dump
08-08-2012, 21:30
This is one way to create jobs.
He wasn't really an employee, he was a "contractor" who now has no contract.
I love the firms quote that they do not condone the alleged destruction of property. "Alleged" made me LOL.
ICantSpellDawg
08-09-2012, 04:27
Why would PJ spend so much time obsessing over these things? He's either a modern William Wilberforce or Frederick Douglas; the smart money is on Douglas.
PanzerJaeger
08-09-2012, 06:39
Right, because one thing that an African parliamentary needs before drafting a law is a nod from a white man in a suit. It's convenient to blame the honkey for this one, but ultimately incorrect.
A white man in a suit? I do not know what to do with this. Please respond to arguments I have actually made in the future.
Never said that. And the idea that I have not flown off the handle and up your butt every time you hold an opinion that I disagree with confuses me as to where this sudden strike of anger is coming from. There are equally pissy things going on in and around this country than a loud mouth's financial support for the anti gay movement, so right now I am trying to figure out what the oppression/travesty exchange rate is for, say, gay dudes in Uganda vs Dow Chemical's cancer babies. This would make an interesting poker game.
My anger stemmed from your minimalization of the threat facing gay people from these groups, which I found uninformed and somewhat grating. These groups operate under the guise of 'Christian Family Values' to marginalize gay people in ways that extend far beyond the marriage issue. What these groups have or are trying to have passed through GOP state legislatures will have a far more damaging impact on some of the most vulnerable people in our society, but that gets no coverage. I would gladly let marraige go if it meant that these monsters would leave gay children alone. No hate group in modern America, whether it be the KKK or the FRC, can openly advocate violence, as legal precedent has been established to hold them accountable for such rhetoric. However, you are sadly mistaken if you honestly believe that these groups are not directly involved in anti-gay violence across the country. Tony Perkins is the 'politically correct' face of the movement. The things they say behind closed church doors are far worse.
Again, I apologize for my anger. This thread was a predictable mistake.
So intent is more important than outcome? The lesser of evil intents is it? Because no one ever died from stress induced illnesses, or committed suicide, or flew off the deep end, or committed crimes against society because they had everything ripped from them and the people responsible not only did not lose their jobs, but were rewarded and excused. And no certainly no "greedy, reckless, unethical, and certainly very damaging" actions (and the state's failure to hold them accountable) have never, ever resulted in people being hurt or killed in the workplace. Ever.
So, if it's all about the Benjamins, that makes it less bad. Got it.
Intent is obviously more important than outcome in judging the severity of an action. Outcome is a wholly separate issue. It is enshrined in our understanding of justice through the concept of degree. If I run you over in my car by accident while texting, it would be declared manslaughter. If I planned to run you over, it would be murder. You would be dead either way.
I would submit that intentionally trying to hurt people based on nothing more than hate is far worse than getting caught up in reckless risk taking and greed. As egregious as those Wall Street bankers' actions were, they were not intentionally trying to hurt anyone.
Huge difference between middle management and executives, and I would dare say that NO, middle management type may very well NOT have other immediate career options, assuming your definition of MM is the in-store managers and assistants and franchise owners. Maybe an "executive" quitting over this will get him or her some brownie points on the resume and maybe even some positive PR with the press, but to suggest that a store manager or assistant can just bail on his job and find another pronto is a bit of a stretch, and to think some guy who spent a quarter mill getting franchised will just walk away from his investment is also crazy. Ultimately it is their own fault for not doing better research on the team with which they signed on, but I'm not going to lambast them for it. No SOB story here, and it very much has bearing on the story because if it were not for the piss poor economy I am sure more of CFAs employees might have already bailed. Were I a headhunter for the QSR industry, I would be reaching out to CFA employees, assuming there were jobs to be filled.
We will just have to disagree here, as I have always been under the impression that competent fast food managers, and even assistant managers, are always in high demand. I would not consider them 'middle management' in a corporation the size of Chick Fil A anyway. DMs, RVPs, et cetera more accurately fill that role, not anyone on site.
Really? Because I seem to recall tales of the military being destroyed and troops being killed when DADT was repealed. I seem to recall this guy on MSNBC name Kieth Olbermann and good old Murtha who liked to paint combat troops with a very broad brush and call them all murderers. I seem to recall Glenn Beck thinking all muslims are extrememists and backing a hold on immigrants, which could very well stoke the fires of crimes against immigrants. I seem to recall a PResident who first denied hearing, then later changed it to "hearing but disagreeing with" his pastor's Kill Whitey rhetoric.
Oh, and there are a disturbing number of members of Congress lining up to support CFA as we speak, and FOX Host Mike Huckabee was behind the CFA appreciation day rallies.
Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond practically died in office. Tom Delay was a known crook and thief yet served term after term because he brought money to his district and only resigned so he could prepare to defend himself over his appalling participation in crimes against the country and against migrant workers in the Mrianne Islands that included forced abortions.
As stated before, Jim Inhofe has been a very vocal supporter of FRC, and did not sever ties when he was "informed" of the issue in Uganda. The FRC held a rallies in 2010 in which Gingirch, Santorum and bunched of others gave speeches. The FRC was already up to no good in Africa then, this was no secret. This is not a new issue. Where have you been?
I would love to see a video of Olbermann calling all US troops murderers. If anyone ever has, it would be him. None of the rest of what you mention are actually examples of people saying the kind of things Tony Perkins has about gays.
No, you're right, most companies don't donate to hate groups. But they do donate to causes that many people disagree with, or to figures that in turn use the funds for appalling measures. Again, back to the guys mentioned above.
This reminds me of the sudden interest everyone had for Joseph Koney, whose exploits I have been following for the better part of my life, wondering why no one does anything about it, and then when I responded luke warm to the sudden surge of interest this year, suddenly I am the heartless sonofabitch? I think not.
I felt that your comments went beyond cynicism and strayed into minimalism of a particularly abhorrent movement. Maybe I misunderstood you, or maybe you are trying to turn this into a broader argument about AIG and/or Joseph Koney that never actually existed. I'm too exhausted tonight to figure it out.
And please, stop with the KKK stuff. Really. Huge difference.
Actually, groups like the FRC are remarkably similar to the modern KKK. The fight to preserve white culture/Christian Values follows the same basic modus oporandi and appeals to the same core group of people in America. Nobody gets lynched anymore. It is all about hearts and minds these days, but that doesn't mean the hate is not just as potent.
Why would PJ spend so much time obsessing over these things? He's either a modern William Wilberforce or Frederick Douglas; the smart money is on Douglas.
I think I understand what you are saying, but I am not sure.
I think I understand what you are saying, but I am not sure.
From what I am grasping, he is basically saying "You are a heterosexual with a deep passion for the equal rights of LGBT citizens" (the William Wilberforce) or "You are a LGBT citizen yourself promoting for equal rights" (the Frederick Douglas). But both of these are talking about the Slave Trade in their respective times.
I don't think our Panzer is heterosexual, just saying. And it wouldn't mean anything to me really.
Major Robert Dump
08-09-2012, 19:30
I really think turning this thread into a guessing game for PJs sexual orientation is pretty tacky, be it kidding or not. I realize we all poke fun at each other in various sexual ways and use lots of gay undertones in our exchanges, but I just don't think it belongs in this particular thread.
@PJ
You are right. I am minimalizing it in terms of CONUS. It's not misinformation, it's apathy and amusement. While there are definitive cases of right and wrong in this entire ordeal, the sky is, in fact, not falling in the good ole USA, and the comparison of the gay rights movement to the black civil rights movement I happen to find absurd. These people may very well engage in "off the record" condoning of violence behind closed doors, and until it becomes public, it is just that: off the record. It amounts to nothing more than accusations of old white guys in a cigar smoke filled room planning to invade Iraq for the oil. Show us the proof, and we shut them down. Until then, it is politic as usual, so get in line. Picking on vulnerable people is disgusting and a shame. But it is far from an epidemic, and even if it were an epidemic, the FRC is not the only one fanning the flame. Homophobia goes far beyond a person being Christian.
Suggesting that this group is like the KKK is a stretch. Talk all you want about "times are a changin" and that the lynches now are symbolic, not literal. We can apply that standard to virtually everything, and many people do, which is why we get Godwin. Using this rationale I would assume that you are a "constitution as a living document" type of guy, which I would havenever taken you for.
The examples of hateful people I gave go beyond "saying" things about people. You said it yourself: actions go beyond words. Yet they continued to get re elected in the face of terrible things said and done. Over and over again. politics as usual. You say you do not understand the link, while I think I make myself fairly clear. People pick their fights, and I do not understand outrage when the left hand does something but not when it's the right hand. I do't get it. Nut maybe I just think too broadly, like when I pointed out that feminist anti-porn advocates use an argument that defeats their own arguments for abortion-on-demand. No one saw the humor but me. Whatevs
All I am doing is trying to apply the same standards to this little scandal as I do everything else. Just because I am rooting for your side to win, does not mean that when people blow hot air out of their butts that I have to treat it like top-shelf perfume.
Major Robert Dump
08-16-2012, 23:11
WE MUST STOP THE GAY VIOLENCE AGAINST THE CHRISTIANS
Major Robert Dump
08-17-2012, 00:14
The authorities obviously dropped the ball on this.
The Question is Did he buy all 15 sandwiches at once, or did he spread it out over time as not to raise suspicion????
The authorities obviously dropped the ball on this.
The Question is Did he buy all 15 sandwiches at once, or did he spread it out over time as not to raise suspicion????
I disagree with your politics, but excuse me will I enrich you donors. ~:rolleyes:
a completely inoffensive name
08-18-2012, 03:41
I have a suspicion that everyone is coming over to McDonalds ordering a McChicken from me instead of supporting Chick-fil-a.
Well this is interesting (http://www.joemygod.blogspot.com/2012/08/frc-president-tony-perkins-supported.html). Apparently the FRC's Tony Perkins has long-standing ties with David Duke.
https://i.imgur.com/7iMwK.jpg
In 1996, while managing the U.S. Senate campaign of Woody Jenkins against Mary Landrieu, Perkins paid $82,500 to use the mailing list of former Klan chieftain David Duke. The campaign was fined $3,000 (reduced from $82,500) after Perkins and Jenkins filed false disclosure forms in a bid to hide their link to Duke. Five years later, on May 17, 2001, Perkins gave a speech to the Louisiana chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC), a white supremacist group that has described black people as a “retrograde species of humanity.” Perkins claimed not to know the group’s ideology at the time, but it had been widely publicized in Louisiana and the nation, because in 1999 — two years before Perkins’ speech to the CCC — Republican House Speaker Trent Lott had been embroiled in a national scandal over his ties to the group. GOP chairman Jim Nicholson then urged Republicans to avoid the CCC because of its “racist views.”
Major Robert Dump
08-21-2012, 15:16
What a douche. Someone went to town on the mocrophish in the old public library. Some things never go away ")
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.