Chick-fil-a v. Chicago, Boston NOT A GAY RIGHTS THREAD

13»

Replies

  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,056 Senior Member
    BTW Tolerance doesn't imply that you have to agree with someone's beliefs, actions, or life style, but it does imply that you accept their right to believe, act, or live accordingly.
    Wow! You sound like a libertarian.

    How does a pinko commie libtard like you come to that conclusion?:wink:
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,355 Senior Member
    BTW Tolerance doesn't imply that you have to agree with someone's beliefs, actions, or life style, but it does imply that you accept their right to believe, act, or live accordingly.


    A view that surprisingly few of the 'open-minded and tolerant' crowd ever demonstrate. Almost invariably, if somebody is crying intolerance they are doing so in order that 'you' accept 'them'. Not so much going the other way. IOW, if 'I' am hammering 'you', it's because 'you've' got the wrong ideas, not because 'I'm' intolerant. You know, that whole pot/kettle thing. It's easy (and permissible) to be intolerant when you're right and those you discriminate against are so very wrong.
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,590 Senior Member
    coolgunguy wrote: »
    A view that surprisingly few of the 'open-minded and tolerant' crowd ever demonstrate. Almost invariably, if somebody is crying intolerance they are doing so in order that 'you' accept 'them'. Not so much going the other way. IOW, if 'I' am hammering 'you', it's because 'you've' got the wrong ideas, not because 'I'm' intolerant. You know, that whole pot/kettle thing. It's easy (and permissible) to be intolerant when you're right and those you discriminate against are so very wrong.

    A great test of any statement or political stance that targets a specific group is to change out the group name and see if it's still an acceptable statement for someone to make. Here are some examples:

    Conservatives should not be allowed to serve in the military as their presence reduces the combat effectiveness of our fighting force

    Mixed race couples are an abomination and go against god's will and allowing them to marry is an attack on traditional marriage

    Christianity does not reflect the standards and feelings of the city of Chicago and is not welcome here
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Posts: 5,379 Senior Member
    For your consideration, even if the rights of the states supersedes the First Amendment, the Massachusetts Constitution and Bill of Rights also protects free speech, in Part 1:

    "XXI.--The freedom of deliberation, speech and debate, in either house of the legislature, is so essential to the rights of the people, that it cannot be the foundation of any accusation or prosecution, action or complaint, in any other court or place whatsoever."

    http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/bill_of_rightss6.html
    - I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
    "It's far easier to start out learning to be precise and then speeding up, than it is having never "mastered" the weapon, and trying to be precise." - Dan C
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    I was just poking a little fun of intolerant people resorting to arguments of tolerance over other people failing to tolerate their intolerance.

    Is that not the wrong phrase to use in this context?:tooth:

    cjp wrote: »..... Oh dear God, I've admitted to liking something Limey.I'll never hear the end of this.

    Jayhawker wrote: »...But seriously Shush....

    Big Chief wrote: ».........walking around with a greasy butt ain't no fun, though!

     


     

  • MississippiBoyMississippiBoy Senior Member Posts: 819 Senior Member
    A great test of any statement or political stance that targets a specific group is to change out the group name and see if it's still an acceptable statement for someone to make. Here are some examples:

    Conservatives should not be allowed to serve in the military as their presence reduces the combat effectiveness of our fighting force

    Mixed race couples are an abomination and go against god's will and allowing them to marry is an attack on traditional marriage

    Christianity does not reflect the standards and feelings of the city of Chicago and is not welcome here

    Maybe I'm not following something here, but it seems to me that if you can arbitrarily change the group name to something else, then you probably COULD get the statement to be acceptable. Such as:

    "Militant jihadists should not be allowed to serve in the military as their presence reduces the combat effectiveness of our fighting force."

    "Brother/sister couples are an abomination and go against god's will and allowing them to marry is an attack on traditional marriage."

    "Satanism does not reflect the standards and feelings of the city of Chicago and is not welcome here."

    I'm not trying to ruffle your feathers, I'm just not understanding the point.....
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,355 Senior Member
    A great test of any statement or political stance that targets a specific group is to change out the group name and see if it's still an acceptable statement for someone to make. Here are some examples:

    Conservatives should not be allowed to serve in the military as their presence reduces the combat effectiveness of our fighting force

    Mixed race couples are an abomination and go against god's will and allowing them to marry is an attack on traditional marriage

    Christianity does not reflect the standards and feelings of the city of Chicago and is not welcome here


    Well, I suppose that is a good test...but what does it have to do with the tools currently holding poltical office in Boston and Chicago banning (or not allowing further expansion of) a certain restraunt chain due to the private beliefs of the company's CEO? Again, these are NOT corporate rules or agenda, they are merely the privately held beliefs of an employee, not to mention an employee who holds little or no sway over the day-to-day dealings of any single restraunt in the chain.

    Maybe I misunderstand, but it seems as though you're defending the actions of the two mayors? Now, turnabout being fair and all, how would you view a so-called conservative/'religious right' mayor legally banning (through zoning ordinances, etc.) Planned Parenthood or any other orginization who's agenda didn't fit his/hers? Does anybody have ANY doubt whatsoever how that would go over? Mind you, I'm not talking about the legal angle as I don't believe there is any valid argument at all. I'm only talking about the media outrage and the 'personal' angle from the rest of us....
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,985 Senior Member
    One news reporter said said the same day Chicago's mayor said this about Chick-Fil_A he was standing with his arm around Louis Farrakhan who openly call for Gays to be thrown off cliffs, an admitted racist, at an event the same day. Talk about a hypocrite.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,355 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    One news reporter said said the same day Chicago's mayor said this about Chick-Fil_A he was standing with his arm around Louis Farrakhan who openly call for Gays to be thrown off cliffs, an admitted racist, at an event the same day. Talk about a hypocrite.


    C'mon Chief....hypocritical lefties?! Tell me another fairy tale! :troll::wink:
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,985 Senior Member
    coolgunguy wrote: »
    C'mon Chief....hypocritical lefties?! Tell me another fairy tale! :troll::wink:

    Must be the kind of Chicago the mayor wants, a real Utopia with jobs fer all and no crime :tooth:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,821 Senior Member
    One man who happens to own a business is asked by a religious press what his view is on a sensitive subject. He answered his honest opinion/belief. He in no way advocated treating the group unfairly in service or hiring. The main stream media gets hold of it and creates a firestorm of hate against not only the man, but all his businesses and franchisees. The GBLTs get all spun up, and the liberals all come out condemning him and all the business and the franchisees. A few mayors show their donkeys saying they will ban his business from their cities because he has different beliefs/opinions than theirs.

    Now, just WHO is acting intolerant here? Not the business owner or the franchisees. Just the usual suspects, the flaming liberals that demand inclusion of all, just as long as you agree and walk in lockstep with THEIR beliefs. Liberals, the American equivalent of the Taliban and Sharia law. I guess Rahm is their Maximum Ayatollah Grand Wazoo.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Posts: 5,379 Senior Member
    Just to add fuel to the fire, I found this the other day:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-badash/chick-fil-a-5-reasons-it-isnt-what-you-think_b_1725237.html

    They certainly have the right to use their money as they wish (the Supreme Court ruled that legally corporations count as people, not sure how I feel about that the more I learn about campaign finance and super PACs), but it's very interesting nonetheless.
    - I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
    "It's far easier to start out learning to be precise and then speeding up, than it is having never "mastered" the weapon, and trying to be precise." - Dan C
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,590 Senior Member
    coolgunguy wrote: »
    Maybe I misunderstand, but it seems as though you're defending the actions of the two mayors?

    Here is what I wrote earlier in the thread and I stand by it. Maybe if you read what I wrote and just assumed what I believed because of who you think I am it might not be so hard to misunderstand.
    I think they're definitely over reaching. Cities in the past have been able to keep out companies like Walmart or stripclubs and other adult businesses through zoning, but don't see how you can single out a specific company like this.
    I'll add that Rham is talking about the people of Chicago not wanting chick-fil-a in their city. Seems to me they can make that decision themselves by choosing to eat there or not.

    Everything else was targeted at those complaining about being discriminated against for their intolerance.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
13»
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.