PDA

View Full Version : Are you boycotting Chick-Fil-A?



Pages : [1] 2

bighead384
08-04-2012, 02:26 PM
Are you boycotting Chick-Fil-A?

I don't see a reason to. It's just their opinion. I especially don't like how governors in Boston and Chicago have told Chick-Fil-A they can't do business there. That sends the message that all citizens should be thinking the same way those governors do.

Related: Gay Rights activists hold a "Kiss-In": http://articles.cnn.com/2012-08-03/us/us_chick-fil-a-kiss-day_1_marriage-supporters-gay-rights-activists-gay-marriages

Little_Miss_1565
08-04-2012, 02:32 PM
Point of order: Chicago and Boston haven't actually blocked CFA from opening stores there. They've just committed acts of being blowhards, which really all politicians are.

I haven't bought anything at a CFA in years because it's not new that they donate corporate funds to anti-gay initiatives. They can do whatever they like with their money, but they don't need to do it with my money.

KTILLA23
08-04-2012, 03:46 PM
Don't really care, i have never and will never go there anyways.

Jojan
08-04-2012, 03:57 PM
I have just learnt about Chick-Fil-A this week.

WebDudette
08-04-2012, 04:25 PM
Are you boycotting Chick-Fil-A?

I don't see a reason to. It's just their opinion. I especially don't like how governors in Boston and Chicago have told Chick-Fil-A they can't do business there. That sends the message that all citizens should be thinking the same way those governors do.


Yes, I have been for quite a few years. It's not just their opinion, they are actively giving financial support to organization working against homosexual equality. Furthermore, boycotting them is in no way an 'attack'. I'm not preventing them from doing business, I just choose not to give them mine. Everyone who was interviewed during the National Chick-Fil-A Day thing said that they were there to protect CFA's freedom of speech, to support their right to choose, and to defend them against people who would try to infringe on their rights. That's horse shit and they know it. They are there to support homophobia and nothing else. That's okay, they have every right to do that, just as I have every right to not support CFA, but at least be honest about your motives. The only people even attempting to infringe on others rights are those within CFA responsible for funding anti-homosexual groups.

Chick-Fil-A can still open up shop in Boston and Chicago, there's no official law or anything against it. I can't say I support what those governors said. I mean, it's perfectly fine to say they disagree with CFA's practices, but it's a little extreme to say they aren't welcome. It just doesn't seem like their place to me. Still though, CFA is in no way banned from either city.

cool 2 hate 681
08-04-2012, 04:31 PM
Don't really care, i have never and will never go there anyways.

same here
10

Godxilla
08-04-2012, 04:46 PM
I actually live in Massachusetts, so one could almost say that this is a very local thing for me.
Now, to my argument:
I would vote no for a few reasons. First, I think that our Mayor For Life Thomas "Mumbles" Menino has committed a grave mistake in telling CFA to get out and stay out. Now, he was never a pro-business Mayor For Life anyway, but this is simply amazing. To tell a business that has not done anything wrong (meaning breaking laws or evading taxes or something) to stay out of Boston is downright absurd. Clearly, Mumbles enjoys McDonald's more. I have no opinion in that regard, as I have never eaten at either venue, and never will, because of my severe allergy to peanuts and peanut oil. In other words, I would be killing myself by eating there.
Second, there is no need for the Mayor For Life to tell them to screw off. Why? Because gays, lesbiens, transgenders, bisexuals, and other "gay" groups DON'T HAVE TO EAT THERE. If they disagree, then don't go there. And CFA should be allowed to open it's doors for another reason: every time we Massachusettsians see a CFA, we will think about gay rights.
Finally, there are undoubtedly several other businesses that don't support gays and in fact support antigay groups. But Mayor For Life Mumbles will ignore them, because giving them attention would be fair, just, and uniform, 3 things that Democrats hate. It surprises me how big of a deal this is. But as Chris Smoove once said, " It's amazin'-mazin'"
So, in the end, I voted no, and feel strongly that this is the right choice.

Little_Miss_1565
08-04-2012, 04:51 PM
Godxilla, if I'm not mistaken he urged CFA to withdraw their permit application. Menino did nothing legally binding. It's political posturing.

There are many orgs whose heads are very conservative personally, which is fine, but CFA goes the extra step of making this part of their corporate mission.

CFA gets to choose what they support, and others get to choose not to support them because of it.

WebDudette
08-04-2012, 05:02 PM
Just for the record, there are other companies I choose not support for similar reasons. I will never bu anything from or donate to the Boy Scouts of America and I will never have anything to do with the Salvation Army. On the other hand, I'll eat the shit out of some In-N-Out.

What is it that people don't seem to understand about this whol Boston/Chicago thing? There is no real situation here, it's just political pandering that literally ever politician since the dawn of time has participated in. As I said, I think they should have merely expressed their disapproval and left it at that, but they aren't actually doing anything to CFA.

Little_Miss_1565
08-04-2012, 06:54 PM
What is it that people don't seem to understand about this whol Boston/Chicago thing?

It's the same sort of untruth that leads many people to think not supporting CFA = suppressing free speech. Disagreement is also a form of free speech. Buying Chik-Fil-A does not mean you are a free speech crusader. But that doesn't seem to stop anyone from publicly proclaiming this. Thus, mayors expressing their personal disapproval of CFA's policies and how they don't want to see them in their cities apparently also means they're legally blocking them from entering the city limits...even though it doesn't.

XYlophonetreeZ
08-04-2012, 06:58 PM
The pathetic part is how Sarah Palin and all of those people who showed up for "Chick-Fil-A appreciation day" are calling this a free speech issue. They're intentionally drawing disproportionate attention to the very few mayors who have publicly stated that the establishments are not welcome, rather than that larger issue at hand- which is that many people are understandably unhappy with to whom the company chooses to donate.

The main issue at hand, as Sarah and Pilz-E said, is that they have been donating money to anti-gay organizations. I really don't give a shit about the CEO's beliefs. If he wanted to donated to those organizations out of his own pocket, I wouldn't care one way or another about Chick-Fil-A, and would not stop eating there unless I had a problem with my local franchise owners. But the thing is, they're using consumer-driven profits to finance anti-gay organizations. That's a perfectly good reason to boycott a company. I am not eating at Chick-Fil-A. And in making that choice, I am in no way infringing on their First Amendment rights.

I'll add that I'm also not protesting; I'm just not going there. I think that drawing too much attention to boycotts can backfire, as it already has by inspiring all those people to show up for Chick-Fil-A appreciation day.

WebDudette
08-04-2012, 07:19 PM
I agree with that last bit. I've never participated in any form of protest, I've never even tried to convince friends not to eat there, I've just told them why I chose not to. When this whole thing exploded I half expected the counter protest thing to happen. Bums me out man.

I did think it'd be funny to show up and make out with dudes or something, but in the end that will probably do more harm than good.

dorkrockcorkrod
08-04-2012, 10:18 PM
If the CEO had simply said "I personally don't believe in gay marriage" and hadn't ever donated to anti-gay groups that want to make being homosexual illegal entirely, then I'd probably just ignore the guy. However, that's not the case. Idiot fundamentalist Christians.

Godxilla
08-05-2012, 10:41 AM
Godxilla, if I'm not mistaken he urged CFA to withdraw their permit application. Menino did nothing legally binding. It's political posturing.

There are many orgs whose heads are very conservative personally, which is fine, but CFA goes the extra step of making this part of their corporate mission.

CFA gets to choose what they support, and others get to choose not to support them because of it.

Exactly. I'll never eat there for a nonpolitical reason, so I guess that I'm not boycotting them. However, I have no issue with gays choosing not to go there, and I have no problems with antigays going there. They can support what they want to support, and even though it's not a big issue in reality, I guess that one could be angry at their donating habits.

And Mayor For Life Menino has NEVER done anything within the laws, so I guess this is typical.

Little_Miss_1565
08-05-2012, 10:59 AM
Again, Godxilla, he wrote a letter. He didn't actually block them from doing anything.

Scythe Death
08-05-2012, 12:10 PM
I don't even go to CFA due to bad food. The anti-gay stuff is kind of the nail in the coffin for me. I'm sure to not ever go there, especially after the whole donations thing.

People saying that the CFA CEO shouldn't be legally allowed to say such things are retards. I'm not even sure if they exist. People assuming that not believing you can say anything without consequence is a violation to free speech are even bigger retards though. It's not "fascist" to use free-speech against the opinion of someone else.

Tiny Vessels
08-05-2012, 12:21 PM
Fuck yeah I am.

Outerspaceman21
08-05-2012, 01:12 PM
I actually had never heard of this restaurant until this whole controversy started. I went on their website to see if there was any restaurant near me, and no there isn't. As for boycotting, I really wouldn't call it boycotting for me, but rather one isn't in my town for me to access nor do I want to because their food doesn't look all that great either.

Jakebert
08-05-2012, 03:05 PM
Usually when someone in the media, whether it's a politician or a CEO or a talk show host, defends "free speech" it's usually code for "stop criticizing me" which is clearly the case with the Chic-fi-la thing.

Godxilla
08-05-2012, 03:58 PM
Usually when someone in the media, whether it's a politician or a CEO or a talk show host, defends "free speech" it's usually code for "stop criticizing me" which is clearly the case with the Chic-fi-la thing.

Y'know, you could spell it correctly. I've noticed, in my years of foruming, that when someone spells something horribly on purpose, it's usually because they hate that thing, but are too retarded to actually know why. Or they just don't have their own opinion, and therefore copy and paste the most derogatory argument and the misspell the object of their hate. And I'm sure that you have a decent reason for hating them, so why not spell it out for us? Or you could just say CFA. Easier.

Jakebert
08-05-2012, 04:19 PM
You're reading entirely too much into a simple misspelling.

Little_Miss_1565
08-05-2012, 04:24 PM
If the most inflammatory thing Jakebert said was to misspell Chick-Fil-A, don't you think it's a little strange to light into him about it?

WebDudette
08-05-2012, 04:41 PM
Is that kinda like how you call Scythe Death 'Scythe Douche'?

Little_Miss_1565
08-05-2012, 05:59 PM
Is that kinda like how you call Scythe Death 'Scythe Douche'?

Shhh, quit reminding him, you pot smoaxer ;)

Jakebert
08-05-2012, 07:01 PM
I seriously keep re-reading his post but I cannot for the life of me understand it.

Scythe Death
08-05-2012, 08:00 PM
Usually when someone in the media, whether it's a politician or a CEO or a talk show host, defends "free speech" it's usually code for "stop criticizing me" which is clearly the case with the Chic-fi-la thing.

Exactly. It's like they don't understand free speech themselves.

0r4ng3
08-05-2012, 09:35 PM
I seriously keep re-reading his post but I cannot for the life of me understand it.
Clearly it's because your misspelling has turned you into a dirty godless commie. Or something.

BagOfShenanigans
08-05-2012, 10:12 PM
Anyone else find any subtle irony in the fact that Chick-Fil-A's Cookies and Cream milkshake uses Oreos? Not even a little bit?

I don't really like Chick-Fil-A. The service is usually sub-par even for a fast food restaurant and I find most of the items on their menu to be either poor, or not as good as that of other, similar establishments.
I'm not boycotting them, just like I don't boycott churches. I wouldn't utilize their services regardless of their political stance, making my participation in such an act meaningless at the very least.

0r4ng3
08-05-2012, 10:48 PM
I'm not boycotting them, just like I don't boycott churches. I wouldn't utilize their services regardless of their political stance, making my participation in such an act meaningless at the very least.
This is pretty much my stance on it too. In fact, I don't recall ever having seen a Chic-Fil-A in my life. Is it a southern USA thing? Or are they all over the place where I am in New York and I'm just blind?

WebDudette
08-05-2012, 10:53 PM
We have them in Arizona, not a whole lot of them, but they are around. My highschool used to have Chick-Fil-A sandwiches once a week or something like that.

XYlophonetreeZ
08-05-2012, 11:59 PM
It is mostly a southern thing, though they're expanding. People here in NC are fucking obsessed with it. Half of my facebook newsfeed is stuff like "OMG Chick-Fil-A is sooooo evil but soooo delicious aaaahhh how do I survive!!!!!," while the other half is like "I'ma eat Chick-Fil-A whenever I fuckin' feel like it cause it's so damn good! Free speech and no more welfare, y'all!"

The issue of whether it's humanly possible to refrain from eating Chick-Fil-A is almost as big of a controversy as the ethical debate of Chick-Fil-A's stance on homosexuality.

Personally, I used to eat from there every now and then, and while it probably is the best fast-food chicken I've had, I can't say I care enough to miss them at all.

_Lost_
08-06-2012, 02:27 AM
xylophonetreez is so on the money when it comes to NC. These things are alllllll over Greensboro and everyone has to weigh in on one extreme or the other.

What bugs me is that this is just becoming a big deal. I lost my taste for Chick-fil-a some time back over the company's stance and donating habits (not to mention I have NEVER liked waffle fries). This has never been a secret.

T-6005
08-06-2012, 03:20 AM
Well I am boycotting them for sure.

Right?

What is this thing again?

But seriously, I've begun to find the tip-toeing around rampant homophobia incredibly tiring. We're basically letting people get away with thinly disguised (and in most cases not even that) hateful speech. So Chick-Fil-A is within their legal rights in these donations - that doesn't make them or the people supporting them any less dickheads. Letting them believe that this is a conversation that should be had instead of something which makes a mockery of anything touted as anything so grandiose as a 'value system' or some sort of righteous 'morality' is madness.

WebDudette
08-06-2012, 07:23 AM
I want to have gay sex outside of a Chick-Fil-A with Thibault.

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 09:05 AM
So the owner of CF is in favor of traditional marriage and certain people have a problem with that? He has a right to his views and here's a newsflash, he is not preaching any radical idea or agenda. If it weren't for non-gays and traditional marriage, the gaaaaaayyyyyysssss probably wouldn't even exist. It kind of takes a man-woman deal to reproduce outside of a friggin labotratory. Yet they want to boycott. He never said anythig against gays in any way, shape or form from my understanding. He's just in favor of a man/woman marriage. Yet the gays have to make a Big Gay Al deal out it of and have a friggin kiss-in as a protest. Are gays that fucking bored? Apparently gays don't believe in free speech or open opinion unless it serves their agenda or they are the ones shooting off their mouths.

WebDudette
08-06-2012, 09:20 AM
Be careful, your latent homosexuality is showing.

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 09:37 AM
No...I'm pro-vag. Not that there is anything wrong with being gay or supporting the gay "lifestyle". I have friends, well friend, who are (is) gay...in fact, one guy I know (not KNOW KNOW, but just know,) I recently was told is gayyyyy. I about shit. So, there ya go.

WebDudette
08-06-2012, 09:43 AM
Be careful, your latent desire to suck dick is showing.

Tiny Vessels
08-06-2012, 09:47 AM
So the owner of CF is in favor of traditional marriage and certain people have a problem with that? He has a right to his views and here's a newsflash, he is not preaching any radical idea or agenda. If it weren't for non-gays and traditional marriage, the gaaaaaayyyyyysssss probably wouldn't even exist. It kind of takes a man-woman deal to reproduce outside of a friggin labotratory. Yet they want to boycott. He never said anythig against gays in any way, shape or form from my understanding. He's just in favor of a man/woman marriage. Yet the gays have to make a Big Gay Al deal out it of and have a friggin kiss-in as a protest. Are gays that fucking bored? Apparently gays don't believe in free speech or open opinion unless it serves their agenda or they are the ones shooting off their mouths.

I think if you're a business owner and you feel a certain way about something that's fine.Everyone has a right to their own opinion. But you do not (as a business owner) so out and make a whole public interview how what you feel is right and who feels differently than you is wrong. What did he expect to happen? This wouldn't cause controversy? And when CFA had their appreciation day what was that? People who agree with him and was supporting his way of thinking. The people who are boycotting are just saying I don't agree with you and I'm not going to give you business.

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 10:00 AM
Did he actually say that being gay was wrong or that he was simply in favor of traditional marriage? I was not aware he said anything negative about the gays in any fashion. And as far as people supporting him and buying the product in the days after, this was a direct result of the dumbass Chicago Mayor, Romm Emmanuel, shooting off his friggin pie hole. Here's former Obama genius at work.

WebDudette
08-06-2012, 10:09 AM
Be careful, your latent desire to have an ass full of cocks is showing.

Jakebert
08-06-2012, 10:17 AM
Saying you're in favor of traditional marriage is the PC way to say you don't like gay people, Moto. He can't come out and say "I hate gay people" because that's not socially acceptable anymore, but hiding it in "clever" language about the support of traditional marriage is acceptable. It's the same thing.

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 10:48 AM
Ohhhhhh, now I get it. I hate when I am stupid and others need to correct me. Either you fully support and are for gay marriage and everything that goes with it.............or you actually fucking hate gays. You people never cease to amaze me. Either you fully support us or we are sworn enemies and we'll boycott you. Your right to free speech? Not if we don't agree with what you say. Come on, how could a guy that serves chicken hate gays?

XYlophonetreeZ
08-06-2012, 10:53 AM
The boycott has nothing to do with the fact that he expressed an opinion. It has everything to do with Chick-Fil-A donating money to anti-gay organizations, including ones that are dedicated to turning people away from homosexuality ("pray the gay away" type shit). I would have zero problem with the restaurant chain as a whole if the guy wanted to do that out of his own pocket, but unfortunately corporate profits go to that shit. Don't start jumping on this ridiculous "free speech" bandwagon.

Jakebert
08-06-2012, 11:05 AM
Yeah, it is that black and white. There's no reason to think gays will ruin marriage unless you hate gays. How will gays ruin marriage if they aren't evil or wrong? How is marriage between a man and woman more pure if you don't believe that gays are not capable of that kind of purity? It's just completely illogical to think marriage would be ruined by gays, but you still think homosexuality it okay.

This also ignores the fact that marriage is a social institution moreso than a religious one. Marriage has tons of religious meaning now, but the reason it happened in the first place was to acknowledge a simple biological fact that humans have long childhoods and need a structure to support them so they don't die. This can be done with 2 dudes, 2 women, or a woman and a dude. The religious stuff came later when humans started to incorporate pre-existing social structures into newly formed religions in order to explain them. Currently, the main reason for the legal existence of marriage is actually because of divorce and the legalities that go into that.

And in the case of a civil right...fuck yeah we'll boycott you. CFA's CEO has every right to hate gay people and say it all he wants. He also has the right to donate money to whatever cause he wants, including money owned by his company and not him. But we as American citizens also reserve the right to not eat there, and not give our money to a man who will then give our money to something morally suspect. That kind of "voting with your dollars" is a fundamental free speech right, as well as a fundamental capitalist right. He exercised his free speech by being a bigoted moron, and I exercise my free speech by calling him a bigoted moron. I fail to see what's so difficult to understand about this. Both sides are exercising their free speech rights in this case.

Secondly, free speech exists in our Constitution for the purpose of creating democratic change. Public opinion is important in America because it is a driving force to set policy agendas. After the Colorado shooting, a gun control debate broke out that Congress will likely deal with through policy. CFA's owner made homophobic comments, and ignited a public controversy. So people are trying to make their voices heard to create change. This is how democracy works. We were given freedom of speech so that we could reject tyranny and unfair policies that hurt us more than help us. This is what public activism claims to do, on both the left and right wings. While I disagree with the homophobes and want them to lose, they are doing the same thing I'm doing: using their right to speech to create political or social change. Again, I dunno why this is so hard to understand.

The ironic thing about this is that supporters of CFA are saying we're trying to squash his right to speech and that we should stop, completely ignoring that a boycott is an essential type of free speech while trying to stop our right to free speech. Because this isn't an issue of free speech, it's a civil rights issue that the right wing is trying to turn into something else so they can't be called homophobes, which they clearly are.

Jakebert
08-06-2012, 11:05 AM
Also, I know that post served no purpose since you'll either ignore it or build a bunch of strawmen to knock down, but oh well.

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 11:24 AM
The boycott has nothing to do with the fact that he expressed an opinion. It has everything to do with Chick-Fil-A donating money to anti-gay organizations, including ones that are dedicated to turning people away from homosexuality ("pray the gay away" type shit). I would have zero problem with the restaurant chain as a whole if the guy wanted to do that out of his own pocket, but unfortunately corporate profits go to that shit. Don't start jumping on this ridiculous "free speech" bandwagon.

My understanding is they have donated to the same organizations for years. Don't buy the chicken. This is my understanding of what STARTED the gay-boy-cott bullshit.

"We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit," Cathy said. "We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that."

XYlophonetreeZ
08-06-2012, 11:28 AM
Yes, they have absolutely donated to those same organizations for years, but now people are more informed and possibly care about gay marriage more than they used to. Sometimes these things just catch on when they catch on, it doesn't make the boycott any less valid.


Don't buy the chicken.
Thanks, I'm not, and neither are millions of other people. What exactly was your problem with the boycott again?

Jakebert
08-06-2012, 11:44 AM
Not buying something for political/social reasons is literally the definition of a boycott, Moto.

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 12:21 PM
Not buying something for political/social reasons is literally the definition of a boycott, Moto.

Thanks, I was unclear. But, he (CF owner) didn't do anything wrong. What he said is harmless and based on good sound values. He built a successful business so he must not be a complete ass-hat. If you want to not buy something, don't. When the mayor of a major city shoots off his mouth, that's messed up and possibly illegal. Boycott his dumb ass. The CF owner didn't break any law, he didn't discrminate against anyone as far as I know, didn't give contributions to any illegal organization. Now if he was giving to something like the NBP, KKK or some other outwardly fucked organization I could see a problem. He didn't. Of all the things that gays could get their butt hurt over, this doesn't seem like a big dealio.

Jakebert
08-06-2012, 12:29 PM
First off, read my other post about how his comments are not based on solid values. I'm not re-writing that again, but I'll simply restate that homophobia is wrong.

Secondly, Sarah has said this multiple times in this thread: THE MAYOR OF CHICAGO DID NOTHING ILLEGAL. HE MADE A PUBLIC STATEMENT THAT WAS POLITICAL HUBRIS. HE DID NOT BAN CFA FROM CHICAGO. THIS IS NOT ILLEGAL. HE HAS THE SAME FREEDOM OF SPEECH EVERYONE ELSE HAS, EVEN IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT HE SAID. How the fuck do you guys not read that multiple times and then still not understand it?

Third, just because the guy runs a successful business does not make him a good person. In fact there have been many academic studies that CEO's benefit from being sociopaths. I'm not saying this guy is because I don't know, but your snap assumption is inaccurate. And he didn't just "say" something, he donates millions of dollars to an anti-gay marriage group. Unlike Rahmn Emmanual, he actually DID something and didn't just say something. Major fucking difference that, again, has been pointed out so many times in this thread.

Finally, gays have every reason to be offended by a guy giving millions of dollars to an organization that hates them and doesn't want them to get married. So what if the organization is legal? Lots of legal organizations do shitty, immoral things. This organization thinks that gays are immoral and hurting America, and thus they want to block them from having civil rights. Why wouldn't you dislike someone who gives money to a group like that if you're gay?

Tiny Vessels
08-06-2012, 12:31 PM
I'm also glad that the mayor of Boston said that he will not allow CFA to build is his city. Chicago and Boston both don't want CFA

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 12:46 PM
Rahm said CF does not reflect Chicago values. Well in the first place Chicago is a corrupt shit-hole so maybe CF doesn't reflect their values, that being said, he has no clue what EVERYBODY's values are and has ZERO business stating such a blanket remark. Probably costing jobs, but who the hell needs that pressure of going to work anyway. Secondly, do the gays hate the Red Cross too? Do they boycott? I have never heard of it but was wondering this for years and just now thought of it.

Jakebert
08-06-2012, 12:57 PM
Rahm cost them no jobs because he took no action at all. He made a public statement that is largely meaningless. But you're right, he shouldn't be able to use his free speech, as you mentioned on the last page, because free speech doesn't apply to everyone.

Also, how can you say Emmanual doesn't reflect Chicago's values because he's one person, then go on to make a blanket statement about Chicago's values? Doesn't make sense.

Why the fuck would gays boycott the Red Cross? Explain this straw man you built to me.

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 01:04 PM
Rahm cost them no jobs because he took no action at all. He made a public statement that is largely meaningless. But you're right, he shouldn't be able to use his free speech, as you mentioned on the last page, because free speech doesn't apply to everyone.

Also, how can you say Emmanual doesn't reflect Chicago's values because he's one person, then go on to make a blanket statement about Chicago's values? Doesn't make sense.

Why the fuck would gays boycott the Red Cross? Explain this straw man you built to me.

If you would like to donate blood to the ARC...

If you are a male and have had sexual contact (even one time) with another male since 1977...no thank you.

Does anyone know for CERTAIN if this policy still in effect?

Tiny Vessels
08-06-2012, 01:07 PM
Yes they still do ask that question. I donate blood to the Blood Center and before you donate they ask you like 50 questions or so and that is one of them.

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 01:15 PM
Now tell me...why in the hell wouldn't we want their blood?

Tiny Vessels
08-06-2012, 01:20 PM
Now tell me...why in the hell wouldn't we want their blood?

Before they will use your blood they have it tested. Tested for everything and if it turns out that the blood is safe to use they will use it. So what if a gay person donates bloods and it turns out the blood CAN be used. If it helps save lives then it's wondeful. But if the blood is NOT safe they will call you and inform you and get rid of the blood. They will not use it.

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 01:54 PM
The top priorities of the American Red Cross are the safety of our volunteer blood donors and the ultimate recipients of blood. On June 11, 2010, the Department of Health and Human Services Secretary's Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability voted against recommending a change to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) policy of a lifetime deferral for men who have sex with other men. The FDA is responsible for determining donor eligibility requirements and the Red Cross is required to follow their decisions. However, the Red Cross does support the use of rational, scientifically-based deferral periods that are applied fairly and consistently among donors who engage in similar risk activities. We will continue to work through the AABB (American Association of Blood Banks) to press for donor deferral policies that are fair and consistent and based on scientific evidence, while still protecting patients from potential harm.

Those who are at increased risk for becoming infected with HIV are not eligible to donate blood.

According to the Food and Drug Administration, you are at increased risk if: you are a male who has had sex with another male since 1977, even once;

Little_Miss_1565
08-06-2012, 01:55 PM
Moto, don't you wish that just once you had any idea what you were talking about?

MOTO13
08-06-2012, 02:08 PM
Moto, don't you wish that just once you had any idea what you were talking about?

Actually wish you wouldn't troll. You have a point to make regarding the actual discussion or specific post? Make it.

I'd love it if I didn't have to lay out a trail of friggin bread crumbs in order for you to follow. I have a feeling most people understand where this is going. It isn't that difficult.

Jojan
08-06-2012, 02:09 PM
lol penis ^_^

XYlophonetreeZ
08-06-2012, 02:58 PM
Wishomie, it's a little weird that you're like 6 posts deep into this red cross rant and yet no one else is talking about it. I have no idea what your point is, so I'm going to take it to mean that you are completely conceding the Chick-Fil-A debate, tacitly admitting that you had no idea what you were talking about, and so you moved on to having an argument with a brick wall about the ARC. In that case, I will try to pay more attention to your posts and will certainly take your liberal, progressive, and pro-gay views into account regarding the Red Cross's blood donation policy.

Jakebert
08-06-2012, 03:06 PM
That is indeed more or less what he's doing. Even if you watch the trajectory of his arguments, he slowly gives up the deeper into it he gets because he knows he has no clue what he's talking about and gets called out on how poorly the logic he uses is.

BagOfShenanigans
08-06-2012, 04:01 PM
I'm not big on this Moto fella. He has different opinions.

jacknife737
08-06-2012, 04:03 PM
Saying you're in favor of traditional marriage is the PC way to say you don't like gay people, Moto. He can't come out and say "I hate gay people" because that's not socially acceptable anymore, but hiding it in "clever" language about the support of traditional marriage is acceptable. It's the same thing.

Exactly.

I've met polite racists before: that doesn't stop their views from being any less despicable. Bigotry is still bigotry, even if its delivered from a smiling face.

And when people claim that there should be a double standard (ie, "well, he only gave a bit of money") they essentially help to legitimize the more aggressive stances against the LGBT community.

Jakebert
08-06-2012, 05:01 PM
It's not that I'm racist, I just believe in upholding the sanctity of white people.

AllIn All It's Not So Bad
08-06-2012, 06:02 PM
I would have zero problem with the restaurant chain as a whole if the guy wanted to do that out of his own pocket, but unfortunately corporate profits go to that shit. Don't start jumping on this ridiculous "free speech" bandwagon.

Technically he is doing it out of his own pocket because profits are HIS money. If you paid for a product and a service, which is the chicken and getting it prepared respectively, you are commiting an exchange of value where your monetary means now became property of CFA (the CEO) and you are stuck with the chicken





Now, I'm pretty neutral about this since I already described I have a neutral stance on gay marriage. But let's get shit straight ok

WebDudette
08-06-2012, 06:45 PM
Be careful Moto, your latent desire to have a gay threesome with John Stamos and David Coulier is showing.

Little_Miss_1565
08-06-2012, 06:50 PM
I like how Moto calls me out for "trolling" but WebDudette isn't trolling.


Technically he is doing it out of his own pocket because profits are HIS money.

Not entirely true. CEOs have a boss, and that's the corporate board of directors. If the company's profits were his money, the company coffers would be his personal piggy bank, and no company would do that and risk pissing off the investors.

So, no, it's not "his" money. It's corporate funds. If we were talking about a portion of his personal paycheck or bonus, I'm not sure there would be this much of a to-do. The CEO of AEG personally donates money to a Romney PAC, and it's widely known, but no one is calling for a boycott of Coachella.

Jakebert
08-06-2012, 06:56 PM
Be careful Moto, your latent desire to have a gay threesome with John Stamos and David Coulier is showing.

I'm straight and I'd still do this just to say I did.

Godxilla
08-06-2012, 08:09 PM
I'm not big on this Moto fella. He has different opinions.
I seem to have noticed this. But it's a good thing. 0 trolls=0 fun.

It's not that I'm racist, I just believe in upholding the sanctity of white people.
Then fuck you.

Be careful Moto, your latent desire to have a gay threesome with John Stamos and David Coulier is showing.
Mmmm... Spicy hot fantasy there. Keep it off of the board.

I like how Moto calls me out for "trolling" but WebDudette isn't.

Don't worry, he is.

Tiny Vessels
08-07-2012, 01:02 AM
Be careful Moto, your latent desire to have a gay threesome with John Stamos and David Coulier is showing.

LOL I would love to see that.

MOTO13
08-07-2012, 09:06 AM
Wishomie, it's a little weird that you're like 6 posts deep into this red cross rant and yet no one else is talking about it. I have no idea what your point is, so I'm going to take it to mean that you are completely conceding the Chick-Fil-A debate, tacitly admitting that you had no idea what you were talking about, and so you moved on to having an argument with a brick wall about the ARC. In that case, I will try to pay more attention to your posts and will certainly take your liberal, progressive, and pro-gay views into account regarding the Red Cross's blood donation policy.

oK...who the hell is this wishomie? Your like the 5th person to mention this. 1565 mentions it in one of her posts, I pm her, she doesn't even reply. She has one of her bff's PM me, ask me if I was wishomie. I say no. No further contact. Now you mention it. Odd.

The owner of CF can do whatever the hell he wants with his money. It's his money. He can take all the profits, put it in a pile and piss on it. So what? The hole shitstorm really started, as I stated, regarding his comment about 2 weeks ago, which I quoted. It's free speech that these fucks don't get but they want to bastardize it into something bad. Good luck. He wants traditional values and puts his money where his mouth is. As opposed to gay right people who put their mouth....nevermind. Different discussion. My bad. Gay rights people have never said anything bad about traditional values??...never? Go read some of the shit they post...holy crap! Viscious to say the least. Traditonal values will always win...want to know why? Like it or not, it's simple human nature. Last time I checked, two dudes can't populate a planet.

I am astounded (sarcasm) that not one person on this site has put the connection between the ARC, feds, and this story. Anyway, CF has awsome food. The waffle fries are probably some of the best on the planet. Go try the food. You might actually like it. As to whether or not you like the owner, that's personal choice. It's not like this is something new he has done in the past month. But for some reason the gay rights bandwagon wants to beat, pound and hammer on this man like he is George Michael's clone.

Jakebert
08-07-2012, 09:35 AM
It must be easy to argue if you just don't read anything anyone else writes. But I'll do this at least one more time because I'm bored.

1.) You're right, it is CFA's owner's free speech. But it's also our free speech to call him a bigot. Someone can say whatever they want in the public arena, and the rest of the public can respond to it. This is exactly what happened here. This has been explained multiple times but you still either refuse to understand it or you just don't. Free speech does not mean you have the right to say whatever you want without fear of criticism, despite what Sarah Palin wants to say it means. I know you won't actually read any of this so I'm just throwing shit in here purple monkey dishwasher.

2.) Your opinions on homosexuality are incredibly inconsistent and contradictory. A few pages back you're saying you have no problem with gays, now in this post you're saying that they don't have values because they put dicks in their mouths (which would also imply that some monogamous married women don't have values). Which is it? A few pages ago you made a big stink, saying that being against gay marriage wasn't necessarily homophobic, but you completely contradict yourself in this post.

3.) There's no such thing as "traditional values". As I pointed out in another post, marriage began as a social institution out of a biological imperative to help children develop into adults. Religion later enveloped this, as religion enveloped all existing social institutions in order to gain legitimacy. (Also included in this is how many religions, especially Christianity, would invent new holidays around pagan harvest rituals in order to end them). "Traditional values" is something politicians invented in the 1960s to stop civil rights and interracial marriage, and something Reagan exhumed in the 1980s to win elections. Keep in mind that in the 1960s "traditional values" meant that white people should only marry white people. "Traditional values" change to mean whatever the current side against some civil right wants it to mean.

On this point, "traditional values" couldn't be farther from human nature. Religious laws like "gay people are bad" or "don't fuck before marriage" are put in place to curb human nature. If human nature was to be monogamous, then the writers of Bible wouldn't have written these rules down. Human nature is inherently impulse driven and usually towards things that are considered immoral by "traditional values". This is why we have laws and a social contract. This is why most philosophers dedicated entire tomes to discussing the tricky business of human ethics.

4.) There is no non-religious reason why gays should not get married. Even biologically, saying that since gays can't reproduce they shouldn't get married, is false because right now America has an overabundance of children that need adopted and to be placed in foster homes. Gays can easily step up to fill this void, and by getting married and doing this would actually help society way more than some white trash family having 10 kids that they can't feed and thus contributing to overpopulation problems.

5.) CFA's food quality means nothing to this argument. Trying it will not suddenly make people think the owner is not a bigot.

MOTO13
08-07-2012, 10:08 AM
First, who is wishomie?

I'll be brief cause now this crap is getting boring...Good, we agree on point 1. He can do whatever he wants. But this whole thing started because of what he said a few weeks ago. Traditional values and how HE wanted and does live. Secondly I did not contradict myself. Either you can't read or humor evades you. Third.. traditional values or whatever you want to say, means to me the natural way to keep a population going. Show me an all gay independent culture. Doesn't exist. Btw, gay is not a choice imho. You are what you are from birth. I never said gays didn't make good parents in some cases.

I read most of your stuff. Thank goodness for cut-n-paste huh?

Jakebert
08-07-2012, 10:26 AM
Then if you agree on point one, why the fuck are you even arguing with anyone? That's what everyone has been saying for this entire thread.

And your definition of traditional values is not the definition this guy is using. And frankly, the debate is over him, not you. Therefore, what I said is still correct. Although your personal definition is incredibly flimsy as well but I don't feel like getting into that.

Sorry it's hard to tell you're joking when you keep wavering back and forth from one illogical argument to another. Maybe that's a sign?

MOTO13
08-07-2012, 10:42 AM
Who the hell is wishomie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????

Tiny Vessels
08-07-2012, 10:50 AM
Who the hell is wishomie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????

Probably someone who got banned and now they think it's you.

Jakebert
08-07-2012, 11:32 AM
It's okay Wishomie, you don't have to worry about outing yourself.

MOTO13
08-07-2012, 11:51 AM
Ok...i'm wishomie...whoever the fuck that is.

Is this person not welcome here? I pm'd 1565 a couple weeks ago, but she's obviously too busy to reply. If ANY mod wants to pm me and question if I am this person, have at it.

Little_Miss_1565
08-07-2012, 12:07 PM
You seem to be assuming that this mod gives half a fuck. Sorry, been doing this too long to get baited into PM exchanges with people who love strawman arguments.

MOTO13
08-07-2012, 12:16 PM
Exchanging pm's beyond my simple question?...lol. Like I have that kind of time or interest. Pretty fkn please, brown sugar on top...someone just answer...who the hell is wishomie?

Jakebert
08-07-2012, 12:24 PM
You are, silly.

Godxilla
08-07-2012, 04:20 PM
Wishomie is an ancient dinosaur who lived on Lagos Island in the Second World War. But nuclear tests gave it the ability to breathe nuclear fire. Silly, right? Then it terrorized London in the 50s. This is all in a movie.

Happy to fill you in.

Jakebert
08-07-2012, 05:27 PM
You're thinking of Gamera.

Godxilla
08-07-2012, 05:36 PM
No, Gamera was created by the people of Atlantis. You see, Atlantis was a powerful Island Kingdom, sort of like Mu or Nilai-Kinai. They created a flying beast called a Gyaos to show their might. But the Gyaos were not tame pets, and soon, they began to destroy Atlantis. They then created Gamera to help them stave off the Gyaos. After that battle, some Gyaos escaped. Gamera was buried under the Arctic by the Atlantians, to await the next time he would be needed. Thousands of years later, a Soviet Jet Fighter with a nuclear bomb was forced to crash land by American pilots in that area. Gamera awakened to battle more Gyaos.
so, yeah, that's who Gamera is.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-07-2012, 10:24 PM
I have just learnt about Chick-Fil-A this week.
Same here


Just for the record, there are other companies I choose not support for similar reasons. I will never bu anything from or donate to the Boy Scouts of America and I will never have anything to do with the Salvation Army.
Out of curiosity, why? Now, I have had the problem of people getting super defensive and aggressive when I ask them to elaborate on something, and it makes me sad. I really am just curious. I'm not trying to start any kind of argument. I just haven't been exposed to people against the Boy Scouts of America (or Canada for that matter).


I have friends, well friend, who are (is) gay...in fact, one guy I know (not KNOW KNOW, but just know,) I recently was told is gayyyyy. .
That is a beautifully constructed sentence. I had to read each fraction twice.


Saying you're in favor of traditional marriage is the PC way to say you don't like gay people, Moto. He can't come out and say "I hate gay people" because that's not socially acceptable anymore, but hiding it in "clever" language about the support of traditional marriage is acceptable. It's the same thing.
I wish you saw how wrong you were when you say this.


Yeah, it is that black and white. There's no reason to think gays will ruin marriage unless you hate gays. How will gays ruin marriage if they aren't evil or wrong? How is marriage between a man and woman more pure if you don't believe that gays are not capable of that kind of purity? It's just completely illogical to think marriage would be ruined by gays, but you still think homosexuality it okay.

Is this a trolling statement? What is illogical is saying "An individual is opposed to homosexual marriage, therefore he/she hates homosexuals." The individual might hate homosexuals, but that is not a necessary consequence to the premise that the individual is opposed to homosexual marriage. I hate it when people get mad at me for hating gays when I really don't. I'm sure there are many people who fall into your black and white generalizations, but I'm not one of them.



He also has the right to donate money to whatever cause he wants, including money owned by his company and not him.
This sentence is strange. It appears to be sincere and sarcastic, which makes it confusing and unpleasant. I think you're suggesting that he doesn't have the right to donate money that does not belong to him (which may be very true). The one thing that causes me to question the possibility of it being a sarcastic statement is that you included it in a sincere sentence within a sincere paragraph. You stated a fact ("He also has the right to donate money to whatever cause he wants") which you intended to be taken sincerely (I'm drawing this conclusion because most of your post revolved around CFA's and your right to free speech and ability to donate to whomever you choose), but continued the "fact" with a more questionable statement (fragment of a statement) that seemed like it was intended to be taken sarcastically. Is this allowed? I'm basically just rambling here because I'm confused (and slightly bored). Can you clarify whether or not the whole sentence was meant to be taken sincerely, sarcastically, or as a mixture of both? Thx :D


Of all the things that gays could get their butt hurt over, this doesn't seem like a big dealio.
Was this intended to be a double entendre? If so, well done.


I will continue to boycott Chick-Fil-A, because that's pretty much my only option. I have never seen one of these restaurants in my life. I currently couldn't care less about the political stance of the people who sell me crap. Is their chicken good? Maybe I'll end my life-long boycott if I ever come across one and the food is good. Is their chicken actually better than KFC's?

I'm not supportive (or strongly against) of any of the movements around this issue. If you don't want them to deal with your money for some political reason, so be it. If you want to protest people exercising their right to eat at whatever restaurant they please, so be it. People have always been strange. I have no reason to be upset with any of this.

WebDudette
08-07-2012, 10:42 PM
Boy Scouts of America are partially government funded but do not officially allow openly gay or atheist members. The Salvation Army also receives government funding and is notoriously homophobic and there are stories about them discarding simple toys not in line with Christian values (such as Twilight and Harry Potter toys).

Even if they weren't government funded I wouldn't support them, but the fact that they are makes it even shittier.

What reason could there be to not support equal rights for homosexuals, besides thinking less of them?

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-07-2012, 11:06 PM
Boy Scouts of America are partially government funded but do not officially allow openly gay or atheist members. The Salvation Army also receives government funding and is notoriously homophobic and there are stories about them discarding simple toys not in line with Christian values (such as Twilight and Harry Potter toys).

Even if they weren't government funded I wouldn't support them, but the fact that they are makes it even shittier.
Okay. Thanks for the not-aggressive-towards-me response.



What reason could there be to not support equal rights for homosexuals, besides thinking less of them?
As you know, I am opposed to homosexual marriage. My basis for that is in scripture. I recognize it as a sinful act. I try to be against sin in general. I do bad things all the time. I'm opposed to many of the things that I do. I try to bring change in myself. I don't view people who practice homosexual marriage as any worse (or better) than I am. That would be absurd and would make me a massive hypocrite. I know that I have no right to judge someone for sinning in a different way than I do. I can still choose to not support the sin.

Of course, my entire paragraph is based on the idea that homosexual marriage is sinful, which I'd rather not discuss because that conversation goes nowhere and it just offends people.

EDIT: Long story short, I don't think less of them. I think less of the act. If I hated people who engaged in sin, I'd hate everyone in my church, my family, my town, my country, and I'd hate myself.

WebDudette
08-07-2012, 11:29 PM
If every church ever chose not to perform or recognize homosexual marriages, I could deal with that. I'd think it's wrong and that they are assholes, but it's their choice to make. That's how people opposed to gay marriage should approach it, because it has literally no effect on them. Anyway, marriage hasn't been a solely religious ceremony for a very, very, very long time. There are so many financial benefits, custody issues, and rights tied into marriage now. The government has long since entrenched itself into marriage and there is no reason to not allow homosexuals to show up at a courthouse and get a secular marriage once a month, just like everyone else.

If a church does choose not to recognize or preform homosexual marriage, they should not be tax exempt.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-07-2012, 11:45 PM
Right now I'm at the point where I let the world do it's thing. I have no power to make decisions for the direction of my country, so I try not to be to concerned with things I disagree with (unless it greatly affects me). Maybe in Canada, I have no right to deny homosexuals the ability to get married. Maybe you're entirely right in that paragraph. I don't expect my government to follow the Bible. I dream of it and present my fantasy worlds to you guys sometimes, but that doesn't mean I expect anything to happen.

What I'm saying is, I'm not even going to go as far to say that I disagree with you, and I'm definitely not going to argue. I'm in too lazy of a mood to analyze whether or not there is a good political case to deny homosexuals marriage rights in a secular country. Maybe there isn't.

The only reason I really posted in this thread was to remind Jakebert that I don't hate homosexuals.

EDIT: I might go to bed now, or I might stay up for the re-run of this past Sunday's Breaking Bad. Either way, I'm leaving here. I'm not ignoring you. If you respond to me, I'll try to get back to you in the morning/afternoonish.

Llamas
08-08-2012, 03:57 AM
Hey look, an interesting thread with actual conversation has broken out here. Seems a rarity lately.

Anyway, I don't really know if I'd be boycotting CFA if I lived anywhere that had one. I mean, I've never had CFA, I don't think, and probably never will simply because of where they're located. There's also the simple fact that fast food is rather disgusting and I rarely eat it. However, for the sake of argument, let's say CFA existed where I live and served food I enjoy.

I honestly don't think the owner of the company did anything wrong. I think it's ridiculous when companies in the US share their political beliefs (it's a freaking company; shut up already), and that includes Oreo and whatever else. I disagree with his views, as well. But he hasn't been mean nor aggressive, and I don't think he's instantly a bad person. He probably doesn't know any openly gay people in his personal life whom he loves and cares about. I tend to chalk up this kinda stuff to misunderstanding and lack of knowledge. If someone has gay family members or friends whom they love, they tend not to be against gay marriage.

Tangent:
I know a LOT of christians who are supportive. Some follow the, "don't hate the sinner; hate the sin" attitude, and therefore do not believe in pushing their beliefs on others. They believe gay marriage should be the same as any other marriage, but that they themselves are not allowed to be gay. Still others don't even believe God explicitly forbids gay marriage (a stance I agree with). The bible is just an excuse for people to hide behind.

In any case, if someone believes that the bible DOES forbid homosexuality, as long as they don't believe that what they view as correct is how everyone should be FORCED to live, I have no problem with it. I have actual friends (people I consider close) who believe it's a sin to be gay, and so they themselves are straight. They couldn't care less that I am.

Back on topic:
So I think Cathy's view is wrong, but I also think that if he knew gay people whom he cared about, his view would change. Even as it stands, though, he himself (and the company) hasn't done anything bad. He has a misguided view and isn't making gays feel welcome. But that's not enough for me to hate him/it nor to boycott. If there was a CFA here and I liked their food, I'd probably still be eating it. Boycotting it won't do anything to change things.

What I DO take issue with is the public response to this whole thing. And I mean from both sides. That whole "everyone eat at CFA day" was disgusting. That was the public's way of saying they're anti-gay, going out of their way to organize big support for Cathy's view. I saw Twitter posts that made me sick to my stomach - about hating fags, AIDS, death threats, etc. On the other side of the coin, there was the gay kiss-in (if it's already happened... I'm not caught up). As a gay person, I was annoyed by this response from "my side". It was very much stooping to their level, and making gays look like we really ARE just all about sexual stuff. The homophobes already see us as sex-obsessed freaks, and a ton of us going to an establishment and kissing just reinforces that stereotype. Furthermore, this kind of protest only affects people who don't matter. The employees working in the stores and the normal customers are not the problem. I'd be annoyed if I was eating somewhere and a bunch of people (gay, straight, or otherwise) showed up and started making out everywhere. It's a horribly dumb tactic. There are plenty of other ways to support equality without acting like assholes. And this method accomplishes NOTHING.

So both sides are acting stupidly. I thought the homophobes boycotting Oreo was moronic, and I feel the same about us boycotting CFA. I boycott companies that do truly horrible things, like Walmart and Disney, and that's it.

KickHim, what bothers me about your posts is that you seem to WANT to forbid gays from marrying. Like I said above, if you believe homosexuality is wrong according to the bible, fine. No problems here. Don't get married to a man. But who are you to tell other people they shouldn't have rights to marry who they love? I believe it's wrong for a man to divorce his wife while she's pregnant, and then remarry a woman half his age just because she's attractive... and I think it's wrong to have these Vegas weddings where you can get married the same day you meet... but I'm not trying to make these things illegal. No interest - that's their lives, not mine.

WebDudette
08-08-2012, 04:19 AM
Llamas, no one is saying that Cathy shouldn't be allowed to have those opinions. However, Chick-Fil-A has donated a few million to anti-homosexual foundations. I don't actually care if others choose to eat at CFA, but I'd feel very uncomfortable knowing that my money somehow contributed to their homophobic donations/actions.

Llamas
08-08-2012, 04:33 AM
Llamas, no one is saying that Cathy shouldn't be allowed to have those opinions. However, Chick-Fil-A has donated a few million to anti-homosexual foundations. I don't actually care if others choose to eat at CFA, but I'd feel very uncomfortable knowing that my money somehow contributed to their homophobic donations/actions.

I guess that's just a matter of what's out in the open and what's not. I am sure that MOST companies I give my money to use that money for things I don't support. I'd go crazy if I tried to find out where each company spent my money, and then only went for companies whose views align perfectly with mine. I have no idea who exactly Samsung (my computer), LG (my phone), Nikon (my camera), Converse (my shoes), etc, etc give their money to. But that wasn't the point of my post. I should clarify that I don't think it's moronic to boycott... I got carried away. I meant that the extreme sides (the eat CFA day/kiss-in) were moronic, and that I don't totally understand boycotting. But I don't care if people boycott at all.

WebDudette
08-08-2012, 04:42 AM
I think that stuff is silly as well. If you're not bothered by contributing money then continue to eat there, if it does bother you then don't eat there. I don't always know where my money is going, but in this case I do and I am just not comfortable giving them financial support. Sure, my business has very little effect on them. I don't really do it for them though, I do it for me.

If another company was making similar donations I'd do the same thing. I don't know if it's really a boycott so much as I'm just like 'meh, I'm not a fan of those guys.'

Llamas
08-08-2012, 05:18 AM
Yeah, I can totally see that perspective. If I have options and I know I don't like something about one company, I'll choose a different one. It's not a boycott, though.

Little_Miss_1565
08-08-2012, 09:08 AM
Llamas, that is essentially the definition of a boycott.

OC HAU
08-08-2012, 09:14 AM
What would The Offspring do? Considering they kill negativity like rats, a successful boycott would be the best option. If not successful, then it's like giving them too much attention or negative advertisement.

Scythe Death
08-08-2012, 10:38 AM
What would The Offspring do? Considering they kill negativity like rats, a successful boycott would be the best option. If not successful, then it's like giving them too much attention or negative advertisement.

What do you mean?

Llamas
08-08-2012, 11:54 AM
Llamas, that is essentially the definition of a boycott.

To me, a boycott is intentionally refusing to use/buy something for political reasons, no matter what, with intentions to cause a change or coerce. They're usually somewhat organized and strict.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-08-2012, 12:32 PM
KickHim, what bothers me about your posts is that you seem to WANT to forbid gays from marrying. Like I said above, if you believe homosexuality is wrong according to the bible, fine. No problems here. Don't get married to a man. But who are you to tell other people they shouldn't have rights to marry who they love? I believe it's wrong for a man to divorce his wife while she's pregnant, and then remarry a woman half his age just because she's attractive... and I think it's wrong to have these Vegas weddings where you can get married the same day you meet... but I'm not trying to make these things illegal. No interest - that's their lives, not mine.
Yes, as I typed my most recent post I had a little epiphany. I realized that in my secular country, I have no right to forbid homosexual marriage. I'm not living in Israel 3 millenniums ago.

MOTO13
08-08-2012, 12:56 PM
Yes, as I typed my most recent post I had a little epiphany. I realized that in my secular country, I have no right to forbid homosexual marriage. I'm not living in Israel 3 millenniums ago.

Correct me if I'm wrong...but you're not living in Isreal now. Cause if you are homosexual and want to get married in Israel...well, you can't. Oh you can think about it...just don't do it.

At least this is my understanding.

Tiny Vessels
08-08-2012, 01:12 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong...but you're not living in Isreal now. Cause if you are homosexual and want to get married in Israel...well, you can't. Oh you can think about it...just don't do it.

At least this is my understanding.



What I think KickHim is trying to say since he was not living in Isreal 3 millenniums ago he has not right to forbid homosexual marriges. But maybe if he was living back then he would have say.

OC HAU
08-08-2012, 01:51 PM
What do you mean?
I expect so much more from someone who studies philosophy and physics.

But, basically, I take The Offspring as my idols. And, also I think that it would be perfect to eradicate Chick-whatever, but if it fails, well then the results could be bitter.

Oh, you might mean negativity thing, well if you watch The Offspring carefully, then you'll notice.

MOTO13
08-08-2012, 01:59 PM
No, I pretty much got his drift I believe. Just doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to me. In my post I was simply pointing out what is going on today in Israel.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-08-2012, 02:19 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong...but you're not living in Isreal now. Cause if you are homosexual and want to get married in Israel...well, you can't. Oh you can think about it...just don't do it.

At least this is my understanding.
I don't know anything about modern Israel. You know more than I do probably. Sorry for the confusion.

BagOfShenanigans
08-08-2012, 03:21 PM
Maybe this is just a publicity stunt on Chick-Fil-A's part.

There's no such thing as bad press.

Tiny Vessels
08-08-2012, 03:34 PM
Maybe this is just a publicity stunt on Chick-Fil-A's part.

There's no such thing as bad press.


No it's not. CFA has been this way for years.

MOTO13
08-08-2012, 03:41 PM
I don't know, this is just a theory...but those sneaky fuckin chickens might be behind this whole thing.

Tiny Vessels
08-08-2012, 03:47 PM
All those stupid chickens!! Bad Bad chickens.:mad: lol

Little_Miss_1565
08-08-2012, 06:04 PM
There's no such thing as bad press.

Nope, there is definitely bad press out there to be had.

Godxilla
08-09-2012, 08:38 AM
Are you all fucking kidding? This is all nothing more than a publicity stunt by Mayor For Life Menino to demonstrate his might.

Little_Miss_1565
08-09-2012, 11:07 AM
Have you smoaxed pot? You're saying Mayor Menino actually orchestrated the CEO of CFA sticking his foot in it...so he could write a stern letter that does nothing?

MOTO13
08-09-2012, 11:29 AM
Nope, there is definitely bad press out there to be had.

Bad press for a restaurant is when people get sick from the food, a crazy fuck shoots the place up or the mascot molests a kid. In this case, definitely not bad press. An avalanche of free nationwide publicity and advertisement to go along with record sales. Ain't that a bitch. All because the owner did essentially nothing different than he had ever done and quite possibly people do not disagree with his values. Well done boycotters...well done. Maybe GM and Chrysler should have pissed off the gays a few years ago. Seems to be food for thought.

Little_Miss_1565
08-09-2012, 12:11 PM
Bad press for a restaurant is when people get sick from the food, a crazy fuck shoots the place up or the mascot molests a kid. In this case, definitely not bad press. An avalanche of free nationwide publicity and advertisement to go along with record sales. Ain't that a bitch. All because the owner did essentially nothing different than he had ever done and quite possibly people do not disagree with his values. Well done boycotters...well done. Maybe GM and Chrysler should have pissed off the gays a few years ago. Seems to be food for thought.

My statement was related only to the possibility of bad press to be had in general as a rule, to counteract the old adage that all press is good press. But way to be defensive.

MOTO13
08-09-2012, 12:45 PM
I took your bad press comment as it relates to this thread. Cause CF is not having any problems as far as I can see from it. But yes, there is absolutely such a thing as bad press. This is NOT intended to change any subject on this thread...Take for example Reid's comment about Romney regarding not paying taxes for over 10 years. Reid is completely clueless about the subject and has no support for such a comment. Makes the dems look like idiots. That is bad press. Also, Last week I took a shirt to DongHungLo's laundry...shirt came back and looked like crap. Bad press. See, we can agree on things.

Little_Miss_1565
08-09-2012, 12:51 PM
"This is not to change the topic of the thread"....then changing the topic of the thread. Nice.

Tiny Vessels
08-09-2012, 01:01 PM
Oh Moto.. If you're going to argue about Reid's comment then lets just say that ALL members of congress when they give interviews is bad press. Yeah that was a stupid comment. But they all give stupid comments/interviews and the press plays off of it and the big debates and this person is pissed off and that person is pissed off this group is and that group is. It's all bad pres if you're going to bring up Reid's comment/congress.

MOTO13
08-09-2012, 01:44 PM
Holy shit...you missed the boat on that one TV. You are a bit broad based to say the least. When you get press based on a malicious comment that is 100% completely unsupported and simply there to harm someone or something and you are caught lying, that is bad press. Or... saying that someone died from cancer and directly blame one individual for it that is TOTALLY unrelated to the death and it backfires into a shit storm of stupidity...that is bad press. Simply 2 examples of bad press in the current light to help 1565's previous point and prove she is correct.

Little_Miss_1565
08-09-2012, 02:43 PM
Can we also agree that you're little more than an attention-seeker?

Llamas
08-09-2012, 03:08 PM
I'd actually be interested to see some stats on CFA's sales before and after this incident. Of course their sales peaked on that one day when all the bigots went, but I'd like to see a graph of their sales by week/month for the last year or so. Would be interesting. Considering CFA seems to mostly be in redneck areas, I get the feeling their sales have probably increased.

MOTO13
08-09-2012, 03:17 PM
Wow, again you see right through things and get to the heart of it. Was it my 153 posts in the past 6 years that gave it away or simply the fact that at least my posts are somewhat entertaining?

Little_Miss_1565
08-09-2012, 03:19 PM
Just because you think something is entertaining doesn't mean it is.

Tiny Vessels
08-09-2012, 03:26 PM
Just because you think something is entertaining doesn't mean it is.

That's so true.

MOTO13
08-09-2012, 03:33 PM
I'd actually be interested to see some stats on CFA's sales before and after this incident. Of course their sales peaked on that one day when all the bigots went, but I'd like to see a graph of their sales by week/month for the last year or so. Would be interesting. Considering CFA seems to mostly be in redneck areas, I get the feeling their sales have probably increased.

That would be a good to see. I like the way say the day all the bigots went and CFA is mostly in redneck areas...good call. Very well thought out. Anyone who does not agree with your view is wrong and a bigot. Well, you do know what that makes you now don't you?

Little_Miss_1565
08-09-2012, 05:28 PM
Very well thought out. Anyone who does not agree with your view is wrong and a bigot. Well, you do know what that makes you now don't you?

You're still a bigot. Nice try, though.

Godxilla
08-09-2012, 07:17 PM
..........

WebDudette
08-09-2012, 08:29 PM
I'd actually be interested to see some stats on CFA's sales before and after this incident. Of course their sales peaked on that one day when all the bigots went, but I'd like to see a graph of their sales by week/month for the last year or so.

I wouldn't be surprised if we got to see this information eventually, we just have to wait for the quarterly reports, or whatever. I'm interested, but if I had to guess, I'd say it levels off at about the same as it was before. Most of the people who are going to stick with the boycott are people who have been doing it for years, many boycotters are going to forget about it (KONY 2012), and the people who promised to eat there more will steadily fall back into normal habits.

So, save for that one day spike that may be partially canceled out by the people boycotting, I think it's going to be about the same and it'll all level out in a couple weeks.

WebDudette
08-09-2012, 08:49 PM
beeteedubs, pretty sure that making death threats against a sitting Mayor on a public forum is a bad idea.

Little_Miss_1565
08-09-2012, 10:26 PM
Remember when the forums got shut down over death threats to President Bush? That was awesome. But now I might see where Mecha got the idea to send me all those threats.

And seriously Godxilla, I get that you're young but you're not even making sense. Yes, it's a heated election season, and duh, there is mad political posturing on both sides. But if you get to make childish death threats on the mayor, then Mayor Menino gets to write a silly letter asking CFA to withdraw a permit application. I mean jesus. Of course he chooses now to do it, after the big dust-up, just like every bigot in America is choosing now to stand up for hate.

But for fuck's sakes, if this is where education is headed, we are all well and truly fucked. Obama saying people should do some soul searching as to whether anyone needs to own a fucking assault rifle means he's taking away your existing guns? That makes no sense. Writing a letter asking a corporation to withdraw a permit app but not actually barring that company from building means he's flexed his mighty powers and forbidden all CFA in Boston? That sounds insane.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-10-2012, 12:15 AM
And now that they're going to ban guns, I can't even grease him with an AUG, ACOG scope and dual mag.
I highly doubt that'd happen. I don't even think that's legally possible in the USA.

Little_Miss_1565
08-10-2012, 12:20 AM
I highly doubt that'd happen. I don't even think that's legally possible in the USA.

There's a constitutional amendment protecting the right to own guns. But that doesn't mean you need a goddamn assault rifle. Many cities already have existing bans on owning assault rifles and that doesn't seem to get anyone's panties in a pinch. Just Obama's questioning whether it should have been so easy for a crazy person to buy military grade armor and weaponry online, though. That apparently constitutes a ban. Fucksakes.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-10-2012, 12:25 AM
What if you want to own a "goddamn assault rifle"? :)

I think that would be pretty stellar. It would be loads of fun at the shooting range. I'd love an assault rifle. I'm definitely moving to the states now!

You also don't need a dishwasher or an extra pair of shoes, but they can be fun to have. Yes, that is the best comparison I could currently come up with. :cool:

WebDudette
08-10-2012, 12:41 AM
Godxilla threatens a guys life over chicken, but we're the crazy bigots, amirite?

MOTO13
08-10-2012, 07:01 AM
I have quite a few guns and occaisionally hunt, so I am a pretty big advocate for the NRA and gun owner rights. But for the life of me, why the fuck any citizen needs an assault rifle baffles me.

OC HAU
08-10-2012, 07:21 AM
Now I'm thinking about the word boycott. I had something like riot in my mind. :D If it only means not buying their stuff, that makes perfect sense to do it.

Also, the old adage that there is no such thing as bad press. Yeah, I think that's bullshit for sane people. But, Chickwhatever still does it--who knows if there are still lots of insane people or if they just want to establish their brand name and then they will try to be nice. I also wonder what does history say about such brands...

Anyway, where's the option like cutting their heads off and putting them on bamboo poles?

BagOfShenanigans
08-10-2012, 07:22 AM
You can own any weapon you want with the proper paperwork. Just look at FPS Russia.

Little_Miss_1565
08-10-2012, 10:56 AM
What if you want to own a "goddamn assault rifle"? :)

I think that would be pretty stellar. It would be loads of fun at the shooting range. I'd love an assault rifle. I'm definitely moving to the states now!

You also don't need a dishwasher or an extra pair of shoes, but they can be fun to have. Yes, that is the best comparison I could currently come up with. :cool:

Sure it'd be fun. I'd like to punch a lot of people in the face, but that doesn't mean I think I should be able to. A lot of people seem to confuse "personal freedom" with "being able to do whatever I want." Part of the social contract of living in a society is giving up certain "rights" in order to have others protected. You may not have the right to own an assault rifle, but in exchange you get an increased ability to avoid being killed by some random douchebag with one.

Godxilla
08-10-2012, 11:45 AM
..........

MOTO13
08-10-2012, 12:08 PM
That would be me, no? *sigh*

Having a weapon in the hands of citizens that was designed for no other reason than to rapidly spray bullets in oder to do as much damage to a human as possible may not what the founding fathers intended. That being said, I have shot a machine gun. It was fun as hell and also scared the living shit out me. I imagined what it would be like on the other end of this thing if I was firing at someone or visa versa. Damn near made me sick. With every right comes the obligation of responsibility. Too many fucknuts out there with zero responsibility or remorse for their actions. That being said, I could cave in a guys skull with a damn rock. Probably won't outlaw rocks. Problem is like I said, too many crazy bastards out there. You can't control everyone or make the majority pay for the actions of a very tiny minority who will use anything to kill.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-10-2012, 12:27 PM
Sure it'd be fun. I'd like to punch a lot of people in the face, but that doesn't mean I think I should be able to.
And I thought my comparison was awful. ;)



A lot of people seem to confuse "personal freedom" with "being able to do whatever I want." Part of the social contract of living in a society is giving up certain "rights" in order to have others protected. You may not have the right to own an assault rifle, but in exchange you get an increased ability to avoid being killed by some random douchebag with one.
Sorry. You seemed so tightly wound over this subject I couldn't help but try and bug you a little bit. Smile :)

Little_Miss_1565
08-10-2012, 12:29 PM
This is why I like Tijs better. Any time we make a joke, he doesn't go batty, calling the user "childish". One joke = insane fucking. You just raped my post and called me "childish". What a fuckjob.

Free expression doesn't mean that you are somehow shielded from someone pointing out that your arguments make zero sense. Death threats on a sitting mayor for doing literally nothing is indeed childish. Kind of like death and rape threats on a moderator of a fucking message board for deleting posts that needed to be deleted. I get that no one likes to have it pointed out that they don't know what they're talking about, but that doesn't mean that everyone should tiptoe around not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings. And jesus christ, if you are this butthurt about me answering your arguments, you are the last person who should own an assault rifle.

I "raped" your post? Get the fuck over yourself. Christ.


You don't need one, you just want one. Obama's being a loser in trying to do this "soul search " thing. We are in a free country, where if you want a gun, you can have one. Even an AUG, ACOG scope, dual mag.

Who said you always get what you want? I want to beat the living shit out of everyone who's ever sent me a death or rape threat on this forum, but that doesn't mean I can.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-10-2012, 12:32 PM
What exactly happened to Mecha anyways? I was at a Bible camp when it all went down.:D

Little_Miss_1565
08-10-2012, 12:34 PM
He sent me death and rape threats and got banned, then came back to try to send me more and got banned again.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-10-2012, 12:39 PM
What provoked the threats? There must be more to the story. Can I hear another end of the story?

Little_Miss_1565
08-10-2012, 12:46 PM
I delete posts and tell people what is and isn't appropriate on the forum, and who the fuck is this bitch (meaning me) to do that? You feel free to try finding out his side of the story, but if you think those threats are appropriate under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, check yourself immediately.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-10-2012, 12:55 PM
What? I'm not on his side. I just wanted to hear his side. You gave me a super brief explanation and I was just wondering what provoked him to make the threats. I'm not saying they are justifiable under any circumstance, I'm just curious what made him go nuts.

Also, I think you do good work on the forums. I support the mods. Keep it up.

Little_Miss_1565
08-10-2012, 12:58 PM
I honestly have no idea what caused it outside of the fact that I am part of the team that determines what people can and can't post here and delete things that aren't appropriate. But this is also pretty endemic to women who manage communities online. Guys who do the same shit are baller. Women who do are evil bitches who need to be taught a lesson.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-10-2012, 01:03 PM
:( I'm going to go do something outside. I woke up on the good side of the bed today and your negativity is bringing me down. Bye!

Little_Miss_1565
08-10-2012, 01:06 PM
Sorry for answering your question?

Scythe Death
08-10-2012, 02:09 PM
Guys who do the same shit are baller.

I disagree. Just the same way you have idiots thinking something is "baller" for guys sometimes, you usually have ass licking faggots saying "oh such a powerful female! you go girl! xD" for female mods.

Really, I just think that most of the time they're idiots. I'm not saying that your decision about banning that dude was wrong though. I don't know the story.

WebDudette
08-10-2012, 05:53 PM
You do know the story though. Really, no matter what 'provoked' him to send death and rape threats, that shit justifies a ban.

Just kidding, death threats are just little jokes, no reason to get worked up over something like that, right?

Godxilla
08-10-2012, 07:24 PM
Free expression doesn't mean that you are somehow shielded from someone pointing out that your arguments make zero sense. Death threats on a sitting mayor for doing literally nothing is indeed childish. Kind of like death and rape threats on a moderator of a fucking message board for deleting posts that needed to be deleted. I get that no one likes to have it pointed out that they don't know what they're talking about, but that doesn't mean that everyone should tiptoe around not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings. And jesus christ, if you are this butthurt about me answering your arguments, you are the last person who should own an assault rifle.

I "raped" your post? Get the fuck over yourself. Christ.



Who said you always get what you want? I want to beat the living shit out of everyone who's ever sent me a death or rape threat on this forum, but that doesn't mean I can.
You need to calm down. Your fury is absolutely uncalled for. I make one little joke, you fuck my argument on the basis of my AGE.

What exactly happened to Mecha anyways? I was at a Bible camp when it all went down.:D
you study the Bible!!!!!?????!!? Holy fuck.

He sent me death and rape threats and got banned, then came back to try to send me more and got banned again.
One of those accounts was called "pleaseletmeexplainmyself". Not that you cared. Even if he offered an apology...

What provoked the threats? There must be more to the story. Can I hear another end of the story?
Oh, there is....

I delete posts and tell people what is and isn't appropriate on the forum, and who the fuck is this bitch (meaning me) to do that? You feel free to try finding out his side of the story, but if you think those threats are appropriate under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, check yourself immediately.
... And this ain't it.

I honestly have no idea what caused it outside of the fact that I am part of the team that determines what people can and can't post here and delete things that aren't appropriate. But this is also pretty endemic to women who manage communities online. Guys who do the same shit are baller. Women who do are evil bitches who need to be taught a lesson.
... And this ain't either.

I disagree. Just the same way you have idiots thinking something is "baller" for guys sometimes, you usually have ass licking faggots saying "oh such a powerful female! you go girl! xD" for female mods.

Really, I just think that most of the time they're idiots. I'm not saying that your decision about banning that dude was wrong though. I don't know the story.
Y'know, you kind of have a point, but this is why you are called "Scythe Douche".

You do know the story though. Really, no matter what 'provoked' him to send death and rape threats, that shit justifies a ban.

Just kidding, death threats are just little jokes, no reason to get worked up over something like that, right?
I don't condone his actions in any way, but I don't see why you have to be such a MUTHERFUCKINDOUCHRBAGJACKASSPISSEATERFUCKJOB! His threat wasn't really a joke, but MINE WAS.

_Lost_
08-10-2012, 09:13 PM
You don't get a chance to explain yourself when you threaten someone's life/well being via the internet. She could press charges if she wanted to. Plain and simple. The fact that he was just banned and nothing further speaks, in part, to how tolerant Sarah is and it also reminds those of us that have been around a while, just how often this sort of thing happens to her. If I were in her position, you bet your ass I would handle these things differently.

You can own any weapon you want with the proper paperwork. Just look at FPS Russia.

As far as gun laws are concerned, a lot of what can and can't be bought in public is already heavily regulated. You can't just own any kind of gun you want as a civilian of the US. I don't know about national gun laws and how similar they are to what I know about what is legal in NC, but in NC you can only buy single shot, semi-auto guns. Burst fire and fully automatic are completely illegal. Even the military uses burst fire over fully automatic. I don't think anyone should be allowed to buy assault rifles at all. While any gun can be used to kill another person, assault rifles are designed for killing people, single shot or not.


Considering CFA seems to mostly be in redneck areas, I get the feeling their sales have probably increased.
This comment bothers me. Considering that NC is one of the top states for the number of chic-fil-a's and that most of them are clustered around urban areas, I'm kind of offended. Just because its southern, that doesn't make it redneck.

WebDudette
08-10-2012, 09:24 PM
Godxilla, so mad.

This thread reminds me, I have to clean my shotguns.

Static_Martyr
08-10-2012, 10:14 PM
I'm all for a universal ban on civilian-owned assault weapons. You just don't need 'em. The only time we would ever be justified in having them is if there was some kind of foreign invasion of US soil and there was literally fighting in the streets.

That said, if some idiot decides he wants to shoot a place up, I'd rather him use a full-auto POS like an AK-47 any day of the week. Damn things jam up way too much to be of any use. And I'm not the only one who thinks so; I've asked a couple of my former Marine friends about their weapon of choice, and the consensus has thus far been that fully-automatic weapons are highly impractical simply because of how frequently they jam. I find that people who see combat tend to favor burst-fire weapons (such as anything based on the M1A (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1A)).

Hell, automatic weapon jamming was the only reason the people at the Colorado theater were able to take the guy out; his gun jammed at a critical moment. Just think if he had been using PRACTICAL weapons, how many more people he would have killed.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-11-2012, 12:50 AM
you study the Bible!!!!!?????!!? Holy fuck.

Is this a good or a bad thing? Or are you just surprised?



This thread reminds me, I have to clean my shotguns.
Is that a euphemism for something?

WebDudette
08-11-2012, 02:25 AM
Nope, I just haven't cleaned and oiled my shotguns in a long time.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-11-2012, 02:56 AM
If we are sincerely talking about firearms and nothing else, I need to clean one of my shotguns. My dad just bought the other a few months ago and it's been cleaned once since.

EDIT: When I say "my" shotguns, I mean my family's. I only get one and my dad gets the other. Neither are legally mine currently.

Llamas
08-11-2012, 03:04 AM
:( I'm going to go do something outside. I woke up on the good side of the bed today and your negativity is bringing me down. Bye!

What a douchey reply... you asked for explanation, and then when Sarah was talking about freaking death and rape threats she's gotten from members here whom you'd like to support, you complain about her negativity??


This comment bothers me. Considering that NC is one of the top states for the number of chic-fil-a's and that most of them are clustered around urban areas, I'm kind of offended. Just because its southern, that doesn't make it redneck.

I've actually never seen a CFA and have no idea where they're actually located. My comment was written specifically to piss off people like MOTO and Godxilla. :)

WebDudette
08-11-2012, 03:07 AM
Yeah, MOTO claimed to do the same thing when he was being a dickhead about homosexuals. Whether it was just a cover or he was genuine, I thought it was stupid.

Llamas
08-11-2012, 03:39 AM
Meh, I thought, "when all the bigots went" and "concentrated in redneck areas" combined as a big red flag that my post wasn't entirely serious... especially to those of you who "know" me... stupid or not, it wasn't serious. I literally do not know where CFAs are located to even comment on that. All I can really even say for sure is that they don't seem to exist in Minnesota or Wisconsin.

Tiny Vessels
08-11-2012, 04:49 AM
I know of 1 CFA is Wisconsin that I know of. Its inside of the mall in the city I live in. There might be more but I have no idea.

Godxilla
08-11-2012, 08:34 AM
Is this a good or a bad thing? Or are you just surprised?
oh, I'm just surprised. I don't really care either way.

What a douchey reply... you asked for explanation, and then when Sarah was talking about freaking death and rape threats she's gotten from members here whom you'd like to support, you complain about her negativity??



I've actually never seen a CFA and have no idea where they're actually located. My comment was written specifically to piss off people like MOTO and Godxilla. :)

Ah, clever. Does this mean that I can write a post trying to piss you off? Cool. In reality, they ARE in redneck areas. I used to live in Atlanta, and I used to see tons on the highway, in the middle of rednecktopia. And next to churches. Good fer all them plain, simple folks who are fixin' to eat frahd chickin.

BagOfShenanigans
08-11-2012, 09:29 AM
Congress shall pass no law abridging the people's right to punch whomever they please.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-11-2012, 11:41 AM
What a douchey reply... you asked for explanation, and then when Sarah was talking about freaking death and rape threats she's gotten from members here whom you'd like to support, you complain about her negativity??

Sorry :(
I guess I never thought of it from her perspective. Her constant bitterness in her replies was kind of upsetting. I didn't realize that the actually threats were making her upset. I've just never really taken internet threats against me seriously.

Sorry Little_Miss_1565. I have a nasty tendency to be less sensitive to people I don't know in person. I understand the negativity now.

Llamas: Members here that I'd like to support? I always had fun bugging Mecha and taking him seriously when he was serious, but I wouldn't go as far to say I support him.

Godxilla
08-11-2012, 07:02 PM
Congress shall pass no law abridging the people's right to punch whomever they please.
Phew. I'm safe, then.

Sorry :(
I guess I never thought of it from her perspective. Her constant bitterness in her replies was kind of upsetting. I didn't realize that the actually threats were making her upset. I've just never really taken internet threats against me seriously.

Sorry Little_Miss_1565. I have a nasty tendency to be less sensitive to people I don't know in person. I understand the negativity now.

Llamas: Members here that I'd like to support? I always had fun bugging Mecha and taking him seriously when he was serious, but I wouldn't go as far to say I support him.

That's okay. He never really liked tou either. I'm just thankful that you were the only one to ever listen to and grade Gotengo. So I like you.

PS: for the rest of you users, please do look at my stuff (Gotengo) in the your band section. Just a sunny ad to lighten the mood.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-11-2012, 07:36 PM
Where is everybody's favorite place to eat chicken? My personal favorites are KFC and Swiss Chalet.

Godxilla
08-11-2012, 09:03 PM
Where is everybody's favorite place to eat chicken? My personal favorites are KFC and Swiss Chalet.

At home. With pineapple. And a bit of a cilantro. With some rice pilaf underneath for texture. If it sounds rich, it's just because you're poor. It really is good.

WeAreOne9
08-12-2012, 01:20 AM
Where is everybody's favorite place to eat chicken? My personal favorites are KFC and Swiss Chalet.

We Canucks sure love our Swiss Chalet.

OC HAU
08-12-2012, 08:16 AM
Ban, bible camp, death threats and AUG, ACOG SCOPE, DUAL MAG!

I'm lovin' it here. I no longer own a pair of Godzillas, but that's OK.

MOTO13
08-12-2012, 12:28 PM
At home. With pineapple. And a bit of a cilantro. With some rice pilaf underneath for texture. If it sounds rich, it's just because you're poor. It really is good.

That actually sounds really good.

Otherwise Popeyes ftw.

Tiny Vessels
08-12-2012, 12:30 PM
That actually sounds really good.

Otherwise Popeyes ftw.

Popeyes is fucking horrible chicken. It's so gross. Yuck.

Godxilla
08-12-2012, 01:45 PM
Ban, bible camp, death threats and AUG, ACOG SCOPE, DUAL MAG!

I'm lovin' it here. I no longer own a pair of Godzillas, but that's OK.
I knew you'd understand! But one Godzilla is better than none.

That actually sounds really good.

Otherwise Popeyes ftw.

Glad you think it sounds tasty. I really do enjoy every time I eat it. The pineapple and chicken fuse flavors wonderfully if you let it sit and cool for a few minutes. It's even better the next day!

Little_Miss_1565
08-12-2012, 02:16 PM
Godxilla, I don't know you from Adam. How am I supposed to know when you're joking or not? There are things that make sense to and are hilarious to teenagers that are the opposite to anyone else. I'm way closer to 30 than I am to 20. It shouldn't be a surprise to you that I'd have no patience for this nonsense.

This is another thing that makes me hate the internet. "Someone criticized my post, I'mma take power back by posting death threats!" It's not power. It's being a dick.

Kickhim, this forum has been shut down in the past for death threats that someone posted probably as a joke, but it didn't stop the Secret Service from coming in. Not joking. There's a reason that threats are always taken seriously offline. Online isn't any different.

Scythe Death
08-12-2012, 02:39 PM
but it didn't stop the Secret Service from coming in. Not joking.

Holy shit.

Just so you guys know, I take the song "Kill the President" very seriously.

Godxilla
08-12-2012, 03:32 PM
Godxilla, I don't know you from Adam. How am I supposed to know when you're joking or not? There are things that make sense to and are hilarious to teenagers that are the opposite to anyone else. I'm way closer to 30 than I am to 20. It shouldn't be a surprise to you that I'd have no patience for this nonsense.

This is another thing that makes me hate the internet. "Someone criticized my post, I'mma take power back by posting death threats!" It's not power. It's being a dick.

Kickhim, this forum has been shut down in the past for death threats that someone posted probably as a joke, but it didn't stop the Secret Service from coming in. Not joking. There's a reason that threats are always taken seriously offline. Online isn't any different.

Well, I suppose that I will think twice the next time I make a joke, one never knows what's gonna happen. But, MrConeman gets to say "Bighead deserves to be shot" and doesn't get banned, while I go to the edge of banishment and back for my post? Oh, okay.

Lizardus
08-12-2012, 03:53 PM
Mr Coneman has the advantage of being an established character. He also has the advantage of having used a variation of a common phrase that has been used as a form of criticism for decades, also, context.

Little_Miss_1565
08-12-2012, 04:37 PM
He also has the advantage of recognizing it was wrong of him to say that no matter how angry he was, and deleted it.

XYlophonetreeZ
08-12-2012, 05:25 PM
Kickhim, this forum has been shut down in the past for death threats that someone posted probably as a joke, but it didn't stop the Secret Service from coming in. Not joking. There's a reason that threats are always taken seriously offline. Online isn't any different.

I'm guessing that was around the same time that "Kill the President" was mysteriously removed from the self-titled album.

Godxilla
08-12-2012, 05:25 PM
He also has the advantage of recognizing it was wrong of him to say that no matter how angry he was, and deleted it.

Very well. I shall edit my post to nothingness, and make no mention of AUGs for the rest of my time here.

Edit: It has been done, and I really do apologize for my "childish" death threat on the Mayor For Life.

Little_Miss_1565
08-12-2012, 06:56 PM
I'm guessing that was around the same time that "Kill the President" was mysteriously removed from the self-titled album.

I might be misremembering things in my old age, but I believe it might have been right around that time.


Very well. I shall edit my post to nothingness, and make no mention of AUGs for the rest of my time here.

Edit: It has been done, and I really do apologize for my "childish" death threat on the Mayor For Life.

Cool.

ruroken
08-12-2012, 10:56 PM
I have just learnt about Chick-Fil-A this week.
This.

I've never seen one before.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
08-19-2012, 03:06 PM
Ban, bible camp.
:(



Kickhim, this forum has been shut down in the past for death threats that someone posted probably as a joke, but it didn't stop the Secret Service from coming in. Not joking. There's a reason that threats are always taken seriously offline. Online isn't any different.
Once again, I apologize for my insensitivity. I'm raised with an immature internet generation. I've been desensitized into not taking online threats seriously.

Godxilla
08-27-2012, 04:18 PM
Off-topic:
Welcome to the new mods. The only one I approve of is Lost. But who cares about my tastes.
Anti-Mecha troll-patrol squad?

Little_Miss_1565
08-27-2012, 06:21 PM
Way to bump a thread for the purposes of self-aggrandizement. Your brother is one troll in a long line of trolls. He is neither the first nor the last. Sorry if that makes you feel less special. (Confession: not sorry)

_Lost_
08-27-2012, 06:54 PM
I don't understand why you would bump this particular thread to say that...

jacknife737
08-28-2012, 06:24 AM
I don't understand why you would bump this particular thread to say that...

Attention whoring.

Llamas
08-28-2012, 06:33 AM
Ha, I didn't even notice there were new mods. LM and Tijs sick of being the only ones? :P Or were they ordained by the PTB?

Edit: lol @ anyone caring which mods Godxilla approves of.

WeAreOne9
08-28-2012, 09:10 AM
Ha, I didn't even notice there were new mods. LM and Tijs sick of being the only ones? :P Or were they ordained by the PTB?

Edit: lol @ anyone caring which mods Godxilla approves of.

Who else are the new mods?

Is Ricky gone?

_Lost_
08-28-2012, 10:02 AM
Just been Tijs and Sarah for a few months now.

Rooster
08-28-2012, 10:36 AM
So this means that Randy, Gustavo and _Lost_ have all embraced the dark side?

;)

Jakebert
08-28-2012, 12:18 PM
I still don't know why anyone would want to be a mod for the ungrateful jackasses that post here.

Llamas
08-28-2012, 12:30 PM
Just been Tijs and Sarah for a few months now.

Maybe I just don't pay much attention, but hasn't it been just those two for a few years now?


I still don't know why anyone would want to be a mod for the ungrateful jackasses that post here.

Seriously. Would have to pay me a part-time salary to remove spam, filter out bs trolling and people breaking forum rules, and put up with monthly threads being called a nazi/tyrant/asshole for trying to make this place attractive for people to want to contribute.

_Lost_
08-28-2012, 12:45 PM
Maybe I just don't pay much attention, but hasn't it been just those two for a few years now?

Officially, not really. In reality, pretty much.

Lizardus
08-28-2012, 01:00 PM
I still don't know why anyone would want to be a mod for the ungrateful jackasses that post here.

Practice for when you have your own kids.
Experienced in dealing with assholes.
Personal training in the art of having patience.

Godxilla
08-29-2012, 07:24 PM
Way to bump a thread for the purposes of self-aggrandizement. Your brother is one troll in a long line of trolls. He is neither the first nor the last. Sorry if that makes you feel less special. (Confession: not sorry)
Way to make sure to criticize me to make sure that you don't seem weak. I don't feel special; if I felt special I would have asked you bitches to change your shit.

I don't understand why you would bump this particular thread to say that...
Look at what happened, Lost. This is exactly why.

Attention whoring.
More or less, baby. I'm like a fucken supernova, who burns fast and dies young.

Ha, I didn't even notice there were new mods. LM and Tijs sick of being the only ones? :P Or were they ordained by the PTB?

Edit: lol @ anyone caring which mods Godxilla approves of.
Exactly why I said "but who cares". There are reasons, but I don't feel like y'all want to know.

So this means that Randy, Gustavo and _Lost_ have all embraced the dark side?

;)
Pretty much.

I still don't know why anyone would want to be a mod for the ungrateful jackasses that post here.

Neither do I. And I tell ya, I won't improve my behavior to make their lives easy.

Lizardus
08-29-2012, 08:20 PM
who burns fast and dies young.



Hopefully.........

Little_Miss_1565
08-29-2012, 09:52 PM
Look at what happened, Lost. This is exactly why.

Oh, okay, so you can take a swipe at me, but it's me being a bitch when I dish it right back.

Please be more of a dick, more often.

_Lost_
08-29-2012, 10:07 PM
Hey look Godzilla, you've made this thread all about you! Good for you!

Anti-mecha squad... what the fuck ever... :rolleyes:

Godxilla
08-30-2012, 11:38 AM
Oh, okay, so you can take a swipe at me, but it's me being a bitch when I dish it right back.

Please be more of a dick, more often.

I don't actually think that's possible.

Little_Miss_1565
08-30-2012, 11:45 AM
I don't actually think that's possible.

I believe in you. Try harder.

Godxilla
08-30-2012, 11:46 AM
I believe in you. Try harder.

I offer no return comment.

RageAndLov
08-30-2012, 11:58 AM
I offer no return comment.

You just offered a return comment.

Godxilla
08-30-2012, 12:22 PM
You just offered a return comment.

I offer a return comment.

samseby
09-19-2012, 09:04 AM
So, here we go:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/chick-fil-a-anti-gay-organizations-funding-ceased_n_1896580.html?1348063593&ncid=edlinkusaolp00000008

Little_Miss_1565
09-19-2012, 09:34 AM
Fantastic! I love it when people get that hatred is not a family value.

Llamas
09-19-2012, 11:31 AM
Business move on their part. Nothing more. However, it tells me that the response of the public didn't go how CFA expected it to. I'm guessing they're losing tons of business and are desperately trying to get it back. CFA still sucks ass, but go people who stood up for LGBT rights! Very awesome.

Little_Miss_1565
09-19-2012, 12:00 PM
Of course it's a business move on their part. But who cares?

MOTO13
09-19-2012, 12:29 PM
Yeah, now the LGBTWTFE leaugue can go back to not knowing or caring about a company that they knew zero about prior to this whole thing happening. Of course it was a business move. Did CFA lose money or business because of their boycotting? Possibly, but it was minimal at worst. But the gays, lesbians and other forms can rest assured that the .02 of every hundred dollars that was sent to the charities they were against will probably no longer go there. They can also rest assured that the employees will also make less because of the possible slow down of business. Good fuckin move. Really changed the world huh? Who did they hurt? The employees more than anyone/anything else. If the gays and lezbians really wanted to make a statement, they could have asked Cathy for a sit down conference. But, the boycott was ideologocally driven and never meant to make any real social difference. It was done to exploit and sensationalize.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
09-19-2012, 12:34 PM
Fantastic! I love it when people get that hatred is not a family value.
I hate it when people think a family value is based out of hatred. :p

Little_Miss_1565
09-19-2012, 01:05 PM
Moto, was there an argument in all that butthurt?

Kickhim, denying someone's rights, civil, human, or otherwise, is based in hatred. Always. There is no separate but equal, and there's no equivocation because you feel bad about engaging in acts based on hatred. You either love all or you don't. I know plenty of very conservative Christians who feel they're called upon by God to love all people, and they support gay marriage.

MOTO13
09-19-2012, 01:21 PM
Moto, was there an argument in all that butthurt?

Kickhim, denying someone's rights, civil, human, or otherwise, is based in hatred. Always. There is no separate but equal, and there's no equivocation because you feel bad about engaging in acts based on hatred. You either love all or you don't. I know plenty of very conservative Christians who feel they're called upon by God to love all people, and they support gay marriage.

You either love all or don't? So, you love me. Kumbyfuckingyah.

I, as well as 99% of the population, do not love all. Not even close. At best, that shit is a bumper sticker.

Tiny Vessels
09-19-2012, 01:27 PM
So, you love me. Kumbyfuckingyah.

LOL nice answer.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
09-19-2012, 02:15 PM
Kickhim, denying someone's rights, civil, human, or otherwise, is based in hatred. Always.
I'm only quoting one sentence because everything following it was based off of this one sentence, and it's wrong. For example, I don't hate pedophiles, but I'm also not supportive of their idea of love. I would gladly deny pedophile rights out of love for the children.

As I have made public in the past month or two, I no longer see a necessity to ban homosexual marriage in secular countries. I am still against homosexual marriage (doesn't mean I'm responsible to stop it), because I believe it is wrong, but I also think Islam is wrong. I don't want to kill (or kick out) all the Muslims.

I can't think of a single gay person I hate. I can't think of a single person I hate. Quit telling me what I think, Liberal Brainwasher :D

EDIT: "Liberal Brainwasher" is just a joke. I have a feeling you'll take it seriously.

Tiny Vessels
09-19-2012, 02:21 PM
I can't think of a single person I hate.

I can think of a single person I hate, I'm pretty sure there is more than one.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
09-19-2012, 03:22 PM
It takes great effort to anger me. I also suck at holding grudges. I always tell myself that I'll be mad at someone for the next week and then give up in the next half hour. I don't think I'd be able to hate anyone longer than a few minutes.

Tiny Vessels
09-19-2012, 03:39 PM
Normally I don't hold grudges, but this one person I will always hold a grudge against and I will for life. And if someone pisses me off I say I'm not gonna talk to them but I always end up talking to them. I get over it.

MOTO13
09-19-2012, 03:48 PM
As a general rule, I am a pretty easy going guy. But I could probably go through the alphabet and have one person person I hate for every letter. People who say they don't hate are full of shit imho...either that or they have a really bad memory.

Tiny Vessels
09-19-2012, 03:55 PM
Anybody on here fall into your list of people to hate, Moto?

MOTO13
09-19-2012, 03:59 PM
Hate? On this site? Not even close. All good people. Some full of shit, but good people.

Tiny Vessels
09-19-2012, 04:14 PM
Hate? On this site? Not even close. All good people. Some full of shit, but good people.

Completely different answer than what I was expecting you to say. But cool, glad you dont hate anyone here,.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
09-19-2012, 05:08 PM
People who say they don't hate are full of shit imho...either that or they have a really bad memory.
I guess I must have a really bad memory.

Godxilla
09-19-2012, 05:19 PM
Hate? On this site? Not even close. All good people. Some full of shit, but good people.

Somebody just called me a good person! I'm honored.

Lizardus
09-19-2012, 06:29 PM
But still full of horseradish.

http://www.sadanduseless.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/gif/703.gif

Tiny Vessels
09-19-2012, 07:45 PM
Somebody just called me a good person! I'm honored.

Well you should feel honored :)

_Lost_
09-19-2012, 08:02 PM
KickHim, I think what she is saying is that the idea behind denying this that or the other person rights is spawned from hatred. She never said you hated them. You said yourself that you aren't trying to deny anyone their rights. The guy that said black people weren't equals and can't vote came to that conclusion because of hatred. The person that banned abortion did so because of hatred toward women 'baby killers'. The person who banned gays from marrying did so because they hate the idea of same sex marriage. "marriage is between a man and a woman" and all that jazz. Some people are followers who blindly accept the idea, but the people who fight against these things, do so out of hatred. There is no other reason to deny someone basic rights.

WebDudette
09-19-2012, 08:16 PM
MOTO, myself and many others have been refusing to eat at CFA for a long time. It just recently got national coverage, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been going on for years. As for hurting the employees, I don't eat at Taco Bell because their food is shit, if a Taco Bell in my area does some down sizing, am I partially to blame? In fact, I stopped eating fast food altogether over a month ago, am I responsible for a loss of wages at all fastfood places? Or maybe it only work in groups. Are vegans to blame when a slaughterhouse downsizes or a butcher shop closes down? A lot of people, including myself, do not support the Boy Scouts of America. Is it my fault if the local troop doesn't get to go on their annual camping trip because they didn't make enough money? What about those people at In-N-Out who get my money every time my friends want to go to CFA. An I responsible for keeping them in business?

Llamas, of course it's just a business move and I likely still won't eat there. Just as it was a business move when Oreo did it, but I still think its a good indicator of progress and change in America.

Little_Miss_1565
09-19-2012, 08:18 PM
You either love all or don't? So, you love me. Kumbyfuckingyah.

I, as well as 99% of the population, do not love all. Not even close. At best, that shit is a bumper sticker.

Don't get me wrong, I think you're a goddamn asshole. But I don't want to deny you civil rights, the ability to marry or adopt a child, or the ability to visit a loved one in the hospital. I don't have to like you to have love for someone else experiencing the human condition.


I'm only quoting one sentence because everything following it was based off of this one sentence, and it's wrong. For example, I don't hate pedophiles, but I'm also not supportive of their idea of love. I would gladly deny pedophile rights out of love for the children.

As I have made public in the past month or two, I no longer see a necessity to ban homosexual marriage in secular countries. I am still against homosexual marriage (doesn't mean I'm responsible to stop it), because I believe it is wrong, but I also think Islam is wrong. I don't want to kill (or kick out) all the Muslims.

I can't think of a single gay person I hate. I can't think of a single person I hate. Quit telling me what I think, Liberal Brainwasher :D

EDIT: "Liberal Brainwasher" is just a joke. I have a feeling you'll take it seriously.


KickHim, I think what she is saying is that the idea behind denying this that or the other person rights is spawned from hatred. She never said you hated them. You said yourself that you aren't trying to deny anyone their rights. The guy that said black people weren't equals and can't vote came to that conclusion because of hatred. The person that banned abortion did so because of hatred toward women 'baby killers'. The person who banned gays from marrying did so because they hate the idea of same sex marriage. "marriage is between a man and a woman" and all that jazz. Some people are followers who blindly accept the idea, but the people who fight against these things, do so out of hatred. There is no other reason to deny someone basic rights.

What Lost said.

Llamas
09-20-2012, 05:00 AM
Llamas, of course it's just a business move and I likely still won't eat there. Just as it was a business move when Oreo did it, but I still think its a good indicator of progress and change in America.
Lol, did you read my entire post, or just the first two sentences? I said it was a business move (which means my attitude toward CFA doesn't change at all), but it's a great sign regarding the people who stood up for LGBT rights and actually made a difference.


Of course it's a business move on their part. But who cares?
Well, of course I care. It doesn't change my perspective toward CFA one bit. Obviously there are some awesome implications from this happening, that the boycott worked and the American people can kick major ass sometimes, but until CFA donates the same amount of money to pro-gay rights organizations, I still wouldn't spend a dime there even there was one nearby.

nieh
09-20-2012, 07:45 AM
But they're so delicious! Seriously, I've had to resort to fucking Wendy's as far as fast food places go, so this might be enough for me to start going back.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
09-20-2012, 12:40 PM
KickHim, I think what she is saying is that the idea behind denying this that or the other person rights is spawned from hatred. She never said you hated them. You said yourself that you aren't trying to deny anyone their rights. The guy that said black people weren't equals and can't vote came to that conclusion because of hatred. The person that banned abortion did so because of hatred toward women 'baby killers'. The person who banned gays from marrying did so because they hate the idea of same sex marriage. "marriage is between a man and a woman" and all that jazz. Some people are followers who blindly accept the idea, but the people who fight against these things, do so out of hatred. There is no other reason to deny someone basic rights.
Okay, thanks for the explanation. I see what you mean. Back when I thought homosexual marriage shouldn't be permitted in Canada/USA, it still wasn't out of hatred though. It was because I viewed it (and still do) as a crime against God essentially. It's not like I thought "Oh, I don't like these gay guys, I should deny them marriage."

Also, I'm not sure if anyone ever had any intention of banning abortion because they hate women hahaha. I think that is mainly because they are concerned with preserving life, at least that's why I am unsupportive of abortion.

Lunch is over, got to go. Thanks for the explanation.

_Lost_
09-20-2012, 01:13 PM
You are still not fully understanding. I didn't say they hate women. They specifically hate "baby killers". Even if they don't hate the person, they hate the act. If you believe it is a crime against god to let gays marry, then you hate the act of being gay. People always think of hate as such an extreme term. Hate is the "intense or passionate dislike" of something. If you dislike something enough to fight against it in courts, laws, public displays, then you kind of hate it dude.

KickHimWhenHe'sDown
09-20-2012, 01:55 PM
Aha! A light bulb just went off! I understand now. Yes, I do not hate women involved in abortion, but I do hate the act; I do not hate any homosexuals, but I hate homosexuality. That is true. Sorry, I didn't realize that was the point you guys were trying to arrive at. I gotcha.
I thought that LM1565 was saying that a stance against homosexuality is founded in hatred against homosexuals.

Little_Miss_1565
09-20-2012, 02:22 PM
Well, I have a hard time seeing how it's not hatred if someone thinks that anyone who engages in homosexuality, abortion, or other "controversial" actions is somehow lesser than those who don't.

Llamas
09-20-2012, 02:51 PM
Kickhim, thinking that it's a crime against your god to be gay or have an abortion is fine. I don't care if YOU do either of those things, and if you think it's wrong, then obviously you shouldn't be gay or abort babies :P The problem is with people who think that, because THEY belong to a church that says it's wrong, NOBODY (regardless of their religion) should be able to do such things. Jews think it's wrong to eat food that isn't Kosher; I've never met a Jew who tried to make a law that would force all people to only eat Kosher food. I've also never heard of a Muslim movement in the US who wanted to ban pork for all people.

There are, however, people who truly hate gays and women. People who don't want gay marriage because being gay is "sick" and actually want gays out of their country... and people who think that a woman who got pregnant due to rape or incest should have the baby - those people must hate women, to not care what the woman goes through to give birth to her rapist's baby. Thing is, I'm not actually 100% pro-choice. Personally, I would never have an abortion unless it was rape, my own life was at risk, or the baby was going to be born with serious defects - and I *wish* all women were responsible and used protection and wouldn't have an abortion outside of those circumstances. However, my beliefs on that are for me. Ten years ago, I was fully pro-life. Now I see it as, I don't want to have an abortion, but if someone else has one, well it's better than them giving birth to a baby they didn't want and treating it like crap. I just don't care anyone more what someone else does with their body. And why should I?

MOTO13
09-20-2012, 04:03 PM
Being gay is not a crime. Being gay is not a choice. I will never, for the love of god, understand it for one second how a man can look at another man and find...forget it, you know. That being said, do not expect people to ever fully accept or underastand it either. It will most likely never happen. Why? Human nature. In no uncertain terms, it is a completely unnatural and unsustainable lifestyle. Put two gay people on an island and they die of old age. Put a man and a woman on an island, human population begins. This is a fact, can't dispute it, can't overcome it. My point is, gay people will probably never be fully accepted into society simply because of this.

Llamas
09-20-2012, 04:31 PM
Being gay is not a crime. Being gay is not a choice. I will never, for the love of god, understand it for one second how a man can look at another man and find...forget it, you know. That being said, do not expect people to ever fully accept or underastand it either. It will most likely never happen. Why? Human nature. In no uncertain terms, it is a completely unnatural and unsustainable lifestyle. Put two gay people on an island and they die of old age. Put a man and a woman on an island, human population begins. This is a fact, can't dispute it, can't overcome it. My point is, gay people will probably never be fully accepted into society simply because of this.

There's a chance I could end up with a dude. A small chance, but it does exist. And if I end up with a dude, I'm STILL not popping any babies out of my vagina. Anyone whose argument is that it's wrong because it doesn't produce babies is an idiot. It doesn't matter if it can produce babies if it doesn't. Men who are sterile are allowed to marry, too. I guess they shouldn't be accepted. LET'S SHUN THE STERILE MEN.

Little_Miss_1565
09-20-2012, 05:23 PM
I haven't tried to test this yet, but chances are excellent that, according to my doctor, I won't be able to have biological kids. Will I never be accepted by society? :(

AllIn All It's Not So Bad
09-20-2012, 05:36 PM
I'm actually a bit curious about something. Please, anyone, explain. But first, I'd liked to restate that I'm neutral about homosexuality and gay marriage. Couldn't care any less because really I've met some pretty awesome gay guys. But my question is how can one man look at another man and find sexually attractive. Like, I've tried it to see what gay men see about each other. I never fully grasped it. However, I will say that I admire men who are built. Muscles and all and I think to myself, damn I wish I was built and good looking, which was what lead me to work out about a year and a half. But that's another story.

Llamas, since you are a woman, maybe you could help me understand this. Women love men who are muscular and have masculine traits. However, there are the women who are sexually attracted to women. What is it. Is it for the same reasons as guys? Curves, thighs, pretty face, in between slim and thick, and the amazing hair that makes them look like goddesses when they flip it? Idk, I'm just really curious.

T-6005
09-20-2012, 06:06 PM
Well, now you're just assuming that we're all attracted to the same types of women.

Not that I'm denying there's a lot of overlap in people's preferences, but as a whole everyone's already interested in different things even within a single gender.

AllIn All It's Not So Bad
09-20-2012, 06:46 PM
Well I know that I was describing how I like my women, even though it isn't a complete list. However this was an open invitation for everyone to put in their thoughts even though I also addressed llamas.

WebDudette
09-20-2012, 07:04 PM
I have never considered having sex with a man, but I look at some men and think 'damn yo', that dude is sexy' and it's never a super built guy. Most girls I know are also not attracted to ripped guy, one girl I know is specifically attracted to more feminine men. The lesbian I know also have varying taste in women, and the gay men I know all go for different things. Chances are the women you find ideal are nowhere close to ideal for me and vice versa.

Llamas, sorry I was on my iPod at work. I assume I either briefly skimmed what you said, or forgot exactly what you said by the time I got around to replying.

Little_Miss_1565
09-20-2012, 08:25 PM
AIA, my gay friends don't understand how any man can look at a woman and think "I want to have sex with that immediately," outside of the objective 'This person is a good-looking person.' I'm not sure anyone can really explain why they don't feel something they've never felt in their life.

Eskimo
09-21-2012, 03:15 AM
Ah, so the blackmail worked, huh? Beyond fucked-up.

I hardly agree with the guy's views, but all the same, he's allowed to say it, private company and all. You're allowed to donate money, you're allowed to speak your views publically. Not like the guy was breaking any hate laws, plus the thing about it came out the company hires a bunch of gay people.

And, I mean, let's be honest, that dude that went and shot up the Christian Values place (D.C. was it?) was barely fuckin' mentioned on the news at all. On this social stuff I 99% of the time side with the atheist baby-killin' Jesus-hatin' commie lefties, but all the same the whole fuckin' media situation is skewed.

That shit about Boston and the other cities basically denying the Chick-Fil-A dude any future option of opening any stores there was horse rectum.

Llamas
09-21-2012, 04:52 AM
AIA, my gay friends don't understand how any man can look at a woman and think "I want to have sex with that immediately," outside of the objective 'This person is a good-looking person.' I'm not sure anyone can really explain why they don't feel something they've never felt in their life.

This exactly. I personally can't understand how anyone can NOT wanna date anyone of one of the sexes. To me, it seems like a silly criterion - like, oh. I'm a boy, and you're a boy. Nah, I don't wanna date you cause of that. So yeah, nobody of any sexual orientation can really understand the other orientations.

And to Allin's question, people are not attracted to a sex simply for physical reasons. I date women more often than men because I fall for women more often. I like men as friends and to mess around with sometimes, but I dunno if I could do a relationship with one (though I'm not closed to the possibility). It's not about how they look. It's not because they're too masculine, or not masculine enough, or any of that. It's related to personality and emotion. When it does come to looks, for me personally, I like thin, kinda lanky guys. Some muscle is cool, but I don't care for lots of muscle. I don't care for facial or other body hair, and prefer guys who don't have much naturally. Every woman is different, though. And when it comes to girls, I dunno. I definitely don't seem to like the kinds of girls you like. I like girls that are a little bit less feminine than you know, models and actresses and stuff. I'm not into butchy women, though. But I wouldn't want to date a girl who spends hours in the bathroom every day and is too concerned with her appearance. I guess I like my men and women a bit closer to the neutral line, and neither of the extremes :P

Godxilla
09-21-2012, 11:52 AM
Am I the only one who is a bit creeped out by this? I have never looked at a guy and thought "let's fuck". Some guys make me think that their girlfriends are lucky to have them, but I just cannot understand gay love. I cannot, will not, and therefore should not masturbate to a picture of a guy.

Tiny Vessels
09-21-2012, 12:07 PM
Am I the only one who is a bit creeped out by this? I have never looked at a guy and thought "let's fuck". Some guys make me think that their girlfriends are lucky to have them, but I just cannot understand gay love. I cannot, will not, and therefore should not masturbate to a picture of a guy.

Maybe I don't understand how you can not understand it. You love who you love. Two guys, two girls, a guy and a girl, it doesn't matter love is love. A gay relationship has all the same feelings as an non gay relationship. How you feel about a girl, is about the same as a girl feels about a girl. To me it's not that hard to understand. Hey don't be afriad to masturbate to picture of a guy if hes hot. Lol, sorry had to say that.

Lizardus
09-21-2012, 12:32 PM
I like it when someone's exterior is a reflection of their personality.