Chick-Fil-A and Homosexuality

[Balta1701]

If the CEO of CFA had no history of donating any money to focus on the family and was apathetic about SSM but came out and said he hated gays the reaction would have been the exact same. GMAB.

And he continues to have the right to be a bigot all he wants, just as I have a right to label him a bigot, regardless of whether he drapes himself in any religion for his justification. And no, you cannot take away my right to call him a bigot for being a bigot.

[StrangeSox]

Well I disagree. It's a hilarious double standard.

I don't care that you disagree. It's dumb. It's not "intolerant" to reject ideas that promote bigotry and subjugation and second-class status.

[CrimsonWeltall]

I don't care that you disagree. It's dumb.

 

OMG INTOLERANCE

[StrangeSox]

If the CEO of CFA had no history of donating any money to focus on the family and was apathetic about SSM but came out and said he hated gays the reaction would have been the exact same. GMAB.

 

False. There was already a lot of existing animosity in the gay community directed towards CFA before this incident.

[bmags]

http://www.owldolatrous.com/?p=288&fwc...;fwcl=1&fwl

 

I know posting a long-article in this forum is like not posting anything at all, but it's a big issue that requires deep thoughts. And I think he nailed it.

[StrangeSox]

I don't care that you disagree. It's dumb. It's not "intolerant" to reject ideas that promote bigotry and subjugation and second-class status.

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.

 

We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

 

"The Paradox of Tolerance," Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, Vol. I, Chapt. 7, n.4, at 265 (Princeton University Press 1971) (emphasis added, italics in original).

[Quin]

Come on now...

 

"Evolution? You don't believe in the bible. You're an idiot."

 

"Abortion? That a murder issue, not an equal rights issue."

 

"Homosexuality? It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve."

 

"Boobs on TV? Perish the thought!"

 

"Islam? That's not a religion, that's a cult!"

 

See what I did there? And those are stated positions of our representatives in government. Again, how is there a War Against Christianity?

 

I'm just gonna point out that I've heard all of these far more than Jenks' examples.

 

[StrangeSox]

Remember when we had to put up curtains to cover Lady Justice? Good times.

[BigSqwert]

http://www.owldolatrous.com/?p=288&fwc...;fwcl=1&fwl

 

I know posting a long-article in this forum is like not posting anything at all, but it's a big issue that requires deep thoughts. And I think he nailed it.

That was a fantastic read. Thanks for sharing.

[GoSox05]

http://www.owldolatrous.com/?p=288&fwc...;fwcl=1&fwl

 

I know posting a long-article in this forum is like not posting anything at all, but it's a big issue that requires deep thoughts. And I think he nailed it.

 

Yep. That was awesome.

[StrangeSox]

I posted this article a while back. It's written by a college-aged Christian girl and was about the results of some national polling done by a pro-Christian but professional and non-biased research group.

 

The number one thing young people in this country associate Christianity with these days is being antihomosexual. For non-Christians, it's 91%. This is an example of why that is.

[greg775]

Even if he's right, am I supposed to feel bad?

 

To use an example Greg is perfectly familiar with, Joe Paterno did a whole lot of good in a lot of people's lives. He contributed greatly to his university financially and in many other ways. What do people think of today when they talk about Penn State?

If the Catholic church can't find priests because they spent decades covering up the abuse and rape of kids...my level of sympathy could not be any lower. If Greg's theory is right...you know the solution? STOP COVERING UP THE ABUSE OF YOUNG BOYS AND PROTECTING THE ABUSERS.

Yet the media will not discourage people from becoming coaches again and imply that all coaches are pedophiles like Sandusky and cover up artists like Joe. Yet this pedophile priest issue was covered in a way that it was implied all priests are pedophiles. How come we don't get a barrage of news about all the sicko youth coaches and get to the point nobody can be a coach because they are pedophiles like Sandusky?

 

Maybe they shouldn't have covered up child rape for decades?

That still doesn't take away the fact there are zillions of good priests and good men in the profession who have helped countless kids. Yet because of liberals and the coverage of this issue, the future of the priesthood is dead. Like I said, becoming a priest is a no-no, a huge taboo. It's all part of the ruination of society. A good occuption like priest has been wiped off the map.

 

I posted this article a while back. It's written by a college-aged Christian girl and was about the results of some national polling done by a pro-Christian but professional and non-biased research group.

 

The number one thing young people in this country associate Christianity with these days is being antihomosexual. For non-Christians, it's 91%. This is an example of why that is.

 

How come nobody attacks Hollywood and TV producers. You'll still see the feminine portrayal of gays in the movies and on TV shows and occasional jokes about being gay in the movies. How come there's no outrage??

 

[CrimsonWeltall]

Yet the media will not discourage people from becoming coaches again and imply that all coaches are pedophiles like Sandusky and cover up artists like Joe. Yet this pedophile priest issue was covered in a way that it was implied all priests are pedophiles.

 

The media implied all priests are pedophiles? That's ridiculous.

 

Yet because of liberals and the coverage of this issue, the future of the priesthood is dead. Like I said, becoming a priest is a no-no, a huge taboo. It's all part of the ruination of society. A good occuption like priest has been wiped off the map.

 

Again, young people aren't as interested in becoming priests because they're not as interested in religion.

 

How come nobody attacks Hollywood and TV producers. You'll still see the feminine portrayal of gays in the movies and on TV shows and occasional jokes about being gay in the movies. How come there's no outrage??

 

Wait, are you comparing comedy to working against gay rights or comparing comedy to child molestation?

[BigSqwert]

Yet the media will not discourage people from becoming coaches again and imply that all coaches are pedophiles

 

Are you implying that the media has been discouraging people to become priests and that all priests are pedophiles?

 

Yet because of liberals and the coverage of this issue, the future of the priesthood is dead.

 

Because of liberals, priesthood is dead? Are you saying before these sex scandals there was a line out the door of young men signing up to become priests?

 

How come nobody attacks Hollywood and TV producers.

 

Great question. I wish someone, anyone, would attack Hollywood and TV producers one day. I've had enough of their untouchable status.

[Balta1701]

Yet the media will not discourage people from becoming coaches again and imply that all coaches are pedophiles like Sandusky and cover up artists like Joe. Yet this pedophile priest issue was covered in a way that it was implied all priests are pedophiles. How come we don't get a barrage of news about all the sicko youth coaches and get to the point nobody can be a coach because they are pedophiles like Sandusky?

Can you cite one example of someone in the media saying something that would explicitly discourage people from becoming a priest, or do you support the media covering up the child abuse scandal so that people wouldn't be discouraged from joining the preisthood?

[greg775]

Yep. That was awesome.

 

It's way too simplistic to boycott CFA because the company makes donations to the organizations that author mentions. It just is.

[BigSqwert]

It's way too simplistic

 

Sort of like every single argument you've ever made on this site.

[Soxbadger]

How come nobody attacks Hollywood and TV producers. You'll still see the feminine portrayal of gays in the movies and on TV shows and occasional jokes about being gay in the movies. How come there's no outrage??

 

The same reason Jew's dont attack Seinfeld for making Jewish jokes. He may be an anti-dentite but he isnt an anti-semite.

[StrangeSox]

That still doesn't take away the fact there are zillions of good priests and good men in the profession who have helped countless kids. Yet because of liberals and the coverage of this issue, the future of the priesthood is dead. Like I said, becoming a priest is a no-no, a huge taboo. It's all part of the ruination of society. A good occuption like priest has been wiped off the map.

 

It is not because of "liberals" and the media covering worldwide child rape cover-ups. It's because society is becoming less religious over time across the board, not specifically among Catholics.

[StrangeSox]

How come nobody attacks Hollywood and TV producers. You'll still see the feminine portrayal of gays in the movies and on TV shows and occasional jokes about being gay in the movies. How come there's no outrage??

 

This is a full-frontal dose of crazy, but it's an example:

 

http://users.livejournal.com/_allecto_/34718.html

[Balta1701]

It is not because of "liberals" and the media covering worldwide child rape cover-ups. It's because society is becoming less religious over time across the board, not specifically among Catholics.

Even if Greg was right...

 

It's not because of liberals or the media that there was a gigantic uproar over child rape within the catholic church.

 

It's because there was an epidemic of child rape and coverup of child rape within the catholic church.

 

You want to be mad at someone? Be mad at the people who systematically made it policy to cover up decades of child rape and protected rapist priests as the expense of more children getting raped. Don't be mad at the people who covered it or especially at people who brought it to light.

[StrangeSox]

It's way too simplistic to boycott CFA because the company makes donations to the organizations that author mentions. It just is.

 

It's simplistic because it's a simple situation: eat at CFA or don't. It won't make some major impact in the world. No one is arguing that it would.

[greg775]

The media implied all priests are pedophiles? That's ridiculous.

Again, young people aren't as interested in becoming priests because they're not as interested in religion.

Wait, are you comparing comedy to working against gay rights or comparing comedy to child molestation?

No, I've seen some jokes in movies and on TV where there's a feminine portrayal of gays or the old gay jokes. I'd think somebody could find one of these examples and immediately start a nationwide boycott of the theatres and the company that produced said movie or TV show. I mean it's ridiculous to stereotype a group of people like that and the jokes are still out there. Can't think of any particular movie or show but I know I've seen 'em in the past year even.

 

Can you cite one example of someone in the media saying something that would explicitly discourage people from becoming a priest, or do you support the media covering up the child abuse scandal so that people wouldn't be discouraged from joining the preisthood?

No, it's the whole story and slanted coverage as a whole. Not all priests are bad, yet the perception has been repeated so much that now you look up priest in the dictionary and the word pedophile appears so to speak. It's just not so. And I'm all for the bastard bishops who covered it up getting thrown in jail. I hate all molesters and all people who cover up molestation. Crimes against kids should be punishable by the death penalty or life in solitary! But it's not all priests. And the occupation has been ruined.

[StrangeSox]

That perception has been repeated so much because there are so many stories of child-rape cover-ups around the world. The fault for that lies squarely with the rapists and their abettors in the church's hierarchy, not with news organizations covering a worldwide scandal in one of the most prominent religions in the world.

[StrangeSox]

Even if Greg was right...

 

It's not because of liberals or the media that there was a gigantic uproar over child rape within the catholic church.

 

It's because there was an epidemic of child rape and coverup of child rape within the catholic church.

 

You want to be mad at someone? Be mad at the people who systematically made it policy to cover up decades of child rape and protected rapist priests as the expense of more children getting raped. Don't be mad at the people who covered it or especially at people who brought it to light.

 

Greg sounds like a PSU hanger-on right now.