Chick-fil-a and the homophobic sandwich

Page 5 of 17 [ 272 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 17 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,555
Location: the island of defective toy santas

05 Aug 2012, 11:07 am

too bad the righties and lefties can't each have their own turf, never to be intruded by the other.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

05 Aug 2012, 11:18 am

John_Browning wrote:

Jesus was on his own side. He wasn't interested in what the Romans did or any other geo-political issues. He wasn't interested in overthrowing capitalism,he participated in that system as a carpenter, and did not discourage others from it but emphasized voluntary charity and aid to those who need it. With the exception of the sick and disabled, he did not associate with the outcasts as a sign of approval even though he didn't judge them. The state of their lives was in bad shape and they didn't just need help, they needed a radical intervention. If ancient Israel had a significant underground gay community, Jesus would have interacted with them for that same reason- not to condemn them, but to intervene for those willing.

Have you even read your own religious text? Jesus *was* an outcast, as were many of his followers, the people he helped, etc etc.

Jesus Christ wrote:

I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God

Yeah, he is definitely not into capitalism. It sounds more like you are describing a modern right wing theocrat politician than your savior, there.

Israel probably did have a significant underground gay community, and they doubtless did not participate much in society *as gays* since it would result in their violent deaths at the hands of their fellow enlightened religious people.

Nobody is forcing you to marry a man, so why do you care if gays get married? Why can't fundies get their heads out of their asses for more than five minutes? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills with these people. I sometimes wonder if I have spent more time reading the Bible in the past few months than most of them have in their lifetimes, and I am not even a Christian.

_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

05 Aug 2012, 11:30 am

Listen to the hot lady, people

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

05 Aug 2012, 11:38 am

Dox47 wrote:

raisedbyignorance wrote:

Wouldn't it make more sense to send angry letters to the politicians? I mean I can get the giving the finger thing but I think going to Chick-Fil-A would only accomplish half of what you're trying to resolve.

Nah, I think that giving money to CFA sends a better message than a letter a politician is just going to ignore does, politicians seem to pay a lot more attention to money.

What message? Lots of Americans are unprincipled? I could have told you that for free and without you having to eat some nasty grease soaked processed chicken. A lot of people are acting like boycotts are without precedent. I find this disingenuous.

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

05 Aug 2012, 2:54 pm

Vigilans wrote:

Jesus Christ wrote:

Yeah, he is definitely not into capitalism.

'Rich men have a hard time being good' and 'thou shalt not have a capitalist society' are two very different things.

Quote:

Nobody is forcing you to marry a man,

That seems pretty irrelevant.

Quote:

so why do you care if gays get married?

If gay marriage is allowed, it changes what marriage is. If people's suggestion (from earlier in the thread) that people should be allowed to marry chairs were allowed it would change what marriage is even more. What marriage is matters to a lot of people.

I'm curious as to how many people supporting gay marriage think people should be allowed to marry chairs.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

05 Aug 2012, 3:28 pm

Ancalagon wrote:

Vigilans wrote:

Jesus Christ wrote:

Yeah, he is definitely not into capitalism.

'Rich men have a hard time being good' and 'thou shalt not have a capitalist society' are two very different things.

How would there even be rich people to not-get-into-heaven, if not for capitalism in some form?

Quote:

Nobody is forcing you to marry a man,

That seems pretty irrelevant.

How so? How is two men getting married relevant to your life?

Quote:

so why do you care if gays get married?

If gay marriage is allowed, it changes what marriage is.

And attempting to rigidly define it according to Christian values is not an attempt to change it from a legal definition?

Quote:

If people's suggestion (from earlier in the thread) that people should be allowed to marry chairs were allowed it would change what marriage is even more. What marriage is matters to a lot of people.

I'm curious as to how many people supporting gay marriage think people should be allowed to marry chairs.

This whole "chair marriage" red herring has nothing to do with what I have been saying, and is utterly superfluous to the discussion. Nobody is going to marry chairs. In your quest to deny gays the right to marry through "worrisome" rhetorical future situations you people just prove how far you are willing to obfuscate this discussion in order to quash it and maintain your denial of equal rights to a large portion of the human species

Of course what marriage is matters to a lot of people. Is it a religious tradition that should be limited to people who value it for this reason or is it something two human beings who love each other should be allowed to engage in to show their devotion to each other and be recognized as a married couple under the law? If it is a purely religious tradition, then should atheists and people of non-Christian faiths be barred from it in Christian nations?

I'm curious as to how many people opposed to gay marriage are not massive sexual hypocrites with a religious chip on their shoulder against those who go against their grain

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,445
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Aug 2012, 3:57 pm

Vigilans wrote:

Listen to the hot lady, people

If Cat Woman says it's so, it must be.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

05 Aug 2012, 5:46 pm

Vigilans wrote:

How would there even be rich people to not-get-into-heaven, if not for capitalism in some form?

Huh? Do you really think that rich people only exist in capitalist societies?

Quote:

Nobody is forcing you to marry a man,

That seems pretty irrelevant.

How so? How is two men getting married relevant to your life?

What does that have to do with someone forcing me to marry a man?

Quote:

This whole "chair marriage" red herring

What makes you think it's a red herring? Two people supporting gay marriage in this thread said something along those lines. So far, nobody has said that they supported gay marriage but opposed marrying chairs. Is that typical or common? I have no idea. Hence the question.

Quote:

you people just prove how far you are willing to obfuscate this discussion in order to quash it

How in the hell does asking a question of people so that I can find out what they think constitute obfuscation?

Quote:

I'm curious as to how many people opposed to gay marriage are not massive sexual hypocrites with a religious chip on their shoulder against those who go against their grain

I think this was meant to be grandstanding rather than a serious question, but I'll answer it as if it were meant to be serious.

I'm more undecided at the moment, but when I was opposed to it your description would not apply to me. Neither would it apply to anyone that I know that opposed it, at least as far as I can tell.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

05 Aug 2012, 6:36 pm

Ancalagon wrote:

Huh? Do you really think that rich people only exist in capitalist societies?

How does one get rich when there is no free market or capital to exchange, collect and distribute? When there is no power structure based on monetary value?

Ancalagon wrote:

What does that have to do with someone forcing me to marry a man?

I am not interested in playing this game with you again. I don't have patience for postured ignorance meant to obfuscate the discussion.

Ancalagon wrote:

One person said that, and from what I can tell it was meant to be tongue in cheek. I'm not sure if you are aware of what a "red herring" device is but I really consider this tangent about chairs to be one. If you want to debate it, then talk to MONKEY, since it was her who said it.

Ancalagon wrote:

How in the hell does asking a question of people so that I can find out what they think constitute obfuscation?

Look at the question you are asking

Ancalagon wrote:

I think this was meant to be grandstanding rather than a serious question, but I'll answer it as if it were meant to be serious.

It was meant to be a response to your under-toned question about chairs, which you are utilizing as some sort of slippery slope device in substitute for the normal ones invoked by your compatriots- ie, pedophilia will be legalized, bestiality will be legalized, etc etc etc

Ancalagon wrote:

I'm more undecided at the moment, but when I was opposed to it your description would not apply to me. Neither would it apply to anyone that I know that opposed it, at least as far as I can tell.

That's nice

hanyo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Sep 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,302

05 Aug 2012, 7:53 pm

Being against gay marriage when no one is forcing you to marry a same sex person would be like me saying they shouldn't allow religion when no one is forcing me to go to church. It's called "live and let live" and "minding your own business".

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,445
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Aug 2012, 9:57 pm

Opposition to gay marriage today can be construed as being anti-civil rights in yesteryear. But the day will doubtlessly come when gay Americans will be recognized as Americans first in polite society, while those who oppose gay rights will be regarded as the same types who still openly hold prejudice against black Americans.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

edgewaters
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,427
Location: Ontario

05 Aug 2012, 10:02 pm

I think most of the people against gay marriage are actually closet homosexuals.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,445
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Aug 2012, 10:11 pm

edgewaters wrote:

I think most of the people against gay marriage are actually closet homosexuals.

That might not be far off.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

05 Aug 2012, 10:35 pm

Vigilans wrote:

How does one get rich when there is no free market or capital to exchange, collect and distribute?

Stealing? There are probably plenty of others, but that will do.

Quote:

I am not interested in playing this game with you again.

Right back at you. If you only have snide remarks without content, please spare me.

Quote:

One person said that, and from what I can tell it was meant to be tongue in cheek.

Also ruveyn made a remark about marrying pet ponies or pet sheep. I don't see any reason to presume that MONKEY was not being literal. If she was being tongue in cheek about it, then I have no idea what she meant. I would guess that ruveyn was making an accurate description of his views, based on how I've seen him post before.

Quote:

I'm not sure if you are aware of what a "red herring" device is but I really consider this tangent about chairs to be one.

It isn't a tangent to ask people in a debate about the limits on marriage what they think should be the limits on marriage. Apparently, some people think there should be no limits at all. At least, that's how I was reading the comments about chairs and ponies. I'm not sure how else those comments could be read.

Quote:

Ancalagon wrote:

How in the hell does asking a question of people so that I can find out what they think constitute obfuscation?

Look at the question you are asking

The question that you quoted, or my original question? Whichever it is, what am I supposed to see when I look at it?

Quote:

You are reading things into what I said that aren't there at all.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,555
Location: the island of defective toy santas

05 Aug 2012, 11:55 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

can't happen soon enough.

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,555
Location: the island of defective toy santas

05 Aug 2012, 11:58 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

edgewaters wrote:

I think most of the people against gay marriage are actually closet homosexuals.

That might not be far off.

if shakespeare were alive today, he might've put it something like "the haters protest too much, methinks."

Page 5 of 17 [ 272 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 17 Next

Jump to:

Chick-fil-a and the homophobic sandwich Post Reply New Topic

Chick-fil-a and the homophobic sandwich