Wednesday was Chick-fil-A appreciation day...

46 posts / 0 new
Last post
Thom Hartmann A...
Thom Hartmann Administrator's picture

– an event organized by bigots like Sarah Palin and John Huckabee who want to praise the fast food restaurant chain for its hardline stance against marriage equality and funding of anti-gay hate groups.  In response, today is Chick-fil-A kiss day.  Gay rights activists and organizers across the nation will be flocking to Chick-fil-As today to kiss someone of the same sex.  We’ll see if such open displays of same-sex affection really do trigger the apocalypse as most anti-gay bigots warn.

Comments

Redwing
Redwing's picture
Don't agree with the owners

Don't agree with the owners stance?  How about finding another place to eat your chicken and stop trying to suppress the owners right to speak his beliefs.

Yours and other speech suppressors have given them a free million dollar ad campaign.  They now have thousands of new customers that have been introduced to their food.

 If I were Dan Cathy I would send you a $1,000 gift certificate to any one of his locations as a thank you.  Come prepared to wait in line thanks to the publicity you gave them.

BTW.  Some company's have guts.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/02/chick-fil-a-harasser-gets-served-his-walking-papers/

iggyvern
iggyvern's picture
650,000 people showed up in

650,000 people showed up in support of Chik-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy's stance against same-sex marriage. His personal belief, not the whole chain's. Chik-fil-A is an equal opportunity employer and does not discriminate in its hiring practices.  It is a business not a government service. Each franchise is independently owned. One can choose to eat there or not.

stwo
stwo's picture
The massive support at Chick

The massive support at Chick Fil A was not in support of the CEO's stance, it was in defense of his right to express without being threatened by government representatives such as the Mayors of Boston and Chicago. I saw many supporters interviewed who loathed his opinion but were more livid that powerful elected officials made threats of disallowing restaurants because of the CEO's opinion.  Thom and the left know damned well the issue was free speech and not the straw man that is being spun. Meanwhile a handful of same-sex kisser- big deal.  I'm with Antoine Dobson on this issue!!!

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
Redwing wrote: Don't agree

Redwing wrote:

Don't agree with the owners stance?  How about finding another place to eat your chicken and stop trying to suppress the owners right to speak his beliefs.

 

 

Wow, that's the exact same thing, word for word, that your kind said about whites not allowing blacks to eat in their restaraunts.  It sounds as if you would like to go to a time not so long ago when we could refuse service to someone because of their skin color.  Now it's just sexual preference that has been used to fill that sorely missed void in your live's.  It won't be long before they'll put a big old "White's Only" sign up on their stores right next to the "Heterosexuals Only" sign.

Redwing
Redwing's picture
I am referring to the people

I am referring to the people that are complaining about the owners right to his opinion and you know it.  Don't twist my words to make your point.  You fool no one with that crappy post.

iggyvern
iggyvern's picture
The Thom Hartmann A...refered

The Thom Hartmann A...refered to the Mike, btw, Huckabee event to "  praise the fast food restaurant chain for its hardline stance against marriage equality and funding of anti-gay hate groups." He was expressing HIS personal beliefs, not the whole chain of franchises. I realize the support was for his free speech rights. But to claim it as if it were consistent with the whole organization is misleading. I agree with Redwing.

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
Redwing wrote: I am referring

Redwing wrote:

I am referring to the people that are complaining about the owners right to his opinion and you know it.  Don't twist my words to make your point.  You fool no one with that crappy post.

Nice try but you are accusing Thom of "supressing the owners right to free speech".  That's exactly what was said about the white restaraunt owner's not allowing blacks to eat in their restaraunts.  That's YOUR opinion not somebody else's.

 

anonymous green
I'd say that anyone who

I'd say that anyone who supports the freely made statements of bigots can.....

Kiss My Ass!!!!!!

anonymous green
Just practicing for the big

Just practicing for the big day tomorrow.

It felt good though.

Redwing
Redwing's picture
Safe to assume Harry Reid is

Safe to assume Harry Reid is on your list?

Redwing
Redwing's picture
Safe to assume Harry Reid is

Safe to assume Harry Reid is on your list?

A better option

http://www.jillstein.org/

Mauiman2
Mauiman2's picture
Bush_Wacker wrote: Redwing

Bush_Wacker wrote:

Redwing wrote:

Don't agree with the owners stance?  How about finding another place to eat your chicken and stop trying to suppress the owners right to speak his beliefs.

 

 

Wow, that's the exact same thing, word for word, that your kind said about whites not allowing blacks to eat in their restaraunts.  It sounds as if you would like to go to a time not so long ago when we could refuse service to someone because of their skin color.  Now it's just sexual preference that has been used to fill that sorely missed void in your live's.  It won't be long before they'll put a big old "White's Only" sign up on their stores right next to the "Heterosexuals Only" sign.

No one is refusing service to anyone at Chic-fil-A.  Your analogy is WAY off base!

Brookesmith
Anonymous green--you need to

Anonymous green--you need to mark the spot, because you come across as an insignificant total ass.

anonymous green
stwo wrote: Thom and the left

stwo wrote:

Thom and the left know damned well the issue was free speech and not the straw man that is being spun. Meanwhile a handful of same-sex kisser- big deal.

Tomorrow is Kiss My Ass day. Here are the rules:

Every time a right wing bigot says something as stupid as the leader of Chik fil A, millions of voices fill the air, and the blogosphere, with one simple phrase.

Kiss My Ass!

Remember, it's tomorrow, but you can practice on these boards, today, and even every day after tomorrow.

Brookesmith
Seems like the Chil-fil-A

Seems like the Chil-fil-A kissin wasn't as sucessful as was Chik-fil-A apreciation day. 13,000 gay rights kissers vs 700,000 free speech supporters. Evidence of the minority they are.

I also heard on MacRanger Radio Show that a gay activist has filed a civil suit against Chik-fil-A. Seems he forgot to include muslims that kill homosexuals. hmmmm...

How's that ass kissin going anonymouse green?

 

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
Mauiman2 wrote: Bush_Wacker

Mauiman2 wrote:

Bush_Wacker wrote:

Redwing wrote:

Don't agree with the owners stance?  How about finding another place to eat your chicken and stop trying to suppress the owners right to speak his beliefs.

 

 

Wow, that's the exact same thing, word for word, that your kind said about whites not allowing blacks to eat in their restaraunts.  It sounds as if you would like to go to a time not so long ago when we could refuse service to someone because of their skin color.  Now it's just sexual preference that has been used to fill that sorely missed void in your live's.  It won't be long before they'll put a big old "White's Only" sign up on their stores right next to the "Heterosexuals Only" sign.

No one is refusing service to anyone at Chic-fil-A.  Your analogy is WAY off base!

If you read the quote you will see that redwing is telling me to eat somewhere else if I don't like bigotry.  That's the comparison I'm making.  In the 60's it was very common place down south to go eat somewhere else if you don't like our stance on racism and bigotry.  It's the same old ABUSE of freedom of speech.  It's not illegal but it just plain wrong.  I don't believe for one second that the support given to chicky fillet was about standing up for traditional lifestyles.  It was about sharing high fives with their fellow bigots.  "Take that you homos!".  If I didn't believe that then I wouldn't have said a word.

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
Brookesmith wrote: Seems like

Brookesmith wrote:

Seems like the Chil-fil-A kissin wasn't as sucessful as was Chik-fil-A apreciation day. 13,000 gay rights kissers vs 700,000 free speech supporters. Evidence of the minority they are.

I also heard on MacRanger Radio Show that a gay activist has filed a civil suit against Chik-fil-A. Seems he forgot to include muslims that kill homosexuals. hmmmm...

How's that ass kissin going anonymouse green?

 

No shit sherlock.  It's about discrimination against a minority.  Did you think that a minority group was going to outnumber a majority group?

Brookesmith
Mr. Cathy has a right to

Mr. Cathy has a right to express his beliefs just as much as the next guy. Which group made it an issue of discrimination?  The same-sex whatever crowd's argument, as does their supporters, seems to be a  somewhat bigoted itself, when the muslim view of and answer to homosexuality is ignoreed. I believe that is what someone here referred to as "cognitive dissonance".

I find it incredible that that many (700,000) people rallied over such a non-issue as one man's opinion. Or it was a brilliant publicity move on his part. Shows that people care about freedom of speech and a lot less about same-sex whatever. 

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
700,000 people getting

700,000 people getting together to support a cause on the conservative side of things supporting discriminatory beliefs is a wonderful example of America's right to free speech and much smaller groups than that getting together (OWS) to exercise their right to free speech get pepper sprayed and jailed and disbanded because they are immoral flea baggers.  I guess the Constitution was only written for the christian conservatives and everyone else can be damned to hell where they belong.

Nobody is immune to hypocracy but the christian conservatives have raised it up to new heights.

Brookesmith
Freedom of speech is not

Freedom of speech is not limited to the "conservative side".

The bottom line with OWS is its staged. Its a farce and its filled with bad actors. Rape,Defication on vehicles,burning buildings, private property violations , injuring cops, defying orders to desperse, hurling cement blocks, breaking windows, accosting young underage females etc. That is not the exercise of free speech. On top of it all,  an incoherance that defies description.

There is a logicl way to exercise one's rights. Are you for caos and anarchy?

Brookesmith
Do you remember how the OWS

Do you remember how the OWS crowd handled the homeless and street people when they entered their ranks and asked for handouts? They shunned them. A lot of the OWS crowd were discovered to be from 1%ters. Yes, no group or person is immune from hypocrisy.

chilidog
iggyvern wrote: 650,000

iggyvern wrote:

650,000 people showed up in support of Chik-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy's stance against same-sex marriage.

More B.S.

"Over 650,000 people responded to Huckabee’s invitation to appreciation day on Facebook."

http://articles.boston.com/2012-08-02/metro/32984303_1_appreciation-day-...

"We are very grateful and humbled by the incredible turnout of loyal Chick-fil-A customers on August 1 at Chick-fil-A restaurants around the country," said Steve Robinson, executive vice president of marketing, in the statement. "While we don’t release exact sales numbers, we can confirm reports that it was a record-setting day."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-chick-fil-a-sales-...

anonymous green
Brookesmith

Brookesmith wrote:

...mmmm...

How's that ass kissin going anonymouse green? 

You tell me...

How's the endeless debate raging today?

Despite the fact that National Kiss My Ass Day was yesterday, I would end any debate with a Manchurian American the same way today, before any further ridiculous arguments over the 'meaning' of Freedom.

"Kiss my non-Manchurian Ass!"

Karolina
Karolina's picture
In Warsaw, Poland Jews were

In Warsaw, Poland Jews were normal Polish people, and nobody cared that they were not Catholic like the majority of the Poles.

When the facsists conquered Poland, the Jews' lives changed in three stages.

First the Jews were legally required to have a large star of David always visible on whatever they were wearing. This was done to create the sense that they were different — and shamefully inferior.

Then they were legally required to live separately from the rest of the Poles, and were given a fenced-off area of Warsaw to find housing. This was done to disconnect the Jews from their Catholic friends and collegues — and further ostracize the Jews.

Finally, they were legally rounded up and taken away from Warsaw to "concentration camps," so that the majority of the Polish people would not be aware of the treatment of the Jews — and there the Jews were systematically killed.

We cannot morally, or as Christians, allow even the first stage of that process to happen here to any minority or to any person. Nobody is shamefully inferior in a healthy Democracy or in the eyes of a loving God, which is how Jesus Christ expressed God to be.

Fascism is the legal, state-approved bullying of victims. We must reverse this process for it is a very slippery slope.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Brookesmith wrote:Shows that

Brookesmith wrote:
Shows that people care about freedom of speech and a lot less about same-sex whatever.

Discrimination toward a minority is NOT FREE SPEECH. It is bigotry — discrimination toward a minority.

Giving money toward a cause that works to repress a minority is NOT FREE SPEECH. It is enabling the repression of a minority.

Financially supporting something that enables bigotry to flourish is NOT FREE SPEECH. It is just more bigotry.

Brookesmith
Karolina wrote: Fascism is

Karolina wrote:

Fascism is the legal, state-approved bullying of victims. We must reverse this process for it is a very slippery slope.

 

I don't believe the "state" had anything to do with citizens excercising the rights of assembly and free speech in their support of Mr. Cathy's right of freedom of speech. I have no problem with the gay whatever, but other people have a right to not support it. Marriage of any kind is not guaranteed in the Constitution.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Karolina wrote:Discrimination

Karolina wrote:
Discrimination toward a minority is NOT FREE SPEECH. It is bigotry — discrimination toward a minority.

Giving money toward a cause that works to repress a minority is NOT FREE SPEECH. It is enabling the repression of a minority.

Financially supporting something that enables bigotry to flourish is NOT FREE SPEECH. It is just more bigotry.

Brookesmith, if people who want to get married are not allowed to get married, when others ARE allowed to — how is that not bigotry? How is that not labelling the people who are not allowed to get married by law as shamefully inferior?

I'm not sure what people were supposed to do on the appreciation day, but if it involved buying the restaurant's food—they were financially supporting an ollgarch that is an outed bigot. The people who work for the company are also contributing to the wealth of the oligarch, with which he enables a bigot cause. None of that is FREE SPEECH, mind you. It is financial enabling of the continued repression of gays — and the first step in the three-step process to DEATH CAMPS.

Is this where we want to go? Isn't NDAA already in place? Ask yourself—what is going on here?

douglaslee
douglaslee's picture
Did anyone think to look at

Did anyone think to look at their  billboard sign that day?  Maybe a BOGO promotion? BOGO is buy one get one, and it is easily blocked from the screen shot. The same way a crowd of 6 burning a flag can be framed as throngs rioting. Who was this shaking his fist at god?  Kind of an ignorant statement. Some think the same thing when they drink a beer on sunday, or saturday if they're seventh day adventitsts. If only 400,000 said grace before they ate are the other 200,000 shaking their fists? 

Maybe the BOGO was only for those customers holding a cross and not shaking it. Now if it was a cross in a waterfilled paperweight, I think you're allowed to shake it.  Shake your money maker Cathy. Is he one of the prosperity gospel types? Like Olsteen, use Jesus to prosper. There are Christian car loans, so Christian chickens must be possible. Virgin chickens? A redundant phrase according to Dick Cavett .

Brookesmith
So people do not have the

So people do not have the right to express their beliefs and put their money where they please because YOU and others disagree with those beliefs? Hmmm... Yet others should have those same rights because because YOU and others sympathize with their unprotected beliefs. Do you think the state should be involved in choosing who has certain rights and the selective enforcement of those rights for some and not others. Watchout, you are going down a slippery slope towards exactly what you are arguing against.

We are talking about the freedom of speech here by an individual. Chik-fil-As are independently owned franchizes. No one stopped the kiss in participants from expressing their rights of freedom of speech (expression). Maybe you and your followers would better further your homosexual cause by condemning muslims that think homosexuals should be put to death?  Watchout for your cognitive dissonances.

anonymous green
Arguing with Manchurian

Arguing with Manchurian Americans is like barking up a fake tree.

There is no beef there.

Nor any chicken.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste arguing with the mindless platitudes of the terminally brainwashed.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
We are NOT talking about

We are NOT talking about FREEDOM OF SPEECH. We are talking about bigotry and bigots financing bigotry by taking the money of people who don't know that they are bigots.

Except on appreciation day, and from now on. People who agree with them will no doubt become regulars. So I guess we'll see who the majority is—bigots or non-bigots? Will Chick-Fill-A stay in business or not? Personally, I hope that there are far less bigots, but I wouldn't bank on it.

People are allowed to believe whatever they want to believe, as long as that does not include a belief that they are allowed to repress, violate, hurt, damage or kill another person in any way, actively or passive-aggressively. Those actions are called and should be called CRIME.

Muslims in the USA are not allowed to repress, violate, hurt, damage or kill another person in any way either, not actively nor passive-aggressively. I have no desire to live in or even visit a country that allows that kind of behavior, and I am not interested in having my own country become one of those.

Brookesmith said: Watch out, you are going down a slippery slope towards exactly what you are arguing against. 

Karolina answers: This is very vague, so please enlighten me as what you are trying to say. Do you see me as a person going down a slippery slope toward becoming a homosexual who isn't allowed to get married — or a person going down a slippery slope toward becoming a patriotic American living (or dying) in a country that practices genocide? And either way...why?

Brookesmith
Come on girl, if you want

Come on girl, if you want certain types of speech (expression) banned by the "state" then you might get more than you intended when the type of freedoms you demand are also banned. That is the slippery slope I don't want to start sliding down. There is no law against bigotry and there is no Constitutional protection of marriage, of any kind. I personally do not give a rats ass about the subject of gay whatever. It is free speech I care about and both sides got their say in this matter. And that is what this was all about. It is just that one side spoke a lot louder that the other, but no one was prevented from expressing themselves. You made it about the other. But as I said, be careful what kind of feedom of speech YOU want banned.

Mr. Cathy is entitled to his beliefs just as you are. He is also free to put his money where he wants, just as you are. To restrict one, might find the other restricted as well. The state sanctioned or prohibited nothing with respect to the Chik-fil-A incident. No one was prevented from expressing their beliefs. Again, Chik-fil-As are independently owned franchises. If you don't like Mr. Cathy's beliefs about gay whatever then by all means don't patronize Chik-fil-A establishments. You would be hitting him in the pocketbook, in a very distant and round about way, of course.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Sweetheart, I am sure that

Sweetheart, I am sure that you are wise enough to know that money is NOT speech, corporations are not people and Citizens United MUST be repealed.

Cathy has a right to believe whatever his imagination tells him to believe, just like you do, but acting on bigotry to hurt human beings is evil and is the first step of  (1) IDENTIFY,  (2) SEPARATE,  (3) DESTROY

Sinclair Lewis wrote:
When fascism comes to this country it will be wrapped in a flag carrying a cross.

polycarp2
Brookside wrote: Maybe you

Brookside wrote: Maybe you and your followers would better further your homosexual cause by condemning muslims that think homosexuals should be put to death? 

poly replies: You do realize that some Christians think the same thing, don't you? All Muslims don't. All Christians don't.

As for your dissertation of OWS, perhaps what you should do is attend an event as a participant. You'll come away with a different view than the one's expressed on Fox News.

Experience is still the best teacher.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

.

Brookesmith
Karolina, who acted on

Karolina, who acted on bigotry? Citizens United should be repealed and corporate personhood should be done away with, I agree. But an individual has the right to spend his money on causes he believes in.

OWS has no core. It is costing the taxpayers millions. It is a democratic smoke screen designed to distract from Obama's failures.

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oGdVoK3x9QxDIAWalXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1OThhbHNqBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDOQRjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDA0OV8xNTQ-/SIG=13l6d0m04/EXP=1344294794/**http%3a//thekitchencabinet.us/2011/10/20/occupy-wall-street-a-farce-engineered-by-2012-strategists/

anonymous green
Brookesmith wrote: OWS has no

Brookesmith wrote:

OWS has no core. It is costing the taxpayers millions. It is a democratic smoke screen designed to distract from Obama's failures.

Obama's up what yours??

X my democratic l*l.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Brookesmith wrote:Karolina,

Brookesmith wrote:
Karolina, who acted on bigotry? Citizens United should be repealed and corporate personhood should be done away with, I agree. But an individual has the right to spend his money on causes he believes in.

OWS has no core. It is costing the taxpayers millions. It is a democratic smoke screen designed to distract from Obama's failures.

Cathy acted on bigotry. Repressing a group of people who want to secure a civil right that they should have had all along, is bigotry in action. 

OWS is genuine, but they do need to become more organized and more focused on making big changes in our ecoomy and politics. There are other groups that are already doing that, but OWS seems to be the only group that has been tracked and dramatized in the corporate media. They have often been infiltrated by paid troublemakers to make a good story, and to demonize the patriotic cause.

Brookesmith
Cathy exercised his freedom

Cathy exercised his freedom of speech. He did "repress" anybody. Marriage of any kind is not protected in the Constitution. It is up to each state. And the idiot mayor Emmanuel that spewed unconstirtutional crap about Chik-fil-As in Chicago should have been aware that same-sex marriage is not even legel in Chicageo before he opened his ignorant mouth. He even supports Farrahkan, who professes to be muslim and is anti-gay. Watch out for those cognitive dissonances.

Nope, no contradiction there.

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oGdbVR7x9Q6zsAuvtXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1c2dibHRuBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMwRjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDA0OV8xNTQ-/SIG=13i6oi6f4/EXP=1344298961/**http%3a//www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/07/26/rahm-emanuel-has-no-problem-with-louis-farrakhan/

OWS is a distraction for Obama.

Brookesmith
It is unbelievable the

It is unbelievable the hypocrisy that some here tolerate.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Brookesmith wrote:It is

Brookesmith wrote:
It is unbelievable the hypocrisy that some here tolerate.

There is clearly no point on continuing this exchange, as you will not change your position. I am happy to let you believe as you believe and move on.

Brookesmith
The point about hypocrisy is

The point about hypocrisy is that those who do not think others have the right to a differing, or even opposing, opinion and should be silenced, do not recognize their own hypocrisy when that same opposing opinion is expressed by someone they have heretofore deemed as politically correct. I gave for an example Chicago Mayor Emmanuel, and what he condemned in one religious statement by the Chik-fil-A CEO and what he finds acceptable in Farrahkan and all his anti-semantic rhetioric and the islamic stance on homosexuals.

""So, let’s make sure we have this correct. A business owned by a devout Christian family that does not engage in any kind of discrimination has no place in Emanuel’s 'Chicago values,' but Emanuel rolls out the red carpet for perhaps the most well-known anti-Semite in the nation?" asked Hot Air's Ed Morrissey."

That to me is liberal hypocrisy.

Cognitive dissonance is when one has a strong belief in something or oneself and then encounters something or someone that conflicts against that belief.

anonymous green
Brookesmith

Brookesmith wrote:

Cognitive dissonance is when one has a strong belief in something or oneself and then encounters something or someone that conflicts against that belief.

No Linda, you're wrong again.

Cognitive dissonance occurs when one has a strong belief in something or oneself and then encounters something in their own heads that conflicts against that belief.

It's like a dissonant chord ringing in your mind, as your soul struggles to find the root, the 1.

It's the sound that you and the right wing Manchurian Americans are hearing now, and it just won't go away will it?

Soon, unless you learn, the symapthetic vibrations of dissonance will break your mind into little pieces, so it's best to listen to the song your conscience is singing.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
anonymous green

anonymous green wrote:
Cognitive dissonance occurs when one has a strong belief in something or oneself and then encounters something in their own heads that conflicts against that belief.

It's like a dissonant chord ringing in your mind, as your soul struggles to find the root, the 1.

It's the sound that you and the right wing Manchurian Americans are hearing now, and it just won't go away will it?

Soon, unless you learn, the symapthetic vibrations of dissonance will break your mind into little pieces, so it's best to listen to the song your conscience is singing.

Wow. Kudos, Anonymous.

MEJ
MEJ's picture
I watched the story on ABC

I watched the story on ABC nightly news and they framed it as, ...______ people showed up at Chick Fillet to support traditional marriage..." For some reason I dont think that was the motivation for the majority of the folks who are part of the Party of Prejudice.

Liberal media my ass

Brookesmith
They came out in support of

They came out in support of Mr. Cathy's right to freedom of speech, just as the kissers got to express theirs, all hosted by Chik-fil-A.