Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Night Hawks

Chick Fil-A

Recommended Posts

I'll gladly support a gay hating establishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wat? A positive statement of their religious beliefs is gay hating? We've completely lost our minds when discussing RIGHTEOUS OUTRAGEZ!!!!!

Not at all. That was merely to demonstrate that they are heavily guided by their religious beliefs. It's the donating money to anti-equality movements that I think was being construed as "gay hating".
What percentage of Chik-Fil-A operators, employees, and customers would be fair to classify as "gay-hating"? Does working at one implicitly endorse all beliefs of all members of the founding family? How about patronizing one?

Who cares?
Trying to figure out how extensive your condemnation is, and the standards you set for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've only eaten here one time in my life, I think I had just their regular chicken sandwich and their waffle fries. I don't normally order chicken when I do fast food so this is a departure for me. I know some people love this place, and others prefer their chicken sandwiches from other fast food places. To each their own. I hear their shakes are too die for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've only eaten here one time in my life, I think I had just their regular chicken sandwich and their waffle fries. I don't normally order chicken when I do fast food so this is a departure for me. I know some people love this place, and others prefer their chicken sandwiches from other fast food places. To each their own. I hear their shakes are too die for.

Good to know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wat? A positive statement of their religious beliefs is gay hating? We've completely lost our minds when discussing RIGHTEOUS OUTRAGEZ!!!!!

Not at all. That was merely to demonstrate that they are heavily guided by their religious beliefs. It's the donating money to anti-equality movements that I think was being construed as "gay hating".
What percentage of Chik-Fil-A operators, employees, and customers would be fair to classify as "gay-hating"? Does working at one implicitly endorse all beliefs of all members of the founding family? How about patronizing one?

Who cares?
Trying to figure out how extensive your condemnation is, and the standards you set for it.

Really? One side has a standard of "you're a dude that likes dudes, so I hate you" and you're expecting some sophistication from the other side?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wat? A positive statement of their religious beliefs is gay hating? We've completely lost our minds when discussing RIGHTEOUS OUTRAGEZ!!!!!

Not at all. That was merely to demonstrate that they are heavily guided by their religious beliefs. It's the donating money to anti-equality movements that I think was being construed as "gay hating".
What percentage of Chik-Fil-A operators, employees, and customers would be fair to classify as "gay-hating"? Does working at one implicitly endorse all beliefs of all members of the founding family? How about patronizing one?

Who cares?
Trying to figure out how extensive your condemnation is, and the standards you set for it.

Really? One side has a standard of "you're a dude that likes dudes, so I hate you" and you're expecting some sophistication from the other side?

I didn't have any expectations. I'm genuinely curious if working at a Chik-Fil-A or being a CFA customer means one hates gays, or is at least an endorsement of gay-hating. If so, it would explain why it's always such a madhouse when a Chik-Fil-A opens: they are vetting potential customers to determine if their gay-hating level is sufficiently large enough to eat there. That takes some time and clogs the line. Edited by Bruce Dickinson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was supporting the Gay boycotts just so this place would be forced to open Sunday's due to losing money so I could get that bagel, chicken and egg Sammich. Thanks Gaybama/Hillary!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gays need to start their own chicken sandwich store - can't be too difficult to replicate what they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wat? A positive statement of their religious beliefs is gay hating? We've completely lost our minds when discussing RIGHTEOUS OUTRAGEZ!!!!!

Not at all. That was merely to demonstrate that they are heavily guided by their religious beliefs. It's the donating money to anti-equality movements that I think was being construed as "gay hating".
What percentage of Chik-Fil-A operators, employees, and customers would be fair to classify as "gay-hating"? Does working at one implicitly endorse all beliefs of all members of the founding family? How about patronizing one?

Who cares?
Trying to figure out how extensive your condemnation is, and the standards you set for it.

Apparently I oversimplified a legitimate question. I wanted to know if CFA was the chicken company that started off the ####storm with the gay community, I was legitimately unsure if it was them, and apparently that question set off another ####storm in here.

Edited by Chaka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wat? A positive statement of their religious beliefs is gay hating? We've completely lost our minds when discussing RIGHTEOUS OUTRAGEZ!!!!!

Not at all. That was merely to demonstrate that they are heavily guided by their religious beliefs. It's the donating money to anti-equality movements that I think was being construed as "gay hating".
What percentage of Chik-Fil-A operators, employees, and customers would be fair to classify as "gay-hating"? Does working at one implicitly endorse all beliefs of all members of the founding family? How about patronizing one?

Who cares?
Trying to figure out how extensive your condemnation is, and the standards you set for it.

Really? One side has a standard of "you're a dude that likes dudes, so I hate you" and you're expecting some sophistication from the other side?

I didn't have any expectations. I'm genuinely curious if working at a Chik-Fil-A or being a CFA customer means one hates gays, or is at least an endorsement of gay-hating. If so, it would explain why it's always such a madhouse when a Chik-Fil-A opens: they are vetting potential customers to determine if their gay-hating level is sufficiently large enough to eat there. That takes some time and clogs the line.

Again, who cares? If a corporation has the same rights as an individual (thanks Citizens United) then it can be held to the same standards as an individual regardless of the moral, political, ethical etc. composition of their employees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ending their funding to gay hating groups does not mean they stopped hating gays. It just means they stopped funding gay hating groups. Could have been they just couldn't afford to anymore.

Wow! I never new a corporation was a single entity, and not actually made up of hundreds of individuals.

The more you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wat? A positive statement of their religious beliefs is gay hating? We've completely lost our minds when discussing RIGHTEOUS OUTRAGEZ!!!!!

Not at all. That was merely to demonstrate that they are heavily guided by their religious beliefs. It's the donating money to anti-equality movements that I think was being construed as "gay hating".
What percentage of Chik-Fil-A operators, employees, and customers would be fair to classify as "gay-hating"? Does working at one implicitly endorse all beliefs of all members of the founding family? How about patronizing one?

Duh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wat? A positive statement of their religious beliefs is gay hating? We've completely lost our minds when discussing RIGHTEOUS OUTRAGEZ!!!!!

Not at all. That was merely to demonstrate that they are heavily guided by their religious beliefs. It's the donating money to anti-equality movements that I think was being construed as "gay hating".
What percentage of Chik-Fil-A operators, employees, and customers would be fair to classify as "gay-hating"? Does working at one implicitly endorse all beliefs of all members of the founding family? How about patronizing one?

Who cares?
Trying to figure out how extensive your condemnation is, and the standards you set for it.

Really? One side has a standard of "you're a dude that likes dudes, so I hate you" and you're expecting some sophistication from the other side?

I didn't have any expectations. I'm genuinely curious if working at a Chik-Fil-A or being a CFA customer means one hates gays, or is at least an endorsement of gay-hating. If so, it would explain why it's always such a madhouse when a Chik-Fil-A opens: they are vetting potential customers to determine if their gay-hating level is sufficiently large enough to eat there. That takes some time and clogs the line.

Again, who cares? If a corporation has the same rights as an individual (thanks Citizens United) then it can be held to the same standards as an individual regardless of the moral, political, ethical etc. composition of their employees.

Good to see not only children act childish these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wat? A positive statement of their religious beliefs is gay hating? We've completely lost our minds when discussing RIGHTEOUS OUTRAGEZ!!!!!

Not at all. That was merely to demonstrate that they are heavily guided by their religious beliefs. It's the donating money to anti-equality movements that I think was being construed as "gay hating".
What percentage of Chik-Fil-A operators, employees, and customers would be fair to classify as "gay-hating"? Does working at one implicitly endorse all beliefs of all members of the founding family? How about patronizing one?

Who cares?
Trying to figure out how extensive your condemnation is, and the standards you set for it.

Really? One side has a standard of "you're a dude that likes dudes, so I hate you" and you're expecting some sophistication from the other side?

I didn't have any expectations. I'm genuinely curious if working at a Chik-Fil-A or being a CFA customer means one hates gays, or is at least an endorsement of gay-hating. If so, it would explain why it's always such a madhouse when a Chik-Fil-A opens: they are vetting potential customers to determine if their gay-hating level is sufficiently large enough to eat there. That takes some time and clogs the line.

If you hate gays, then you hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. If you don't hate gays, then you don't hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. Where you work or dine doesn't determine your hate of others. So your question relies on a ridiculous premise to begin with, so no one is going to be able to give you an answer you want. The company already revealed that it hates guys by financially supporting gay hating groups. That cat is already out of the bag. It's good that they stopped the financial support, but that alone is not evidence that they feel differently about gays today. They make a tasty sandwich. They're a good business at doing that. They should have stuck to that, but their hatred compelled them to do more than that with the business. That was a big mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ending their funding to gay hating groups does not mean they stopped hating gays. It just means they stopped funding gay hating groups. Could have been they just couldn't afford to anymore.

Wow! I never new a corporation was a single entity, and not actually made up of hundreds of individuals.

The more you know.

It's called corporate personhood, established by the 14th amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ending their funding to gay hating groups does not mean they stopped hating gays. It just means they stopped funding gay hating groups. Could have been they just couldn't afford to anymore.

Wow! I never new a corporation was a single entity, and not actually made up of hundreds of individuals.

The more you know.

It's called corporate personhood, established by the 14th amendment.

Any other manure you want to regurgitate before the afteroon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ending their funding to gay hating groups does not mean they stopped hating gays. It just means they stopped funding gay hating groups. Could have been they just couldn't afford to anymore.

Wow! I never new a corporation was a single entity, and not actually made up of hundreds of individuals.

The more you know.

It's called corporate personhood, established by the 14th amendment.

Any other manure you want to regurgitate before the afteroon?

Doing my best to clean up the #### gay haters have dumped on this world. Don't blame me for their mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wat? A positive statement of their religious beliefs is gay hating? We've completely lost our minds when discussing RIGHTEOUS OUTRAGEZ!!!!!

Not at all. That was merely to demonstrate that they are heavily guided by their religious beliefs. It's the donating money to anti-equality movements that I think was being construed as "gay hating".
What percentage of Chik-Fil-A operators, employees, and customers would be fair to classify as "gay-hating"? Does working at one implicitly endorse all beliefs of all members of the founding family? How about patronizing one?

Who cares?
Trying to figure out how extensive your condemnation is, and the standards you set for it.

Really? One side has a standard of "you're a dude that likes dudes, so I hate you" and you're expecting some sophistication from the other side?

I didn't have any expectations. I'm genuinely curious if working at a Chik-Fil-A or being a CFA customer means one hates gays, or is at least an endorsement of gay-hating. If so, it would explain why it's always such a madhouse when a Chik-Fil-A opens: they are vetting potential customers to determine if their gay-hating level is sufficiently large enough to eat there. That takes some time and clogs the line.

Again, who cares? If a corporation has the same rights as an individual (thanks Citizens United) then it can be held to the same standards as an individual regardless of the moral, political, ethical etc. composition of their employees.

Good to see not only children act childish these days.

I agree. It was pretty childish of CFA to support the fight against equal rights.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've come up with a better way to handle the last several pages.

I don't follow my fast food chicken very closely but are these the guys who hate the gays?

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You annoying tools are going to make me get chick fil a tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't follow my fast food chicken very closely but are these the guys who hate the gays?

Well, is a privately held company with a deeply religious foundation.

And according to Wiki The company's official statement of corporate purpose says that the business exists "To glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us. To have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A."

So...yeah.

Nice :fishing: . Typical FFA silliness - feign ignorance, then argue when anyone tries to disagree with your pre-conceived notion. Crap like this is why I generally stay out of here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't follow my fast food chicken very closely but are these the guys who hate the gays?

Well, is a privately held company with a deeply religious foundation.

And according to Wiki The company's official statement of corporate purpose says that the business exists "To glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us. To have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A."

So...yeah.

Nice :fishing: . Typical FFA silliness - feign ignorance, then argue when anyone tries to disagree with your pre-conceived notion. Crap like this is why I generally stay out of here.

I didn't know it was CFA, which is why I asked. I'm also not really arguing. The facts seem pretty clear. CFA supported an anti-equality movement. Make your own judgement based upon that, it won't bother me in the least. In fact I find it informative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had CFA just the other day and it was the worst food I have ever tasted. Gross.

Plus they hate the gays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had CFA just the other day and it was the worst food I have ever tasted. Gross.

I don't believe you

You’re right. What I did there was embellish the quality of their food based on my feelings about marriage equality. I thought that was what this thread was about??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently I oversimplified a legitimate question. I wanted to know if CFA was the chicken company that started off the ####storm with the gay community, I was legitimately unsure if it was them, and apparently that question set off another ####storm in here.

I'm guessing you intentionally brought the question up here to bring the kooks out from both sides. It would have taken 5 seconds to google.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you hate gays, then you hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. If you don't hate gays, then you don't hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. Where you work or dine doesn't determine your hate of others.

Agreed.

So your question relies on a ridiculous premise to begin with, so no one is going to be able to give you an answer you want.

You're ignoring a big part of the question, and I'm not seeking a specific answer. You were quite clear that CFA showed they hated gays because of organizations they financially supported. Is eating at CFA financially supporting the CFA organization? If so, why does eating at CFA not imply an endorsement of CFA's behavior?

The company already revealed that it hates guys by financially supporting gay hating groups. That cat is already out of the bag.

Are we 100% sure that's the chain of events? Is it possible the Cathy family gave money to a wide range of non-profit organizations, then withdrew support of ones that engaged in activities outside their stated mission?

It's good that they stopped the financial support, but that alone is not evidence that they feel differently about gays today.

What's CFA's record on hiring and retaining gay employees? What's their record on treatment of gay customers? If it's a gay-hating corporation, shouldn't there be a paper trail miles long of discrimination and harassment towards gay people? I recognize that came off as a leading question, but I honestly don't know what CFA's record is in those areas.

They make a tasty sandwich. They're a good business at doing that.

Debatable.

They should have stuck to that, but their hatred compelled them to do more than that with the business. That was a big mistake.

If CFA offered to participate in a fundraiser for your neighborhood schools, donating a percentage of sales to the schools to help the schools fund unfunded mandates, would you advise the school to accept or reject CFA's offer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you hate gays, then you hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. If you don't hate gays, then you don't hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. Where you work or dine doesn't determine your hate of others. So your question relies on a ridiculous premise to begin with, so no one is going to be able to give you an answer you want. The company already revealed that it hates guys by financially supporting gay hating groups. That cat is already out of the bag. It's good that they stopped the financial support, but that alone is not evidence that they feel differently about gays today. They make a tasty sandwich. They're a good business at doing that. They should have stuck to that, but their hatred compelled them to do more than that with the business. That was a big mistake.

This is always an interesting position I see people take. It's quite the paradox to suggest one hates gay people solely because they give money to hate groups (which suggests those that don't give, don't hate gays) then when the money stops going to the hate groups there is all of a sudden more that needs to be considered when determining if one still hates gays or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had CFA just the other day and it was the worst food I have ever tasted. Gross.

Plus they hate the gays.

So do I. Hate them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently I oversimplified a legitimate question. I wanted to know if CFA was the chicken company that started off the ####storm with the gay community, I was legitimately unsure if it was them, and apparently that question set off another ####storm in here.

I'm guessing you intentionally brought the question up here to bring the kooks out from both sides. It would have taken 5 seconds to google.
He knew
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you hate gays, then you hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. If you don't hate gays, then you don't hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. Where you work or dine doesn't determine your hate of others. So your question relies on a ridiculous premise to begin with, so no one is going to be able to give you an answer you want. The company already revealed that it hates guys by financially supporting gay hating groups. That cat is already out of the bag. It's good that they stopped the financial support, but that alone is not evidence that they feel differently about gays today. They make a tasty sandwich. They're a good business at doing that. They should have stuck to that, but their hatred compelled them to do more than that with the business. That was a big mistake.

This is always an interesting position I see people take. It's quite the paradox to suggest one hates gay people solely because they give money to hate groups

One does not hate gays because they give money to hate groups. They give money to hate groups because they hate gays.

(which suggests those that don't give, don't hate gays)

This is flawed logic. But you used it because your premise was wrong, as pointed out above.

then when the money stops going to the hate groups there is all of a sudden more that needs to be considered when determining if one still hates gays or not.

Giving money to hate groups was evidence of their hatred of gays. When they stopped, the evidence is gone. They probably still hate gays, but they're now hiding all evidence of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you hate gays, then you hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. If you don't hate gays, then you don't hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. Where you work or dine doesn't determine your hate of others. So your question relies on a ridiculous premise to begin with, so no one is going to be able to give you an answer you want. The company already revealed that it hates guys by financially supporting gay hating groups. That cat is already out of the bag. It's good that they stopped the financial support, but that alone is not evidence that they feel differently about gays today. They make a tasty sandwich. They're a good business at doing that. They should have stuck to that, but their hatred compelled them to do more than that with the business. That was a big mistake.

This is always an interesting position I see people take. It's quite the paradox to suggest one hates gay people solely because they give money to hate groups

One does not hate gays because they give money to hate groups. They give money to hate groups because they hate gays.

(which suggests those that don't give, don't hate gays)

This is flawed logic. But you used it because your premise was wrong, as pointed out above.

then when the money stops going to the hate groups there is all of a sudden more that needs to be considered when determining if one still hates gays or not.

Giving money to hate groups was evidence of their hatred of gays. When they stopped, the evidence is gone. They probably still hate gays, but they're now hiding all evidence of that.

Actually....the point is in the bold.....you have no clue of one's motivations for doing things. You can guess and make assumptions, but in the end, that's all they are unless said individual flat out tells you what their motivations are. This sort of thinking isn't far removed from the people who assume they know why a politician votes against a particular bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is eating at CFA financially supporting the CFA organization? If so, why does eating at CFA not imply an endorsement of CFA's behavior?

No one is donating money to CFA. When you give money to CFA, you are buying a chicken sandwich.

I eat at CFA. I don't go looney about how great their food is, but it is pretty good. I also don't go looney like those who think everyone should boycott them. Both sides are extremes. One does not need to be an extremist to admit yes CFA hates gays, and oh by the way they make a tasty sandwich too. I might have to go get one tomorrow now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you hate gays, then you hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. If you don't hate gays, then you don't hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. Where you work or dine doesn't determine your hate of others. So your question relies on a ridiculous premise to begin with, so no one is going to be able to give you an answer you want. The company already revealed that it hates guys by financially supporting gay hating groups. That cat is already out of the bag. It's good that they stopped the financial support, but that alone is not evidence that they feel differently about gays today. They make a tasty sandwich. They're a good business at doing that. They should have stuck to that, but their hatred compelled them to do more than that with the business. That was a big mistake.

This is always an interesting position I see people take. It's quite the paradox to suggest one hates gay people solely because they give money to hate groups

One does not hate gays because they give money to hate groups. They give money to hate groups because they hate gays.

(which suggests those that don't give, don't hate gays)

This is flawed logic. But you used it because your premise was wrong, as pointed out above.

then when the money stops going to the hate groups there is all of a sudden more that needs to be considered when determining if one still hates gays or not.

Giving money to hate groups was evidence of their hatred of gays. When they stopped, the evidence is gone. They probably still hate gays, but they're now hiding all evidence of that.

Actually....the point is in the bold.....you have no clue of one's motivations for doing things. You can guess and make assumptions, but in the end, that's all they are unless said individual flat out tells you what their motivations are. This sort of thinking isn't far removed from the people who assume they know why a politician votes against a particular bill.

If vegas would let me place a bet on it, I'd bet my entire net worth on it. I was a Christian for 30+ years of my life, and yes I was taught to hate gays. Only word games and semantics keep Christians from admitting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could eat 50 of their gay hating nuggets

I could eat 51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you hate gays, then you hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. If you don't hate gays, then you don't hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. Where you work or dine doesn't determine your hate of others. So your question relies on a ridiculous premise to begin with, so no one is going to be able to give you an answer you want. The company already revealed that it hates guys by financially supporting gay hating groups. That cat is already out of the bag. It's good that they stopped the financial support, but that alone is not evidence that they feel differently about gays today. They make a tasty sandwich. They're a good business at doing that. They should have stuck to that, but their hatred compelled them to do more than that with the business. That was a big mistake.

This is always an interesting position I see people take. It's quite the paradox to suggest one hates gay people solely because they give money to hate groups
One does not hate gays because they give money to hate groups. They give money to hate groups because they hate gays.

(which suggests those that don't give, don't hate gays)

This is flawed logic. But you used it because your premise was wrong, as pointed out above.

then when the money stops going to the hate groups there is all of a sudden more that needs to be considered when determining if one still hates gays or not.

Giving money to hate groups was evidence of their hatred of gays. When they stopped, the evidence is gone. They probably still hate gays, but they're now hiding all evidence of that.
Actually....the point is in the bold.....you have no clue of one's motivations for doing things. You can guess and make assumptions, but in the end, that's all they are unless said individual flat out tells you what their motivations are. This sort of thinking isn't far removed from the people who assume they know why a politician votes against a particular bill.
If vegas would let me place a bet on it, I'd bet my entire net worth on it. I was a Christian for 30+ years of my life, and yes I was taught to hate gays. Only word games and semantics keep Christians from admitting it.
You seem pretty ok with labeling an entire group of people as haters yet you have no issue with being just as much of a hater toward that same group of people. That's a fairly hypocritical stance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could eat 50 of their gay hating nuggets

I could eat 51
I challenge you to a duel!
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you hate gays, then you hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. If you don't hate gays, then you don't hate gays regardless of where you work or dine. Where you work or dine doesn't determine your hate of others. So your question relies on a ridiculous premise to begin with, so no one is going to be able to give you an answer you want. The company already revealed that it hates guys by financially supporting gay hating groups. That cat is already out of the bag. It's good that they stopped the financial support, but that alone is not evidence that they feel differently about gays today. They make a tasty sandwich. They're a good business at doing that. They should have stuck to that, but their hatred compelled them to do more than that with the business. That was a big mistake.

This is always an interesting position I see people take. It's quite the paradox to suggest one hates gay people solely because they give money to hate groups
One does not hate gays because they give money to hate groups. They give money to hate groups because they hate gays.

(which suggests those that don't give, don't hate gays)

This is flawed logic. But you used it because your premise was wrong, as pointed out above.

then when the money stops going to the hate groups there is all of a sudden more that needs to be considered when determining if one still hates gays or not.

Giving money to hate groups was evidence of their hatred of gays. When they stopped, the evidence is gone. They probably still hate gays, but they're now hiding all evidence of that.
Actually....the point is in the bold.....you have no clue of one's motivations for doing things. You can guess and make assumptions, but in the end, that's all they are unless said individual flat out tells you what their motivations are. This sort of thinking isn't far removed from the people who assume they know why a politician votes against a particular bill.
If vegas would let me place a bet on it, I'd bet my entire net worth on it. I was a Christian for 30+ years of my life, and yes I was taught to hate gays. Only word games and semantics keep Christians from admitting it.
You seem pretty ok with labeling an entire group of people as haters yet you have no issue with being just as much of a hater toward that same group of people. That's a fairly hypocritical stance.

Who do I hate? Their food is pretty good!

Their are far worse corporations than CFA. If hating gays is CFA's only evil, then they're pretty decent compared to the rest. They still hate gays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess if I hated a group of people for 30+ years it would make me feel better to label other people haters as well.

Leaving that cult was the most liberating thing I've ever done in my life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gays need to start their own chicken sandwich store - can't be too difficult to replicate what they do.

Gays can't replicate, dumb###.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.