|
meat sweats posted:Asking people who claim to support gay rights to patronize any restaurant in the world besides Chick Fil A to avoid directly contributing to anti-gay causes = literally being the Tea Party. The way you're going about it? Yeah the Tea Party comparison is apt and appropriate.
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 19:25 |
|
|
meat sweats posted:Asking people who claim to support gay rights to patronize any restaurant in the world besides Chick Fil A to avoid directly contributing to anti-gay causes = literally being the Tea Party. Accusing actual gay people of being sellouts (or not "allies", loving  ) because they don't maintain the same frothing rage that you do in perpetuity = being a progressive. Hope you boycott Bayer, Volkswagen, Hugo Boss, et al!Seriously. I'm not giving CFA my money because I know that the Cathy family themselves are engaged in funding anti-gay groups, regardless of WinShape, and because I don't like the anti-competitive actions they've taken against other food businesses on some of the local college campuses, but I'm not going to start loving screaming at gay people that they're sellout traitors to the cause who are afraid of alienating black people or whatever because they eat a loving chicken sandwich. That's not being an ally - that's being a holier-than-thou rear end in a top hat who thinks they know better than everyone inside the rights movement how best to support The Cause. It's like those guys who start screaming "internalized misogyny" at any woman who disagrees with their favorite Feminist Icon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:But I'm not demanding that. I'm "demanding" that you buy your fried chicken sandwich from Wendy's instead of Chick-Fil-A. There is no more trivial or easy demand I could possibly be making. That you consider "asking anyone to do literally anything" to be "an impossible level of ideological purity" is stupid. Seek therapy. No, really, being abused and victimized for most of your life can cause some very problematic anxiety issues. You are cool voicing how you believe that buying Chick-Fil-A is bad, but then moving beyond that and berating someone else for disagreeing with you shows a very poor sense of self-worth. We can understand that you are hesitant about others supporting programs that are detrimental, but currently it is not really supported by the info that people are by buying Chick-Fil-A. They shouldn't because Chick-Fil-A is lovely, greasy fast-food that should be thrown into the nearest incinerator, but there is just no accounting for taste.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
DreamShipWrecked posted:We do have Chick-Fil-A in Michigan! One, and only one, on the campus of my old university. They had to very pointedly put up signs everywhere saying how they were not tied to the main corporation and even had a survey asking if people wanted to kick the place out of the uni Sup SEMichigoon.  I lived on that campus for 6 months while working nearby and had no idea there was a Chick-Fil-A there, not that I would have gone anyway.In non LANChat- DreamShipWrecked posted:E. Also, in Michigan news, the Attorney General said that the licenses couldn't be immediately handed out if the ruling to drop the ban is appealed. Unclear on if that includes ruling it unconstitutional Is this basically a reiteration of his "order" to Clerks back in October that Lisa Brown testified about? Since the clerks don't work for him, it seems like it would have all the repercussions of Schuette holding his breath until he turned blue. Also:  Punchable, or most punchable?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Chaos Personified posted:Seek therapy. No, really, being abused and victimized for most of your life can cause some very problematic anxiety issues. You are cool voicing how you believe that buying Chick-Fil-A is bad, but then moving beyond that and berating someone else for disagreeing with you shows a very poor sense of self-worth. Oh man, am I the epidemic gay bullying of straights that Michelle Bachmann warned us about?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
I went looking for anything I could find about gay marriage because I'm tired of reading about goddamned chicken sandwiches. I found an article about New Mexico couples filing their taxes jointly. http://www.thestate.com/2014/03/09/3315413_new-mexico-gay-married-couples.html You can read it if you want, but it's just a feel-good piece about how nice it is for people not to get constant reminders that someone thinks of them as abnormal or unworthy just because of who they are. The women who challenged our county's clerk (and were, thus, the first same-sex couple to get married in this county) were talking to some people at church the other week about medical insurance, and one woman made a joke about birth control, and everybody got a good hearty laugh, and society held together. This is probably a lot like legalized weed. One state does it, people nearby check in, see the effect is "meh", and figure they may as well throw in too. Kinda makes me hopeful for humanity. (Yes I'm trying to change the subject.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
cruft posted:I went looking for anything I could find about gay marriage because I'm tired of reading about goddamned chicken sandwiches. I found an article about New Mexico couples filing their taxes jointly. That's actually really cute. The only couples in the country that are legitimately excited to do their taxes 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:Oh man, am I the epidemic gay bullying of straights that Michelle Bachmann warned us about? You aren't being bullied, you're being given called out. Slight difference. Kilo147 fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Mar 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
DreamShipWrecked posted:That's actually really cute. The only couples in the country that are legitimately excited to do their taxes It's a lot easier the younger you are. Mine took about an hour and a half.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
What the gently caress is up with this thread? We have people desperately defending their right to stuff their gullet by way of a corporation that was heavily involved in homophobic activity, only they maybe choose not to? What? And then "calling out" a dude who thinks it's inappropriate? It'd be hard to stoop much lower here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:What the gently caress is up with this thread? We have people desperately defending their right to stuff their gullet by way of a corporation that was heavily involved in homophobic activity, only they maybe choose not to? What? And then "calling out" a dude who thinks it's inappropriate? It'd be hard to stoop much lower here. I don't know, there was a married guy saying that gay folks should "wait their turn".
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:What the gently caress is up with this thread? We have people desperately defending their right to stuff their gullet by way of a corporation that was heavily involved in homophobic activity, only they maybe choose not to? What? And then "calling out" a dude who thinks it's inappropriate? It'd be hard to stoop much lower here. I could drive it lower if you want.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Who gives a poo poo about CFA and their disgusting garbage meat? Go eat some real food that doesn't come from a national chain, you fatties.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
ed: never mind, the new people coming in are messing things up even worse. whatever
Chris James 2 fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Mar 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:The way you're going about it? Yeah the Tea Party comparison is apt and appropriate. I'm not even a gay man, I'm straight and married to a woman. But he's right, it's not hard to not frequent a lovely chicken joint and you and people like you that say otherwise are assholes and lovely "allies" who likely wouldn't do any good no matter how much the LGBTA panders to you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
DreamShipWrecked posted:That's actually really cute. The only couples in the country that are legitimately excited to do their taxes I don't know, I think the first year after I got married, I was pretty jazzed about filing jointly. Afterwards, I realized it was still taxes, though :-( But it's cool that more people can engage in the same pedestrian crap and be just as unenthusiastic about it as everybody else!
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:I don't know, there was a married guy saying that gay folks should "wait their turn". But you see he was bisexual in a straight relationship! So therefore he was the one really being oppressed somehow?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:But you see he was bisexual in a straight relationship! So therefore he was the one really being oppressed somehow? What page was this? Did it have any posts about chicken sandwiches?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I'm not even a gay man, I'm straight and married to a woman. But he's right, it's not hard to not frequent a lovely chicken joint and you and people like you that say otherwise are assholes and lovely "allies" who likely wouldn't do any good no matter how much the LGBTA panders to you. I don't go to CFA and haven't since like the 90's because I knew they were lovely to gay people and lovely to their employees and broke a lot of laws re: religious discrimination in the workplace. They are a bad company run by bad people and that's reason enough for me not to go there. poo poo, I boycotted Domino's way back when they donated a bunch of money to the Colorado anti-gay law back in the early 90's and haven't ordered from them since. I will not scream at you for going there though. Maybe make a disappointed face. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:I don't go to CFA and haven't since like the 90's because I knew they were lovely to gay people and lovely to their employees and broke a lot of laws re: religious discrimination in the workplace. They are a bad company run by bad people and that's reason enough for me not to go there. poo poo, I boycotted Domino's way back when they donated a bunch of money to the Colorado anti-gay law back in the early 90's and haven't ordered from them since. I will not scream at you for going there though. Maybe make a disappointed face. If more fast food chains donated to anti-gay causes, how many more years would the average Internet Nerd live? Somebody get Nate Silver on the horn, we've got a live one here 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
Anyways, is there a single link to the pending litigation in the states that still have a ban? I'd like to read the various complaints and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
I read Utah's response and about fell down laughing. I'm beginning to believe they're purposely sabotaging their own defense of the ban it was so bad. It reads like some poo poo from the 1920's.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
transfatphobic posted:
This got buried at the bottom of the last page and is a pretty good burn in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
Well as soon as everyone stops demanding I be banished from the cool kids club for intruding on your chickenfest and actually starts engaging with the substance of my posts, I'll be happy to point out why that's a lovely argument.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:I read Utah's response and about fell down laughing. I'm beginning to believe they're purposely sabotaging their own defense of the ban it was so bad. It reads like some poo poo from the 1920's. Care to provide some excerpts?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
All you guys have done with this argument is make me really want some chicken for dinner.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:I read Utah's response and about fell down laughing. I'm beginning to believe they're purposely sabotaging their own defense of the ban it was so bad. It reads like some poo poo from the 1920's. The last few overturns, including Michigan's "I'm not biased but all gays burn in hell" defense, have seemed remarkably phoned in. I can't help but wonder if the states are seeing how the wind is blowing and only giving a cursory defense in an effort to not gently caress up the legal system with all their nonsense. Teddybear posted:All you guys have done with this argument is make me really want some chicken for dinner. Just as planned 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:All you guys have done with this argument is make me really want some chicken for dinner. BY GOD SA IS PART OF THE NON-ALLY FAKE LGBTQA HOMOPHOBIC PRO-GAY-HOLOCAUST ILLUMINATI 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:Well as soon as everyone stops demanding I be banished from the cool kids club for intruding on your chickenfest and actually starts engaging with the substance of my posts, I'll be happy to point out why that's a lovely argument. Or you could just post your argument without preconditions? You leaving the conversation isn't exactly a threat, either argue your points or stop posting. cafel fucked around with this message at 00:28 on Mar 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
cruft posted:Care to provide some excerpts? And some greatest hits: The Salt Lake Tribune posted:Letting Shelby’s decision stand would "bring active liberty to a screeching halt, replacing it with a homogenized, one-size-fits-all federal solution" on marriage, the state said.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
meat sweats posted:Well as soon as everyone stops demanding I be banished from the cool kids club for intruding on your chickenfest and actually starts engaging with the substance of my posts, I'll be happy to point out why that's a lovely argument. You pointed out that someone shouldn't get their fast food from CFA but instead get it from another place. With your hard stance on absolutely never giving money to anyone that wrongs gays you failed to find out that the alternatively you gave wasn't a very good option. It undermined your stance. However, I agree that people should be cautious and even avoid buying food from CFA because even if a personal boycott won't help much it's still using your purchasing power as a citizen to express your opinion. But your combative nature, especially when discussing things with people that these negative donations affect (gay people) dissuades anyone from agreeing with you regardless if you are right or wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
quote:less "self-sacrificing" by heterosexual fathers  "Well, now that gays can get married too, there's no reason for me to be a good father to my children, I guess."
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
Oraculum Animi posted:You pointed out that someone shouldn't get their fast food from CFA but instead get it from another place. With your hard stance on absolutely never giving money to anyone that wrongs gays you failed to find out that the alternatively you gave wasn't a very good option. It undermined your stance. However, I agree that people should be cautious and even avoid buying food from CFA because even if a personal boycott won't help much it's still using your purchasing power as a citizen to express your opinion. But your combative nature, especially when discussing things with people that these negative donations affect (gay people) dissuades anyone from agreeing with you regardless if you are right or wrong. My "hard stance" is that CFA supporting groups which literally engage in imprisoning gay teens in remote camps for "conversion therapy" or passing laws mandating the death penalty for homosexuality is wrong, and that CFA's continued blasting of its "pro-family faith" message makes it abundantly clear that the corporation, and its Christian supporters, consider the decision on eating there to be a referendum on gay rights. Wendy's throwing pocket change at a few Republicans (some of whom, unsurprisingly, are the most liberal or silent Republicans on gay issues that you can find anywhere) doesn't even come close to this. In general, this argument is "because nobody's perfect, it's OK to support the most evil people possible." It's nonsense. It's the gay rights equivalent of "as a white first-worlder I'm oppressing brown people with my participation in capitalism, therefore anyone who argues against drones is a hypocrite." Again, my argument IS the pragmatic one: Just don't support outright murder and torture. Just don't support the MOST evil company out there. Anything less than that is within the range of civil disagreement and compromise. Your argument is "literally do nothing whatsoever and denounce anyone who asks for the bare minimum as an unrealistic extremist."
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:35
|
|
|
Cicero posted:
Like I said, a loving laff riot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
DreamShipWrecked posted:The last few overturns, including Michigan's "I'm not biased but all gays burn in hell" defense, have seemed remarkably phoned in. I can't help but wonder if the states are seeing how the wind is blowing and only giving a cursory defense in an effort to not gently caress up the legal system with all their nonsense. Yeah I was astonished by the almost non-defense the state presented. I don't get how any rational person could call that a suitable defense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:38
|
|
|
quote:Same-sex relationships, it claims, are primarily about "personal individual interests" and an "adult-centric" lifestyle and allowing such couples to marry would have multiple repercussions. I'm having trouble figuring out what this is supposed to mean. By "personal individual interests" are they asserting homos want to enter into betrothal out of selfishness? And what is an "adult-centric" lifestyle? Is this code for "those gays do nothing but gently caress?" Because they might be interested in hearing about what goes on in the early years of most hetero marriages. Edit: I wonder if they think that marrying dudes is the easy way out. I feel sorry for their wives 
cruft fucked around with this message at 00:47 on Mar 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
cruft posted:I'm having trouble figuring out what this is supposed to mean. By "personal individual interests" are they asserting homos want to enter into betrothal out of selfishness? In their heads people get married to have children and then selflessly devote themselves to said children. Gays can't have children because biology. QED, liberals
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
7thBatallion posted:Anyways, is there a single link to the pending litigation in the states that still have a ban? I'd like to read the various complaints and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
cruft posted:I'm having trouble figuring out what this is supposed to mean. By "personal individual interests" are they asserting homos want to enter into betrothal out of selfishness? This is Utah, where you have to build a wall in a restaurant to prevent children from seeing someone pour/mix a drink because it will somehow cause them to instantly explode or become alcoholics or something. The concept of doing something and not involving children is anathema. Never mind we don't bother to clean up our air and water, or can't be arsed to pay for a decent education, the only important thing is pumping them out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 19:25 |
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:It boils down to "people who don't have kids are selfish." Never mind that there's absolutely nothing that prevents gay people from having children, except maybe for the discriminatory laws they've already passed that says gays can't adopt kids. Men can use a surrogate, women can buy sperm. I know this argument is pretty tired by now, but I'd still like to have a judge ask them if they plan to start revoking the marriage licenses of childless couples. Still, I feel like there's something else going on here. Like, if this attorney thinks marrying another dude is a result of too much focus on "personal individual interests"... maybe he should have married a dude. It'd explain the weak-rear end arguments, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:53
|
|