Chick-fil-A Sets World Record

[Tgo01]

Only because they think you're a chick.

Hey whatever works to get me the vagina.

[Latrinsorm]

Websters.

Websters doesn't tell you what words mean, it tells you how most people use words. If most people are wrong, so too is Websters. Don't get me started on dictionaries!!!

In my opinion this guy is wrong because he is wrong. I am not hostile to him being wrong though. I am not boycotting him. I am not denying him the right to operate a business in my home town.

No civilians involved in the boycott are denying anything, because your right to operate a business is not a guarantee that I will give you money. If people were physically preventing others from entering Chick-fil-As or blowing them up or something, that would be different.

This goes back to what I was arguing with diethx earlier, if it's currently up for debate in our government (which, sadly, gay rights is at the moment) then how can it be wrong to support candidates/agendas that you agree with?

Because our government is not an ethical entity. (Though that it has nevertheless moved in a more ethical direction overall is a fascinating measurement of our race and our peculiar republic.) People who were of the opinion that slavery was cool were wrong. If a slavery supporter had said "you abolitionists want to enslave us to your anti-slavery beliefs, hypocrites!!!" they would have been twits in addition to wrong.

Seriously what would bankrupting Chick-fil-A do?

The point isn't to bankrupt the target. The point is to threaten them with lost business, chiefly by raising public awareness and therefore rallying support. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. If effective, you add weight to everyone's mental calculus, and now every bigot is that much less useful to a company from a dollars and cents standpoint.

How can you be condemned for what goes through your own head, if you never act on it? Am I cheating on SR every time I watch Spartacus and get a mental image of doing naughty things?

I don't think "condemn" is the right word. I also don't think an ephemeral daydream and a thought out position are comparable. Would you be upset if SR told you that every time you two have been intimate he was picturing someone else, that he further pictures himself and this other person having children, raising a family, etc. even though he recognizes it as a fantasy, albeit one that is complex, intricate, and of extraordinary duration?

[Tgo01]

Websters doesn't tell you what words mean

Dictionaries don't tell you what words mean, I DO.

No civilians involved in the boycott are denying anything, because your right to operate a business is not a guarantee that I will give you money.

I was obviously referring to those mayors with that comment of mine.

People who were of the opinion that slavery was cool were wrong. If a slavery supporter had said "you abolitionists want to enslave us to your anti-slavery beliefs, hypocrites!!!" they would have been twits in addition to wrong.

Of course they were wrong. That's why it was up to the government to do something about it, not leave it up to the citizens to vote on it every once in a while.

The point isn't to bankrupt the target.

You must not be aware of the extent some of these people want to take this.

he recognizes it as a fantasy, albeit one that is complex, intricate, and of extraordinary duration?

I think you're being too generous to SR there.

[Latrinsorm]

Dictionaries don't tell you what words mean, I DO.

You're not my real mom!

I was obviously referring to those mayors with that comment of mine.

Ok.

Of course they were wrong. That's why it was up to the government to do something about it, not leave it up to the citizens to vote on it every once in a while.

But we voted on the 13th Amendment!! I figured we had voted on the 14th amendment too, but the actual passage is a lot more interesting. It turns out that all the good states (plus Tennessee, home of the KKK) ratified it, but when the other Southern states didn't (and therefore prevented the 3/4 needed) Congress declared martial law (over the veto of the President!) until they did. So let's call it a draw.

You must not be aware of the extent some of these people want to take this.

If I must, then I am incapable of doing otherwise and it's kind of a jerk move to pick on me about it. In any event, the lunatic fringe doesn't dictate the mainstream strategy simply by virtue of being the fringe. I'm sure there are people who want to stomp on the CEO's laptop: this does not suggest that every or most boycotters want to do the same.

I think you're being too generous to SR there.

Zing.

[Warriorbird]

You never did tell me what "team" I'm on Warriorbird. I also love your theory that someone who is fighting for equality can never be a bad person or act like a dick.

Let me reference the rest of the thread at this point to explain what "team" you're on.

In addition, you're functioning under the same "let's demonize a movement based on the action of one individual" lovingly used by such folks as the KKK, Bull Conor, and George Wallace. What makes it worse is you know you are.

It's the "Ha ha, I know I'm wrong, but fuck it I'm going to double down against equality." standard.

Why?

Let's reference just how effective voting against slavery and voting against Jim Crow were and throw on that you're standing against "state's rights" as a Republican which = LOL.

[Tgo01]

Let me reference the rest of the thread at this point to explain what "team" you're on.

So you're still not gonna tell me?

In addition, you're functioning under the same "let's demonize a movement based on the action of one individual"

Oh the irony of it all.

Let's reference just how effective voting against slavery and voting against Jim Crow were and throw on that you're standing against "state's rights" as a Republican which = LOL.

So, I don't get what you're saying? It's funny because I'm not making an argument for state's rights because I'm a Republican? Like, I can't have an opinion that differs from other people in my party? It's kind of funny reading these posts from you and others in this thread. I'm probably one of the more tolerant people on this forum yet you all are somehow trying to make me into some sort of monster or joke simply because I don't think staging "kiss ins" at Chick-fil-A is a very effective way to help the gay movement?

[Warriorbird]

So, I don't get what you're saying? It's funny because I'm not making an argument for state's rights because I'm a Republican? Like, I can't have an opinion that differs from other people in my party? It's kind of funny reading these posts from you and others in this thread. I'm probably one of the more tolerant people on this forum yet you all are somehow trying to make me into some sort of monster or joke simply because I don't think staging "kiss ins" at Chick-fil-A is a very effective way to help the gay movement?

This has hardly been your contribution.

[Tgo01]

This has hardly been your contribution.

Going to let me in on this secret or shall I wander the Earth forever not knowing, just like I'll apparently never know what "team" I'm on?

[Latrinsorm]

I'm probably one of the more tolerant people on this forum yet you all are somehow trying to make me into some sort of monster or joke simply because I don't think staging "kiss ins" at Chick-fil-A is a very effective way to help the gay movement?

As I said in my first post, my goal is only for us to have a good laugh about this. I think that's a much less pejorative way of phrasing "trying to make Tgo01 into some... joke", don't you?

[ClydeR]

I'm probably one of the more tolerant people on this forum yet you all are somehow trying to make me into some sort of monster or joke simply because I don't think staging "kiss ins" at Chick-fil-A is a very effective way to help the gay movement?

If you're that concerned about it, you could buy chicken offsets. They're like Indulgences or carbon offsets, but tastier and more fattening.