Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Political Chicken And Coffee

August 2, 2012 by  

Political Chicken And Coffee
TWITTER
Sarah Palin recently showed her support for Chick-fil-A on Twitter.

Imagine that it is possible to be a homophobic, right-wing zealot one moment and a gay-loving uber-liberal the next, simply by crossing the street.

In this author’s locale, it is possible (Chick-fil-A and Starbucks sit right across from one another). But that’s only if you allow yourself to believe that the customers of fast food restaurants and other businesses should be labeled simply because they prefer their chicken fried in peanut oil and like to sip coffee in a place with hip music playing in the background and a free Wi-Fi connection.

Does it really matter how companies feel about whether homosexuals should be allowed to marry? Instead of asking themselves that simple question, Americans on both sides of the debate have decided to instead jump to their feet — in largely meaningless ways — and engage themselves in a debate that has nothing to do with marriage equality or moral tradition.

Several months ago, Starbucks made clear that it supports the right of gays to marry. Some conservatives flipped out and, to the dismay of some Christian coffee lovers, a handful of pastors called for a Christian boycott of the company.

“Christians are upset with Starbucks for turning against God… Starbucks can follow Satan if they want to,” Steven Andrew, evangelical pastor and president of the USA Christian Ministries in California, said in a statement at the time. “However, pastors are to help Christians. Are you on the Lord’s side? Will you help the USA be blessed by God?”

Andrew probably joined the likes of Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee and thousands of conservatives yesterday for Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day. The event was aimed at encouraging conservatives to go to the restaurant after its CEO Dan Cathy said he supports traditional marriage in an interview with a Christian publication. The company has come under heavy fire from gay-rights groups and been boycotted by many people.

The takeaway message is that Christians should avoid the evil sodomite sympathizers at Starbucks and gay rights activists should avoid peanut-fried, right-wing chicken from Chick-fil-A, right? If that’s the case, here are a few other things people on both sides should boycott:

In case you forgot, those of you who are in favor of women’s equality need to support the 45 companies that pulled advertising from Rush Limbaugh’s talk show after he called Sandra Fluke a slut. His other advertisers are clearly misogynists.

Conservatives should boycott Target stores. Target sells gay greeting cards.

If you are a gay-rights fan, be sure that you avoid any petroleum products with ties to Saudi Arabia. The LGTB-unfriendly nation frequently imprisons and kills people for homosexual activities.

Don’t like homosexuality or Libertarians? Steer clear of Paypal, Facebook and several other tech companies, because innovator and businessman Peter Thiel is both gay and a Libertarian and has ties to several Internet companies that you likely use on a daily basis.

If all of this is beginning to sound a bit over the top, it is because it is over the top. There are more than 311 million people in the United States; we will never all agree completely. Rather than have a sensible debate on whether gay marriage should be legal, Americans have collectively chosen to have a shouting match about who is on what side.

Conservatives will have to accept at some point that the cat is out of the bag with regard to American homosexuality and, short of adopting the legal tactics of certain theocratic nations, it is not going to go away. And gay-rights activists must realize that some people simply do not agree with their lifestyle, and believe that it is neither natural nor moral.

In considering those two things, marriage traditionalists and gay-marriage advocates can find a common enemy: government-sanctioned marriage. Traditionalists and Christians view marriage as the union of a man and woman in the eyes of God first and foremost. Secularists view the union as a contractual one, man-made and legally binding. A traditionalist would never accept a government form as the only thing needed to be married, and a secularist would surely have similar disdain for a marriage not legally binding but God-sanctioned.

Any aspect of marriage that is provided by the government form should be freely attainable by all individuals. That is, any two, three, four and so on people in a free society should have the right to enter a contract that allows for the transfer of wealth, hospital visitation and other rights when a person is ill or dying, the sharing of common assets and the distribution of those assets in the event of breach of contract. In a free society, people have a natural right to assemble and associate as they will, so long as it does not infringe upon the rights of others to do so. The Federal government has not given married couples the special privilege of entering into that contract; it has simply denied others the right to do so — not just people who are gay, but also straight, single people.

When the Federal apparatus and its legislative minions discuss marriage, they are discussing the contractual, not the religious, aspect of the institution. And when they veer into discussing the religious definition of marriage, either in favor or against gay marriage, they abrogate the Constitutional guarantee of a political body that lacks the power to shape religious policy.

If legal gay marriage becomes standard from sea to shining sea, homosexuals who wish to be married and a whole boatload of bleeding-heart liberals will feel vindicated by the symbolic victory. Likewise, if conservatives and traditionalists are able to revive a strict adherence to the Defense of Marriage Act, they will feel a hard-fought battle against moral decay and a threat to their religious value has been won. But, aside from perceptual victory, nothing is going to change. In the first scenario, traditional Christian institutions will not feel that because bureaucracy changed its mind that God will as well and suddenly ordain gay marriages. And, in the second scenario, people who have made the decision to accept alternative sexual practices aren’t likely to stop.

If the debate about gay marriage is to ever be resolved, Americans will have to decide whether the discussion is about religion, legal contracts, the validation of an alternative lifestyle, moral decay or simply what types of people should patronize which establishments. In the meantime, when you sit down to enjoy your chicken sandwich or overpriced specialty coffee, check out a few other recent headlines. You may find that a Nation in decline on all fronts has much scarier problems than whether gays should be allowed to marry in the eyes of the government.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Political Chicken And Coffee”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Bill Scantlen

    Frankly, I am sick and tired of hearing and reading abut all of this tripe! To me it takes the focus off of the real problem and that is to get this piece of petrified puke out of office come November.

    • ivonne carlson maldonado

      WELL SAID!

    • Wyatt

      That’s what it is intended to do , DUH ! When you have no record to run on , you have to create controversy to distract people from your failures and or true agenda

    • Audrey

      Frankly…I do not care whether some is straight or gay…as long as they don’t force their opinions on me. I feel there have been gay people around since Adam and eve. There are even instances of gay in animals …etc. cats. Dogs. Birds. Find something else to focus on

      • Lyn

        Since “ADAM” and “EVE” ???? REALLY? lol

      • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

        Adam and Eve, not adam and steve, says it all bud.

    • Mrs. Miriam Sarmiento

      Bill I agree with you a 100%. We americans should be together in only one fight, and that is to defend our country against the evil forces of communism that are trying to destroy this wonderfull nation under God. Let’s all remember that the strenght is among the citizens of the country united as one. White,black homosexuals , heterosexuals, latin, european or else. God bless this U.S.A. of ours and kep us together in freedom and democracy.

      • RichE

        The Constitution Christian sharia?

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        Mrs. Miriam Sarmiento,

        PEOPLE OF FAITH SHOULD UNDERSTAND PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE “god” IN THEIR LIVES TEND TO HAVE ADVENTUROUS- AND ATYPICAL SEXUAL TASTE. “NON-RELIGIOUS” SEX, MORE THAN ANY OTHER SO-CALLED, “sin” – LIKE, ILLICIT DRUGS, ALCOHOL AND GREED – IS A BASE BIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL TRAIT IN ALL PEOPLE WHO DO NOT FEAR THE “WRATH OF god.”

        SINCE THIS IS A LIBERTARIAN SITE, THE EXISTENCE OF HOMOSEXUALS (LIKE, Peter Thiel) MAKES HOMOSEXUALITY A POPULAR TOPIC ON THIS SITE. IN ADDITION, SINCE PEOPLE (UNDER FIFTY) ARE IN THE WORKPLACE, THEY ARE DEALING WITH THE ISSUE OF HOMOSEXUALITY ON A DAILY BASIS – COLLEAGUES, INTERNET USAGE, ETC.

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “Bill Scantlen,”

      THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A “COLORED” PERSON IS PRESIDENT – FRINGE GROUPS “COME OUT OF THE WOODWORK” DEMANDING SPECIAL RIGHTS.

  • sabulaman

    I showed appreciation/support mainly for Mr. Cathy’s first amendment rights. (even though I do agree with his views on marriage) His views were not different from most views until the big city mayors decided to make a big issue of them. What Mr. Cathy should do is sue their pants off. Give them a taste of their own medicine. Besides, they need him more than he needs them.

    • stansell5

      My outrage with this whole situation is that the two mayors of Chicago and Boston stepped out and declaired that Chic-fil-A is not welcomed in their cities…..WHAT????? That is when I draw the line; I have to show my support for this company. As an American I support the right of a business owner to have a personal opinion! It is so sad that two mayors of two of America’s largest cities are so ignorant that they would actually make statements in Public like this. I would hope that as a rule if you run for PUBLIC office in the United States of America you should at least understand the First Amendment of the Constitution. Freedom of Speech…..Duh!!!!

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “stansell5,” GREAT COMMENTS.

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

      Amen to that. The mayor of Chicago belongs to a lot a gay spa’s, says it all, so did obozo before he got to Washington.

  • Brad

    My Family and I went to our local Chick-Fil-A and was astonished at the sheer number of people waiting paitently in line and in the drive through. From the time we got their till the time we left, the store remained very very busy. I watched the news last night and at thousands of other Chick-Fil-A resturaunts the same was happening all across the country. I was out and about yesterday afternoon, listening to talk radio, the caller explained he took his son to eat dinner at their local Chick-Fil-A, when they arrived the store was closed, they ran out of food the sign read.

  • concerned

    You said, it A Nation in decline starts out with these problems and they multiply and will continue to multiply until life as it was intended and created no longer exists. Then we in essence destroy ourselves. Unfortunately higher education is brainwashing our children as they grow up into believing we must accept all of these changes as they come and accept them as normal and really normal no longer exists, there are no guidelines so how would they know.

    • gary baker

      sorry stupid but higher education doesnt affect the moral conscience it is neither good nor bad. It is what people choose to do whether they are educated or not. SO dont sterotype good and evil. it is in the poverty stricken streets and in high places.

      • Alan

        Sorry, Gary. You lost me with the word “stupid.” Suggestion: when placing a point, stop calling people names!

      • http://teamlaw.org/TrusteeMessage.htm Jazzabelle

        gary: ALL education affects the moral conscience.

        My guess is … either you went to college so long ago you don’t remember it anymore … or … you’ve been to college so recently that you’re still brainwashed.

        Keep visiting the site, dude … your eyes will open in time.

    • Mike B

      I agree with you Concerned. This does trickle down to where the influences on people is the strongest. It should be at home but since the schools have decided to make it their business to teach their personal moral agendas instead of just teaching academics todays kids and the new generation of young adults don’t stand a chance of forming an intelligent and unbiased decision in later life.

      As for Gary? Wow! Apparently he is threatened by any opposing opinions?

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “concerned,”

      IT IS NOT ONLY HIGHER EDUCATION. THERE IS A HUGE MOVEMENT IN THE “gay-rights” COMMUNITY TO TEACH “gay” TOLERANCE TO ADOLESCENT AND TEENAGE CHILDREN IN SCHOOLS. THEIR STATED GOAL IS TO ABOLISH THE ACT OF BULLYING.

  • Geoffrey Lantos

    What a sad, defeatist attitude you have on the gay “rights” issue. From a blog post by Tin Duncan on Worth Reading: “The majority of the American people are simply sick and tired of having the radical gay agenda forced off onto them. Americans are tired of being flogged as “extremists,” “homophobes,” “haters,” and “bigots” for simply affirming traditional marriage. Americans are tired of being told that they are the dangerous, radical, hate-filled fanatics for simply thinking that marriage should be between a man and a woman by a bunch of spittle-flinging gay activists shoving their rainbow triangles in everyone else’s faces and trying to destroy the lives of those who oppose them. Americans are tired of voting against gay “marriage” only to have a homosexual judge strike down the law or constitutional amendment by judicial fiat. Americans are tired of radical homosexual activists whining about how “oppressed” they are while at the same time harassing, giving out the personal information of so as to incite violence against, and threatening citizens with harm who had the audacity to exercise their rights to engage in political action. Americans are tired of left-wing mayors disregarding the 1st amendment and abusing governmental authority for the purposes of punishing businesses and individuals who stand on the opposite side of the aisle from them on this issue. Most of all, perhaps, Americans are tired of standing by and minding their own affairs while the cultural Marxists in this country tear down our institutions and civilization around us.”

    • http://propheticendtimes.wordpress.com propheticendtimes

      I AGREE TOTALLY!

    • patrice

      Could not agree more Geoffrey. Well Said!!

    • Tom T

      Keep in mind, the last gasp of some one losing a debate with failed or poor logic is to resort to name calling. I am a staunch constitutional conservative/libertarian but as far as gay marriage, I really don’t care what a gay couple does or does not do, as true freedom also requires tolerance for how others exercise their freedom.
      With liberals, however, tend NOT to think that way. A liberal has an opinion it has to be forced on everyone, without respect to tolerance.
      “I care not what you do so long as it does not break my leg, nor pick my pocket.”
      Thomas Jefferson

      • Geoffrey Lantos

        Pont take, Tom!

      • Geoffrey Lantos

        Point taken, Tom! (Sorry for typos.)

    • GRusling

      Well said! Tyranny is when “the few” attempt to force the majority to obey their wishes by force of arms, as in “the government”…

    • Dutchman

      Well said!!

    • Bill Hankins

      I think you are right we are all tired of being called all of these names when we voice our opinion.but when they do it it’s free speech!!!!!

    • Mike B

      Well said Geoffrey. Nailed it.

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

      Well put, agree a 100%. God Bless moral people who aren’t hater’s for disliking what God dislikes.

  • huntman

    I think Sam lost the point of all this as he often does. Conservatives did not go to Chick-Fil-A to protest gay marriage. They went to counter rabid anti-first amendment commies, whose idea of free speech is to have the right to tell you to shut-up every time you say or do something they don’t like. I am ecstatic that conservatives have finally decided to take these people seriously. This intimidation cannot stand. They are a real danger to our way of life. KGB anyone?

    • patrice

      Exactly! Which is why we went– to protest our free speech being denied just because we are conservative and have a different viewpoint. Sam is real confused!

    • boyscout

      And I think that you are missing something here huntman. I applaud your personal motivation but cannot see it in multiple postings here; hence no generalization on the conservative (or liberal, for that matter) perspective is applicable. Keep doing what you are doing and be an example to the self righteous.

      • huntman

        I hope you know what you are talking about, because I sure have no clue. What’s your point?

      • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

        so girlscout, anyone who disagrees with your agenda is self righteous? The fool says in his heart, there is no God.

  • John J.

    I agree that one cannot avoid every place that is owned by anti-Biblical people. I shop at Target, Home Depot, etc. However, I love to affirm those who stand up for the truth. Standing up for the truth has become increasingly unpopular and rare. When someone stands up, it gives me encouragement to do so.

  • Mary

    When I was in Chic Fil A yesterday, nobody was discussing homosexuals or same sex marriage. They were protesting Mayors and others attempting to block good wholesome business from being able to get permits or operate in thier city because of the owner’s right to practice his personal religious beliefs, or speak about them publicly. The left is trying to silence people. This was a first amendment issue to us, not a marriage issue. On the same day the HHS Mandate went into effect against dissenting business owners which costs them $100 per day fine per employee, which was also being discussed. This was about freedom, not marriage, for most of us eating chicken yesterday.

    • Bethaney Riley

      Mary, we ate there for your reason and also to stand against the moral decay that is currently thriving in our USA. Marriage is between one man and one woman. I am ashamed that we have a president that says same sex marriage is okay.

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Bethaney Riley,”

        I LIKE YOUR COMMENTS, BUT, REPUBLICANS HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTINUING TO NOMINATE “MIDDLE-OF-THE-ROADERS” FOR PRESIDENT.

        TO HAVE A PRESIDENT AND OTHER POLITICIANS WHO ARE RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES WOULD NATURALLY CREATE AN ADEQUATE SITUATION FOR THOSE WHOSE PRIMARY CONCERN IS FISCAL POLICY. NOMINATING PEOPLE WHO FOCUS ON FISCAL POLICY HAS PROVEN “god” DOES NOT NECESSARILY RESIDE IN THEIR HEARTS. REPUBLICANS WHO THINK THE “TWO Georges” WERE NOT GOOD PRESIDENTS ALSO DO NOT CONSIDER THEM TO BE OVERTLY “godly” MEN.

  • dan luster

    Why do I feel that gay marriage advocates will not stop once people accept their legal right of contract to marry? If this issue were simply a Libertarian matter of individual choices I’m all in. But it’s not that simple. Traditional Christianity has been a stone in the shoe to post-enlightenment leftists for some time. People , of course’ will have a right to marry outside these traditional churches. But traditional churches define marriage as a sacrament between one man and one woman. The key difference here is the word sacrament;not contract. The question is whether the First Ammendment right of these chuches will be sacrificed on the alter of “progress”, or will they be allowed the liberty to define marriage as they see fit, a sacrament.

    • Geoffrey Lantos

      Amen, Dan. Great point.

    • boyscout

      Traditional Christianity has been at conflict (and even war) with itself since Martin Luther. Earlier if you care to regress to the council of Nicea. Bless all of their definitions of “marriage.” And, although our government was founded by men with varied Christian beliefs and principles, separation of church and state was emphatically stressed. Government has NO business defining what comprises a “marriage.” In this matter, the concern of government is with civil affairs (no pun intended), taxation, and basic human rights. If their use of the term offends so many then have them strike it and refer only to civil union..
      Personally, I believe that marriage is a bond between two people that predates churches and even predates the 6,000 year (?) history of mankind to which many adhere. I am still single and do not expect to marry either a government or a church, I am, however, awaiting a response to my proposal of marriage to Monsanto.

      • dan luster

        Martin Luther broke with the Church over corruption,not the sacrament of marriage. The Council of Nicea settled the dispute of Arianism , not marriage. If you want to go back through pre-history, please name an ancient civilization that sanctioned homosexual marriage. Society can set its parameters as it pleases, even to its own demise. It has done so in the past ,and will do so always.

      • Neil Swan

        Allowing gays to marry doesn’t mean churches have to marry them. Some churches have aggreed to marry in states that passed gay marriage.
        The government is just talking about civil marriage. Treating people like people. Most of the ass hole here don’t beleive in treating people like people.

        Neil

      • http://teamlaw.org/TrusteeMessage.htm Jazzabelle

        It may be time for a legal/historical note. It is PERFECTLY LEGAL for gays to marry in EVERY STATE of the Union. What some states forbid is the issuance of a state marriage LICENSE to gay people.

        Marriage, itself, is a fundamental human right. It existed before any government was ever formed and before any church, temple, or other form of organized worship was ever instituted. No government–certainly not the American constitutional republic(s)–has the authority to require that anyone ask the state’s permission in order to exercise this right. It is perfectly possible to marry without a license, and if you write up a marriage contract and file it with the appropriate agency, the state has to recognize your marriage even without a licence.

        Private organizations–like churches–have a definition of marriage which they have the right to adhere to. For example, the state may not force a Baptist church to marry two gay people. That’s a religious definition of marriage. There is also a legal definition of marriage, which is simply a contract. Our federal Constitution recognizes the liberty of any two competent individuals to enter any contract they choose, provided that the contract does not require anything illegal of the parties. The government is prohibited from restricting this right of contract, BUT the federal Constitution does give government a role to play vis-a-vs contracts. The government’s role is to ENFORCE contracts when asked to do so in a breach-of-contract suit. So the government’s only role here is a role of SUPPORT for whatever private contracts people may enter.

        Historically, marriages were performed by churches and not the government. But most if not all churches, at some time in history, were unwilling to marry mixed-race couples. That is when the government got involved and started issuing licences to allow people to marry when the churches would not marry them. Now, for some reason, people have come to think that they HAVE to have a license in order to be married. This is just silly. A license, by definition, is permission to do something which would otherwise be illegal. But getting married is not “otherwise illegal.”

        Personally, I don’t understand why gays are in such a rage over not being able to get a state-issued marriage license, when it doesn’t affect their ability to get married. Maybe they just covet the warm fuzzies bestowed by the state?? Equally, I don’t understand social conservatives’ rage over the idea that some states might issue marriage licenses to gay people. Marriage licenses are dangerous, in my opinion. They’re the basis for the state’s power to tell parents how to medicate, educate, and discipline their children, and remove children from parents who don’t comply. I don’t understand why anyone would WANT a marriage license. IMHO, if social conservatives really wanted to hate on gays, they would be PUSHING marriage licenses for gays and avoiding marriage licenses for themselves.

      • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

        girlscout; seems you write history to fit your agenda, most of the founders were born again believers, all 13 original colonies have God mentioned in thier Constitutions, Congress even paid for Bibles to be printed, so grow up, learn real history and quit rewriting it for your own selfish agenda.

    • http://none Pat

      Dan, I like the way you think.

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “dan luster,”

      YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!; IT IS A “SLIPPERY SLOPE.” IF “gay” MARRIAGE IS LEGALIZED NATIONWIDE, GREEDY “gays” WILL ALSO WANT FULL AND UNCHALLENGED ADOPTION-RIGHTS, FULL AND UNCHALLENGED RIGHTS TO “OPERATE” FREELY AND OPENLY IN THE WORKPLACE, ETC. “Gays” WOULD BE E-V-E-R-Y-W-H-E-R-E!

  • http://yahoo camdenme2

    STARBUCKS AND THEIR FELLOW GAYS SHOULD SHUT UP . IF THEY DO NOT BELIEVE IN TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE ,THEN MOVE TO A DIFFERENT COUNTRY OR PLANET . I’M TIRED OF THEIR TRIPE !!!

    • Blah blah

      Congratulations, you have proven yourself no better than the liberals who wish to silence Mr. Cathy.

    • Franklyn Molina

      Personally, I am tired of the tripe from BOTH sides. E-freaking-nough already. I am sick and tired of the fear from right-wing christian whackos that think that it’s a sin for a man to love another man let alone another woman. And I am sick and tired of the left-wing radical communist scumbags for shoving their homosexual agenda in my face and screwing it up for EVERYONE; to hell with the homosexual groups for shoving their agenda in my mouth. You’re free to do what you want, but don’t force others to like it. And a reminder to businesses, stop feeling like you have to inject your personal politics in your business practices. Google, Chick-fil-A, Starbucks, that means you. And let me remind those businesses of a little something. Just because YOU CAN, doesn’t mean that YOU SHOULD; we don’t live in Should-land.

      • Brad

        Franklin,

        Please read this article it clears up alot of the misconceptions and what Dan Cathy truely said. http://www.getreligion.org/2012/07/wheres-the-beef-what-the-chick-fil-a-boss-really-said/

      • Aristophanes

        Franklyn – you really miss the whole point. Dan Cathy answered a question, he did not elaborate, he did not say I hate gays, he did not get all “right-wing Christian whackos”. Although, maybe to you, ANY Christian who supports the Bible is a “right-wing Christian whacko”.
        I agree with Dan Cathy about same sex marriage. But, I also agree with Dan Cathy about “live and let live”, Do not try to shove your agenda down my throat, majority rules, not 1.8% of the population. I also support Chick-fil-A because of the first amendment. Dan Cathy has every right to say what he thinks and feels, just like all the other companies mentioned. Whether individuals support these companies is the individual’s choice, not some politician or blogger, et al.

        • Geoffrey Lantos

          If this was Facebook, i’d hit the “Like” button.

    • RichE

      IMO America was founded on conservative and liberal principles, progressive and regressive values. To say, “leave” because someone doesn’t believe in your principles or share your values is counter intuitive to the principles upon which American was founded.

  • uvuvuv

    even the gay supporters must be wondering when they will be satisfied. well they won’t be. the next step will be magic rooms in the schools for one on one counseling. oh, and magic tents once the boy scouts are forced by the supreme court to accept them. will the gays overplay their hand? impossible with their deluded supporters. even as they are now pestering school principals to place their kids in classrooms with gay teachers they will join their fellow episcopals etc for the next step in their agenda. the gays have a collective intelligence, what one thinks they all think, so this makes them a formidable political force. in response to my criticism of gay pride parades, SA the other day said that gays have it tough, and the parades are one way they can feel affirmed as human beings. well no one handed out assignments saying who is who, if this was true they would have a case. the trouble is i fondly recall they day when the anti gay stance was universal, the gays had to establish their own societies in the back streets, and although no one liked them they agreeably went along with their situation. honestly they did. but the dems are always looking for new demographics and so they enfranchised the gays with their total acceptance and support. now the gays have school curirculums locked up, governmental mandate locked up and church teachings locked up. how can they feel so threatened by this one guy’s remarks? because they want 100%. even the most innocuous reservations a thoughtful person might have are unnacceptable and cannot be tolerated. there is no room for argument or debate. if you don’t believe me look back at the sweep of events in the last 20 years with this perspective and it all falls into place. but we got them, don’t despair. because they are missing out on that lift of the heart we all feel when certain cute girls come stepping into the room, all expectant and wide eyed. imagine going through life feeling that way with guys instead. can’t someone invent a better eye chart so they can see what they’re missing?

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “Gay” PARADES ONLY NURTURE THE OPINION OF THOSE WHO CONSIDER HOMOSEXUALS TO BE FREAKS. I AGREE. SEEING MALES WALKING DOWN THE STREET “en masse” WEARING DRESSES AND LEATHER PARAPHENALIA SUPPORTS THE ORIGINAL STANCE OF THE American Psychiatric Association.

  • uvuvuv

    mr sa also mentioned that with their tough lives gays are four times as likely to commit suicide. yep, no mental imbalances there. the trouble for gays is the ama took gay tendancies out of their ICD diagnosis code books, in recognition that gays are just like us, only different. this was done to take away any gay stigma. the trouble is many gays do have severe problems with their lives and need psychological counseling. but unless they private pay they can’t get these services because you see, being gay is no longer a diagnosis. sure the docs can fake the diagnosis, depression, but they must submit to the insurance companies detailed paperwork of the counseling sessions, and this would expose their fake diagnosis and the claims would be rejected. and so the gays were hoisted on their own petard, it was a victory for them when the new ICD books came out with the gay codes deleted, but this left many of them stranded without the help they need. not that i care, it’s just ironic.

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “uvuvuv,”

      HOMOSEXUAL CHILDREN DO EXPERIENCE “POP-SCHOOL” DEPRESSION IN DEALING WITH THEIR PEERS [NAME CALLING AND ISOLATION]; THAT IS NORMAL. IF DEPRESSION GETS TO THE POINT OF CONTEMPLATING (OR, “CARRYING-OUT”) SUICIDE, THAT SIGNIFIES SOMETHING DISASTROUSLY WRONG IN TERMS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND/OR EVENTS WITHIN THE FAMILY DYNAMIC.

      HOMOSEXUAL CHILDREN NEED SOCIAL OUTLETS. MEMPHIS HAS A PLACE WHERE HOMOSEXUAL CHILDREN CAN GO TO SOCIALIZE WITH THEIR PEERS AND DISCUSS THEIR ISSUES. I DO NOT KNOW HOW MANY CITIES HAVE SUCH A PLACE; I KNOW SMALL TOWNS DO NOT – THIS IS A REASON WHY RURAL HOMOSEXUALS IMMEDIATELY MOVE TO URBAN AREAS AT THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN.

  • bobgood1

    I believe this is another distraction from a failed Pres. Most people don’t care and are at least tollerant of other people’s likes. We can disagree with a lifestyle, and not partake. It is our personal freedom to have that right. The Gay community seems to be pushing their agenda, trying to make their view appear ” Normal.” It is being promoted. That is what the ” Straight,” people object to, not the lifestyle itself. Just like the Liberal Left, Gays are a very small minority. They just try to appear Large. I believe they call this Tyranny.( Minority controlling the Majority ) .

    • johnsmith@yahoo.com

      Love the sinner hate the sin. Let those that love the Lord hate evil for he guards the lives of his faithful ones and delivers them from the hand of the wicked.

  • EricH

    Be shure to mail your Chick-fil-a wrapper to Rahm Emanuel!

  • diderot

    Lets see. Politicizing the way a person has sex? No one should know how another has sex. I dont want to know how a colleague or anyone for that matter engages in relations. And no one has a right to wave their predilictions in my or your face. I believe this is out and out legal harassment. If some degenerate gets off from smelling stool, and then unites with the anal canal and maybe enters into oral sex thereafter, well thats their business and should remain so. The only time this should be made public is when, for ibstance, Barney Frank talks his shi&, clearly a sociopath who has engaged in anal activity prior to elucidation. Ultimately, and Frank proves it, you are what you eat.

  • swampfox

    As a Christian myself and raised with traditional old school values and even before I gave my life over to the lordship of Jesus Christ,
    I just knew queers were perverted,
    I as well am sick of having their perversion shoved constantly in my face!
    I could really care less what kind of weirdo stuff they do behind closed doors.
    Just quit shoving it in my face!

    Besides,when Jesus has them Chucked into
    hell,
    they’ll have all eternity as a charcoal briquett to regret it.
    Never go to Starbucks anyway,I do construction work for a living and nab a 20oz coffee from circle k.
    You sodomites enjoy your sick pervision here while you can,
    A never-ending eternity in hell awaits everyone of you!

    • SA

      Wow, you really do sound like a God fearing person who has given his life over to Jesus Christ. I am sure Jesus is very proud of you…

      • slylabs13

        Jesus taught more on hell than on any other single subject. If your premise that people who warn others of impending doom is unloving, then you will have to conclude that there was little love in the heart of Jesus. While Swampfox’s delivery leaves much to be desired, the underlying message is that ALL of us are destined to be denied entry into a place where no sin will be allowed. If not for the incredible act of sacrifice made by Jesus, God come in the flesh, we would none of us have hope.

        The Christian message of love is NOT that no one has sinned, or that sin is okay, but that God has taken the penalty for sin upon Himself, and then rose again, tearing the bonds of death and hell asunder, so that NO ONE HAS to perish. The fact remains however, that all who reject that offer are, in fact, going to perish.

      • uvuvuv

        shut up, sa, you can’t speak on that subject, just like i can’t speak authoritatively on what goes on in gay bath houses or jerry sandusky’s mind.

      • swampfox

        The FEAR of god IS the beginning of wisdom.
        yes god is love,but he is also judgement,
        To speak of Jehovah’s love and leave out judgement is a
        lopsided gospel and is not the truth!

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

      Well said, some people just can’t stand the truth, keep up the good work.

  • swampfox

    Rooster cogburn enters a room and catches two of them buggering each other…….

    yall know how this would end!

  • Cinci Jew

    Make your opinion known with your purchasing dollars. Chick-fil-A stands for traditional (normal) marriage while Starbucks and according to American Family Association Home Depot, Office Depot and others support homosexual perversions. I’ll shop with the companies which support morality and avoid the ones financing immorality.

  • Rob

    This is an issue that will probably never be resolved. In my opinion, as far as the Government is concerned, let all unions be a civil one – that way any two people of any sexual orientation can have the same rights across the board. If at that point people want to be “married in the eyes of God” then they can have another ceremony within their specific place or style of worship. I understand with this choice will also provide much controversy on both sides, however all parties will get the same legal rights and those who wish to follow their religious beliefs may do so without the Government dictating whether this union is legal or not. Tho I don’t drink coffee, I love to shop at Target, and the fries at Chick-fil-a are a hit with my family. Thanks for this article – I love to read and discuss things that are non-biased.

  • dan luster

    The number one form of true democracy is being able to vote with your wallet. After the 100th anniversary of Milton Friedman’s death, I cannot believe this matter is even open to debate. To those who believe that mankind must be guided by perfection of our natures, I ask one question…How?

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

      Turn your life over to Jesus Christ, it’s a matter of choice, real choice.

  • slylabs13

    Your foundational premise is wrong. People are not making where they eat a political issue. They are making the statement that if someone else is going to harass, nay persecute a business or a business owner based on what they state as their own personal beliefs, supposedly protected by the 1st amendment, then others of the same persuasion will stand with them in the exact arena that their antagonists chose themselves. Nothing could be more fair. Nothing could be more American.

    Beware the slippery slope!! Once you silence one group’s view in favor of anothers, you cut your own 1st amendment feet out from under yourselves and nothing will be left to protect you from the tide of oppression that will ensue.

  • clairemw

    And those who step aside and allow their fellows to suffer will have to accept that they are no less guilty than their counterpart aggressors of perpetuating a climate of hate in which atrocities* go unbidden and bigotry runs amok. A quick survey of history presents a powerful pattern: every generation has its conservative hang-up, its deliberately uninvolved ignoramuses, and its oppressed. In fact, our voices and voting dollars are among the most powerful methods we have of sending gay rights in the same direction civil rights, women’s suffrage, etc. More power to those who refuse to sit down and shove 500 calories of peanut-fried bigotry down their gullets.

    *[such as these: http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-07-24/news/32833161_1_gay-slurs-gay-woman-nebraska-woman, http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_20727464/northern-minnesota-gay-man-alleges-hate-crime-assault

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

      Better then what you cram into different places?

  • Rocky

    Nice rationalization…but there is a difference between what the two sides are doing. One side is attempting to intimidate while the other is merely pushing backing, attempting to stand up for their views. This may sound like a nuance, but consider your own words…notice that conservatives are either gay bashers, homophobes, mysogynistics, racist, etc. Yet what name calling do we hear from conservatives? The labeling itself, the naming calling, the thuggish tactics pretty much belong to the left. This is what happens when you really don’t have a sound argument and you;ve concluded to hell with the rules this is the way we think it should be and we’re going to make it happen that way, fairly or unfairly! In fact THIS is the difference between the Occuppy Movement and the Tea Party.

  • Rocky

    One other point to make here…you state that gays should be able to enter into contractual relationships…NOTHING is keeping them from doing that now. The difference is they want “official recognition”. They also want employers and governments to be compelled into contract with them, that is, should two create a contract of marriage with each other they insist on the ENTITLEMENTS that are recognized by traditional marriage. This suggests they want to compell others who disagree with them into contract with them. As a Libertarian you should see a problem with this.

  • http://gbvieto.wordpress.com deepizzaguy

    Simple solution to the haters out there. Just tell the opposite of their vile words and they will eat their crow and flee for the hills.

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

      What?

  • Pingback: Political Chicken And Coffee | The Partisan Ranger Blog

  • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.754 Benjamin Fox

    To all the preverts out there, nothing you call people nor what you say or how stupid you look in drag will ever change the minds of moral people, so go back to the closet.

  • Pingback: Taking up your cross is harder than taking home some chicken. « De Profundis Clamavi ad Te, Domine

  • Ms.Young

    What Are Sodomites?
    Thinking Christians are interested in
    what the Bible actually says, not
    merely what it is presumed to teach.
    READ MORE @
    http://www.gaychristian101.com/sodomites.html

  • Middlemant@2012

    Just respect other peoples opinion .even if you donlt like it!!!you should not do anything in public that might offend others,very simple !!!!Besides,their are a lot more ,far more,important issues to deal with than just how people choose to live!!!

  • Pingback: My Homepage

  • Pingback: Tape in

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.