Skip to main content

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

Probably not. 

=
No? The Jim Henson Company ends their toys partnership with CFA over their anti-GLBT agenda and redirects their CFA money to support GLAAD. Then CFA posts in their restaurants that there are no more kid's meal toys available, not because of a civil rights disagreement with Henson, but due to a stafety recall of Henson toys instead.

The Consumer Product Safety Office will add these toys to their problem list is it's true--I'm betting it is. If it shouldn't be true, I will be disappointed in the Chick-fil-a Company.

 

A.Dot? You've never had a Chick-fil-a? Or do you mean you've just never sat down in one their luxurious restaurants? I knew there was something "fishy" about you.

Sounds like chick fil a is just full of chicken, uh, feed. I've eaten there twice in my life. The first time (Huntsville) I had the chicken sandwich-chicken seasoned and marinated in dill pickle juice, on a bun with a pickle. It was OK but can be done as well or better at home . Second/last time, Madison, had the chicken salad sandwich-tasted like sawdust, homemade is way better.

 

 

http://www.businessinsider.com...-a-kids-meals-2012-7

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...l-gay_n_1699597.html

Originally Posted by FirenzeVeritas:

A.Dot? You've never had a Chick-fil-a? Or do you mean you've just never sat down in one their luxurious restaurants? I knew there was something "fishy" about you.

==
I've never been to one of their restaurants or purchased or eaten any of their products. I've even been given coupons for free chicken sandwiches for several years now and either decline them or throw them away afterward. That's how I roll.

It would appear that it's  Jim Henson's company who lied first. If CFA did the recall on the 19th, then Henson's action was retaliatory.

 

 

 

Ask Jim Henson Company why they're no longer partnering with Chick-fil-A and they'll cite the restaurant president's views on homosexuality, but ask Chick-fil-A why the Muppet toys are no longer for sale and they'll blame "potential safety concerns." Tiffany Greenway, a Chick-fil-A spokeswoman, tells The Atlantic Wire that the food chain decided to stop handing out the toys, explaining, "I can confirm that it is true that Chick-fil-A voluntarily withdrew the Jim Henson kids meal toys nationwide because of a potential safety concern. This is unrelated to the Jim Henson announcement." She is referring to the Jim Henson Company's announcement on Facebook on July 20 that given Chick-Fil-A President Dan Cathy's comments that "we are inviting God's judgment on our nation," by redefining marriage they "do not wish to partner with them on any future endeavors" and they were donating the money Chick-fil-A paid them to GLAAD. 

 

On Tuesday the Facebook group "Wipe out Homophobia" group posted a photo of this Chick-fil-A sign which says the toys had a "possible safety issue" but "there have not been any cases in which a child has actually been injured." That explanation was met with some skepticism from some people who thought Chick-fil-A was looking to avoid explaining to children why the Muppets no longer liked them any more -- an admittedly complicated conversation. Jim Henson Company spokesperson Nicole Goldman said she had no comment on Chick-fil-A's recall or its timing. But for Chick-fil-A's part, Greenway said the company decided to pull the Muppet toys in July 19, one day before the Henson Company said they were parting ways with the fast-food chain.

Wow- see? It's been all over the media because the company stands up for their beliefs and values. And they are called bigots? Here is the part where I'm taking it personally, because I share chickfila's values. So? Am I a bigot? I don't think so- I do believe in the family, as God intended it to be. I admire their staying closed on Sunday when that is against the grain here in the US. (side bar- most businesses are closed on Sunday's in Canada and most of Europe as well) I can say this and in the same breath say that I love all people- gay, straight....whatever. Do I approve of their lifestyle? Well, no- but do they need my approval? No. People are free to do or be whatever they want to be, and we do not have the authority or the right to judge them. Quite frankly it would be exhausting to have to research every company's politics to determine whether or not I do business there.
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by FirenzeVeritas:

A.Dot? You've never had a Chick-fil-a? Or do you mean you've just never sat down in one their luxurious restaurants? I knew there was something "fishy" about you.

==
I've never been to one of their restaurants or purchased or eaten any of their products. I've even been given coupons for free chicken sandwiches for several years now and either decline them or throw them away afterward. That's how I roll.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Most of the large apes just gobble them up with glee.

For a  business owner to be penalized for exercising free speech is the real problem here.

Is free speech only free when every one agrees with it?

Where is the 'tolerance' of others' point of view?

Where is the acceptance of having a different opinion?

Had the owner declared he was in favor of legalizing marijuana, would that have been accepted by the liberal crowd?

Chick-fil-A headquarters told The Consumerist that despite what is written in their signs, there is no actual "recall" of the toys. CFA headquarters instead called it a "voluntary withdrawal" which they claim is wholly unrelated to the Jim Henson Company’s refusal to do business with them for their bigoted views & actions. The Consumerist also contacted the Consumer Product Safety Commission about the alleged recall of toys and they confirmed that the CPSC has no record of any recall related to the toys in question.
http://consumerist.com/2012/07...age-controversy.html

Originally Posted by Crumbpicker:

For a  business owner to be penalized for exercising free speech is the real problem here.

Is free speech only free when every one agrees with it?

Where is the 'tolerance' of others' point of view?

Where is the acceptance of having a different opinion?

Had the owner declared he was in favor of legalizing marijuana, would that have been accepted by the liberal crowd?

==
This is not about stifling free speech at all. It's about American consumers also having the right to choose where to spend their money while socially ostracising a company that fights against all  Americans having equal rights.

No one has ever said that the CFA's CEO can't say whatever the hell he wants. He made his bed, now he has to lie in it.

Free speech only means that the government can't punish you for something you say, not that you can say anything you want and no one can criticize you or choose not to do business with you. And really, it's not just that people disagree with Dan Cathy, since all of us probably do business with people with different political opinions from our own pretty much every day, but that Chick-fil-A donates millions of dollars to groups that are actively campaigning to prevent gay people from being able to marry. Understandably, some people don't want to spend their money at Chick-fil-A as a result.

Originally Posted by vplee123:
Adot, true dat. I still do not think his comments warranted him to be called a bigot, though....

==
Again, it's not so much about his comments but his actions by way of CFA. He's actively channeling millions from CFA's profits to limit the rights of his fellow Americans. Throughout American history such a stance against civil rights has always, always been proven to be wrong and embarrassing in hindsight. Whether it's done in Jesus' name or not, this issue is no different.

BIGOT: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Again, it's not so much about his comments but his actions by way of CFA. He's actively channeling millions from CFA's profits to limit the rights of his fellow Americans.

BIGOT: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

________

What about the millions that are raised for gay rights? Are gays limiting the rights of fellow Americans?

As for your definition of Bigot, you meant it for Bill Gray, right?

Originally Posted by vplee123:
Wow- see? It's been all over the media because the company stands up for their beliefs and values. And they are called bigots? Here is the part where I'm taking it personally, because I share chickfila's values. So? Am I a bigot? I don't think so- I do believe in the family, as God intended it to be. I admire their staying closed on Sunday when that is against the grain here in the US. I can say this and in the same breath say that I love all people- gay, straight....whatever. Do I approve of their lifestyle? Well, no- but do they need my approval? No. People are free to do or be whatever they want to be, and we do not have the authority or the right to judge them. Quite frankly it would be exhausting to have to research every company's politics to determine whether or not I do business there.

_________

Good points & I agree. My opinion is not worth pee here but I give it anyway. (some here hate me for that)

I don't think you're a bigot at all. You are the only Christian on here that I have seen stand & say that you believe in the family, as God intended it to be, [if He is real].  I have said that I believe in the traditional family & some has slammed me for it, others just don't pay any attention because I'm not a Christian. I may not be but I have values, just like anyone else.

 

People that see nothing wrong with gays marrying think that those of us that do not approve of their lifestyle is judging them with hate & condemnation. That's not it at all. We all have opinions & each one of us should have the right to give it w/o being attacked.

 

Veep, you mentioned that you don't have the authority or the right to judge them. I think discernment is the kind of judgment God expects Christians to use. Paul told the Christians at Thessalonica, "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good". The word prove means to test, examine, and/or discern. The notion is to examine something & judge whether it's worthy or not, not to knock someone in the head with Hell & brimstone judgment.

 

I’m not talking about the kind of judgment that Bill Gray loves to put forth on this forum. I would describe what he does as the pride-filled criticism of a hypocrite who is critical of another person in order to make himself look good or justify sinful behavior in his own life! He points out our faults when he has bigger faults of his own. That kind of judgment is wrong! You know it & I know it, as most here do, but Bill is one of those that’s always right & there’s no room for discussion.

I may not know what's real/not real, but I love the discussions we can have in peace on here. I'm always looking to learn something.

 

 

 

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

A Dot, I have great respect for you.  I am disappointed that you are accepting the postings of cross-"verified" blogs and trolls on Facebook with so little skepticism.

==
I'm sorry to disappoint. I haven't yet seen an extensive NYT expose on these matters. I am more than willing to follow the facts where they lead though. If you have more substantial sources please share.

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Again, it's not so much about his comments but his actions by way of CFA. He's actively channeling millions from CFA's profits to limit the rights of his fellow Americans.

BIGOT: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

________

What about the millions that are raised for gay rights? Are gays limiting the rights of fellow Americans?

As for your definition of Bigot, you meant it for Bill Gray, right?

==
Yeah, BG and the prez of CFA. You can't have a live and let live attitude, like vp, and be a bigot.

Please, please, describe in detail how gay America gaining equal rights limits the rights of other Americans...

Do you also believe that when women and blacks gained equal rights in America that it limited the rights of men and whites?

As Chicago became the latest city to tell Chick-fil-A it isn't welcome because its president doesn't support gay marriage, legal experts said the communities don't have a drumstick to stand on.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel became the second big-city mayor to blast the company over president Dan Cathy's comment last week that he is “guilty as charged” for supporting the traditional definition of marriage. Emanuel spoke up after Alderman Proco Joe Moreno announced he intends to block the chain from opening its second Chicago location over his stance.

But barring the popular fast-food restaurant over the personal views of Cathy is an “open and shut” discrimination case, legal scholars told FoxNews.com.

“The government can regulate discrimination in employment or against customers, but what the government cannot do is to punish someone for their words,” said Adam Schwartz, senior attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. “When an alderman refuses to allow a business to open because its owner has expressed a viewpoint the government disagrees with, the government is practicing viewpoint discrimination.”

"What the government cannot do is to punish someone for their words.”

- Adam Schwartz, American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois

The ACLU “strongly supports” same-sex marriage, Schwartz said, but noted that if a government can exclude a business for being against same-sex marriage, it can also exclude a business for being in support of same-sex marriage.


It's a free speech issue.
Originally Posted by vplee123:
Wow- see? It's been all over the media because the company stands up for their beliefs and values. And they are called bigots? Here is the part where I'm taking it personally, because I share chickfila's values. So? Am I a bigot? I don't think so- I do believe in the family, as God intended it to be. I admire their staying closed on Sunday when that is against the grain here in the US. (side bar- most businesses are closed on Sunday's in Canada and most of Europe as well) I can say this and in the same breath say that I love all people- gay, straight....whatever. Do I approve of their lifestyle? Well, no- but do they need my approval? No. People are free to do or be whatever they want to be, and we do not have the authority or the right to judge them. Quite frankly it would be exhausting to have to research every company's politics to determine whether or not I do business there.

**********************************

You're not a bigot.  

You're one the kindest, and sweetest out there 

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

If Cathy has to catch Hell for supporting the traditional definition of marriage, where is the outrage for Obama being against the traditional definition of marriage?

Cathy is only a business owner, & Obama is the President of the United States, but he gets a pass.

Why is that?

==
semi,
Are you bigoted against gays? You didn't respond to my questions on your feelings about equal rights for GLBTs.

"Traditional marriages" through the ages? White with white only, black with black only, "tribes with the same tribe" only, one religion with the same religion only, and so on and so on. Isn't it still that way in some places? People are forced to give up their belief, turn their back on their church, and in some cases their family, and convert to another person's "faith" if they want to get married without causing a "war" in the churches and families. 

 
Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

If Cathy has to catch Hell for supporting the traditional definition of marriage, where is the outrage for Obama being against the traditional definition of marriage?

Cathy is only a business owner, & Obama is the President of the United States, but he gets a pass.

Why is that?

==

Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
semi,
Are you bigoted against gays? You didn't respond to my questions on your feelings about equal rights for GLBTs.

________

I'm not bigoted at all & a friend of mine that has been gay for 20 years would tell you the same thing. We've discussed it & she herself believes it's wrong biblically & that she & her partner will go to Hell when they die. I suppose I still have some of that Christian raising inside of me that if God/Bible is real, then I think it's wrong. 

You do know how a man/man & woman/woman have sex, right? It's their choice & if they want to have same sex, then they can have at it but I don't have to agree that it's right.

 

I said what I did about Obama because Cathy is catching more Hell about his stance than Obama did.

 

I should never have asked you the question I did. It bordered on Politics & that is one subject I don't like to discuss. I will give my opinion about some things because I have that right, just as you do, but I won't get into a debate about it. Discussion about Religion can get heated but discussions about Politics can get downright mean, & brings out the worse in people.

I enjoy reading your post so can we just agree to disagree & let it go at that?

 


 

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

one religion with the same religion only, and so on and so on. Isn't it still that way in some places? People are forced to give up their belief, turn their back on their church, and in some cases their family, and convert to another person's "faith" if they want to get married without causing a "war" in the churches and families. 

_________

I know a strong-in-her-faith Pentacostal that married a strong-in-his-faith Church of Christ. They never visit the other's church. His family just almost disowned him, didn't speak to him for years, until they got grandchildren. They still don't have anything to do with their DIL. They believe her to be in a cult.

Those poor kids go to one church one week-end & the other one the next week-end & they rotate Wednesday nights.  

Originally Posted by BFred07:

I am not very familiar with the pro family things that Chick Fil A supports and don't have a huge problem with that (at least not enough to boycott) as it would be hypocritical for me to boycott them and not also give up using gasoline as the money I use to buy oil/gas goes to some middle east ruler that actually has people executed for being gay. 

 My problem with Chick Fil A comes from another point of view and that is the bullying that they are giving the guy about the "Eat More Kale" T-Shirts http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12...-by-chick-fil-a.html

Anyway, Chick Fil A seems to think they should have the exclusive right to the phrase "eat more" and the kale guy is not the first of their victims. If I recall correctly, there was a popular bumper sticker in the 60's(or before), 70's, and 80's that read "eat more possum", this was long before chick fil a started using the phrase and likely where they got the idea for their eat more chicken phrase. 

___

While I share the views of Mr. Cathy regarding marriage, I deplore his company's bullying of the artist who designed the "Eat More Kale" T-shirts.  "Eat More" is not an intellectual property and Chick-Fil-A has no right to the exclusive use of those two words simply because they appear as part of the company's advertising slogan.  They will lose if this issue goes to court, and they probably know that, but their strategy seems to be one of intimidation, in hopes that the artist will surrender rather than fight a costly legal battle.  I hope that Chick-Fil-A has to Eat More Crow on this issue.

Originally Posted by Contendah:
 

While I share the views of Mr. Cathy regarding marriage, I deplore his company's bullying of the artist who designed the "Eat More Kale" T-shirts.  

__________

Not intended to offend but I'm shocked that you share his views regarding marriage. I thought from the way you talk (typed), that you were for gay marriage.

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:
Originally Posted by Contendah:
 

While I share the views of Mr. Cathy regarding marriage, I deplore his company's bullying of the artist who designed the "Eat More Kale" T-shirts.  

__________

Not intended to offend but I'm shocked that you share his views regarding marriage. I thought from the way you talk (typed), that you were for gay marriage.

___

You, like many others, have incorrectly concluded that certain of my "liberal views" somehow obligate me to accept all or virtually all of the tenets of  a very broad liberal agenda.

 

That just ain't so.

 

I have never endorsed gay marriage, implicitly or explicitly.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×