The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Off-Topic (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   Chick-Fil-A (restaurant chain) Controversy (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=285311)

Keiran July 28th, 2012 8:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elgyem (Post 7274662)
It's just a restaurant chain. The owners can believe whatever they want, and nobody should attempt to force their beliefs on them. It doesn't matter what the owners believe, as it's not like they're trying to force their beliefs on anyone. There's no reason for the LGBT supporters to be tearing their hair out, boycotting, and protesting over this.


Family values groups are not hate groups. It's not like Chick-Fil-A is donating to actual hate groups like the KKK, Neo-Nazis, or the Westboro Baptist Church. Seriously, calm down. Freedom of Religion means freedom to have a religion. I find it so funny that you atheists think you're so accepting of everyone, yet you hate anyone who dares have a religion.

I never said I was athiest, but you assumed correctly. You are wrong, though, I don't hate religion. I admire and respect Buddhism quite a lot. Christianity has a lot to learn from it.

Donating to and supporting anti-gay groups which stifle our rights is forcing a belief on us. Like I said, they influence politics which has a direct influence on the lives of everyone. They are psuedo-indirectly, albeit completely directly, forcing their beliefs on the world.

Also, the core of the KKK (the ACTUAL Knights) has never been racist or hateful, and are more accepting of different people than most Conservatives. Your view of them has been twisted by media and misfits of previous generations, just like how you assume every Athiest views you.

TRIFORCE89 July 28th, 2012 8:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluerang1 (Post 7272378)
tl;dr Owner of fast food chain, as a Christian, doesn't support gay marriage.

I mean really? They do not discriminate against anyone so I don't see why this was blown up. Especially in Chicago where a restaurant was not allowed to operate.

Now I know why they don't open on Sundays.

Yeah, what you said.

I'm not really up the story. Are they discriminating at all? Not serving or not hiring people as a result? If so, then they're clearly in the wrong. Are they contributing to organization to halt gay rights legislation? If so, again I can see why people would be upset. But I don't know if either is true, so I'm not upset.

Also, I don't think we have Chick-Fil-A here. So, I really don't care XD

At the same time though, if they're not doing something illegal and its just the opinion the owner/founder/president/whatever, what's the big deal? If it doesn't influence the restaurant or the public, it doesn't seem like a big deal to. If it is to you though, then boycott them. Don't buy their food or go to their restaurant. That's capitalism. But, the restaurant should not be banned anywhere because of it.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Scarf (Post 7274723)
Even if they didn't do that, there would still be a reason to boycott if you didn't want to support someone who was anti-gay. I know I don't like to associate myself with people who are anti-gay so it's perfectly reasonably for me to not patronize a restaurant that's run by anti-gay people.

If it's run by someone "anti-gay", you're not just hurting them (if at all really, they already have the most money). What about all the other employees? Front-line people. Middle managers. Service folks. What if it wasn't takeout and there were people who rely on tips? They're not necessarily against gay marriage, but you're taking it out on them

Mana July 29th, 2012 3:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRIFORCE89 (Post 7275386)

If it's run by someone "anti-gay", you're not just hurting them (if at all really, they already have the most money). What about all the other employees? Front-line people. Middle managers. Service folks. What if it wasn't takeout and there were people who rely on tips? They're not necessarily against gay marriage, but you're taking it out on them

Bit of a weak argument, as (for example) if a restaurant made awful food it would be the chefs fault - but apparently would be mean to not go there and continue spending money, as the waiters need it?

Zoachu July 29th, 2012 5:39 AM

I am not going to eat there anymore. I am completely FOR gay marriage. And the owner is spending his money on anti-gay stuff. People are ridiculous.

zenlor July 29th, 2012 6:08 AM

What if Chick-Fil-A released a statement against homosexual marriage? I think it is their right to do so. What if Starbucks is in favor of homosexual marriage? I think it is their right to be in favor of it. What if Oreo released a "gay cookie?" I think it is their right to do so. Now, here are four other related points I want to raise:
  1. What if homosexuals campaigned to boycott companies that released anti-homosexual statements? I think it is their right to do so.
  2. What if Christian fundamentalists campaigned to boycott companies that released pro-homosexual statements? I think it is their right to do so.
  3. What if homosexuals campaigned to promote companies that are pro-homosexual? I think it is their right to do so.
  4. What is Christian fundamentalists campaigned to promote companies that are anti-homosexual? I think it is their right to do so.
But here's another point, dear friends, which, I think, we need to remember always:
  1. What if one side enforced its views on others? That's not good and it violates human rights.
Summarization of my stand on the issue: Well, it is definitely O.K. to make a stand on an issue as long as you are aware that other people might react on it and might do different actions whether in support of or against your stand. I am a member of the Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ) and we are openly against homosexual marriage but we don't enforce our stand on others and we don't discriminate homosexuals since they are humans too, like us. By the way, we don't boycott pro-homosexual companies. In fact, I just bought Oreo. :)

AxeyWaxyWoo July 29th, 2012 7:40 AM

Sure, I don't agree with their opinion (I'm a gay FTM Transgender), but it is their opinion nonetheless and everyone is entitled to have their own beliefs as long as they don't force them on other people.

And eitherway, I'm vegan, so I wouldn't have ate there anyways. ;P

Esper July 29th, 2012 9:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRIFORCE89 (Post 7275386)
If it's run by someone "anti-gay", you're not just hurting them (if at all really, they already have the most money). What about all the other employees? Front-line people. Middle managers. Service folks. What if it wasn't takeout and there were people who rely on tips? They're not necessarily against gay marriage, but you're taking it out on them

My feelings is that anti-gay attitudes are on the same level as open racism. (I'm not making the argument that they're equal, just saying that's how it is for me. I don't want to derail the discussion.) I simply can't knowingly support something like that. I can feel for the people working there. They may not be hateful or anything, but I know that if I were in a job and learned that my boss did something like that I would want to leave that job. Or I'd speak out, or something.

If I was actively hurting these employees that would be a different thing, but I'm just taking my business elsewhere. Well, I say all that but I've never even been to one of these restaurants. lol

Mihael August 1st, 2012 9:56 PM

Chick-fil-a contributes to organizations that further anti-gay agendas and do things like support pray the gay away camps, which hurt LGBT youth.
I feel that as someone capable of empathy, it kind of makes sense to want to avoid giving money to a business like that

Dakotah August 2nd, 2012 6:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NarutoActor (Post 7272400)
I say good for the owner, he should be allowed to say and serve who ever he wants.

Yes, he should be able to say whatever he wants. However, that really isn't the issue at all. The issue is that he is using your money (if you frequent his establishments) to fund designated hate groups which actively work to remove anti-discrimination protections for gays and lesbians, and also seek to once again make homosexuality illegal in the U.S. If you don't mind your money funding these groups, then carry on.

You are wrong, however, that he should be permitted to serve whoever he wants. There are laws prohibiting businesses serving the public from discriminating against people because of their age, their sex, their religion, their ethnic background, their disability, and in some places their sexual orientation. If you deny service to someone because they are black for instance, you would be in violation of the law and would be subject to appropriate penalties (which could include the loss of license to operate).

Quote:

Originally Posted by NarutoActor (Post 7272400)
Chicago on the other hand, should not have banned said business, that is an infringement on their 1st amendment freedom of speech.

The alderman in this case is not seeking to ban the company from the city, rather he is trying to make sure that the company is going to comply with all the laws in the state and in the city, including anti-discrimination laws which protects gay and lesbian and bisexual citizens in the workforce. If you're going to start a business some place, it's pretty much a given that you would be expected to comply with all laws and ordinances in that area. If you're unwilling to do so, it's best if you start a business elsewhere.

NarutoActor August 2nd, 2012 8:40 AM

I went to Chick-fil-A the other day, just to try it out, and if anything this is media attention is actually helping the business. I saw so many people there it was packed, and it wasn't even there busy hours.

Sydian August 2nd, 2012 8:51 AM

Yesterday was their Chick-Fil-A appreciation day and it was packed. I'm sure some people were there to support free speech and their marriage beliefs and all, and my uncle even posted a picture of all the people inside and said, "Look at all the tolerant individuals here today." which sadly isn't sarcasm.

If you want a good read, because I'm sure if you signed on Facebook yesterday and you live in the south, you only heard the "Christian" side of things and how "Christians are the tolerant ones," then I suggest this. The other side. http://www.theopinionatednation.com/2012/08/02/the-other-side-of-chick-fil-a-appreciation-day-it-really-shook-me/

Bluerang1 August 2nd, 2012 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay_37040 (Post 7282549)

Yes, he should be able to say whatever he wants. However, that really isn't the issue at all. The issue is that he is using your money (if you frequent his establishments) to fund designated hate groups which actively work to remove anti-discrimination protections for gays and lesbians, and also seek to once again make homosexuality illegal in the U.S. If you don't mind your money funding these groups, then carry on.

No, that was the issue. Then it escalated to what you said to make the owner and company look even worse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay_37040 (Post 7282549)

The alderman in this case is not seeking to ban the company from the city, rather he is trying to make sure that the company is going to comply with all the laws in the state and in the city, including anti-discrimination laws which protects gay and lesbian and bisexual citizens in the workforce. If you're going to start a business some place, it's pretty much a given that you would be expected to comply with all laws and ordinances in that area. If you're unwilling to do so, it's best if you start a business elsewhere.

And they don't discriminate against customers or employees so what's the alderman's point? Clearly attention seeking.

Dakotah August 2nd, 2012 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluerang1 (Post 7282871)
No, that was the issue. Then it escalated to what you said to make the owner and company look even worse.

I'm afraid you're mistaken. Dan Cathy has a history of donating money to anti-gay hate groups. We've known this for years. Recently, Equality Matter compiled a report on Chick-fil-A's charitable work which found that the fast food chain donated nearly $2 million to anti-gay groups over the course of 2010. Among those to reportedly receive donations through Chick-fil-A's WinShape Foundation were the Marriage & Family Foundation ($1,188,380), Exodus International ($1,000) and the Family Research Council (also $1,000).

So, as you can see, this controversy began long before Dan Cathy gave his interview which has sparked all this activity both for and against the company.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluerang1 (Post 7282871)
And they don't discriminate against customers or employees so what's the alderman's point? Clearly attention seeking.

Again, I'm afraid you're mistaken. As an example, Chick-Fil-A is currently facing a gender discrimination lawsuit in Duluth, Georgia. In one former employee's claim, she states she was fired so she could be a "stay home mother."

From her complaint:

Quote:

19. During the Plaintiff’s employment, Defendant Howard routinely made comments to the Plaintiff suggesting that as a mother she should stay home with her children.

20. In April of 2011, Defendant Howard hired Bill Green (male) as a General Manager.

21. In April of 2011, Defendant Howard began having management meetings with Jonathan Jurardo (male), Jimmy Guerrero (male), and Green (male), and not including the Plaintiff.

23. On or about June 27, 2011, Defendant Howard told Connie Gravitt that he terminated the Plaintiff so she could be a stay home mother.

24. On or about June 27, 2011, Defendant Howard told Barbara Honeycutt that she was being terminated so she could be a stay home mother.

25. On or about June 27, 2011, Defendant Howard told Barbara Lord that he terminated the Plaintiff so she could be a stay home mother.

26. On or about June 27, 2011, Defendant Howard told Wendy Blankenship that he terminated the Plaintiff so she could be a stay home mother.

27. After the Plaintiff was terminated, the Defendants replaced the Plaintiff in her position as General Manager with Green, who is not a caregiver to any children.
Clearly, contrary to your assertion, Chick-Fil-A has, and is, engaged in discrimination. It's because of these reports and these stories that the Alderman has been seeking clarification from the company on their anti-discrimination policies. He has, to this date, not received a clear answer to his inquiries.

Here is a link to the complete claim:

http://www.glaad.org/files/101150536-Lawsuit_1.pdf

Sydian August 2nd, 2012 3:02 PM

It's funny that every time I sign on Facebook, people are talking about this and don't even know what the deal is. People think that everyone's up in arms because the guy doesn't believe in same-sex marriage. Like it's been said, the guy is entitled to his own opinion. But the money we pay at his Chick-Fil-A (tired of typing, seeing, and hearing that name btw) restaurants are going to anti-gay organizations. THAT is the problem that most people aren't understanding. If the money were out of his own pocket, then that's another story. It's his money, do what you want with it. But it's not his money in this case. It's ours. And one might argue that it's not our money anymore once we hand it to that cashier, but we're contributing. Isn't that just as bad? So if you want to contribute to that and all, I won't stop you, though I will wonder how you can give your money to an establishment that will turn right back around and give it to a group that will use it to go against basic human rights. It is some damn good chicken though, sadly. But there are other places I can get food from.

Something else funny? In 40 years, these people are going to look so dumb. We look at our history books now and think "omg white only places?! that's not right!" and in the future, kids will look in their books and think "omg two men couldn't get married back then?! that's not right!" I hope to be around by then.

TRIFORCE89 August 2nd, 2012 5:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sydian (Post 7283015)
But the money we pay at his Chick-Fil-A (tired of typing, seeing, and hearing that name btw) restaurants are going to anti-gay organizations. THAT is the problem that most people aren't understanding. If the money were out of his own pocket, then that's another story. It's his money, do what you want with it. But it's not his money in this case. It's ours. And one might argue that it's not our money anymore once we hand it to that cashier, but we're contributing. Isn't that just as bad?

They're a private company. Once you had over your cash, you have no claim over it. You make it sound like government and paying taxes where it still is technically the public's money. That is not the case here at all. It is not your money, you have no say on how it is spent.

You can boycott and whatever, but that just doesn't give them more money. The money they've already made is still their's to use as they please because it's their's and not your's.

Still, I'm not super familiar with all this. Is Chick-Fil-A anti gay marriage, anti gay rights in general, or entirely homophobic in general?

Dakotah August 2nd, 2012 6:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRIFORCE89 (Post 7283177)

They're a private company. Once you had over your cash, you have no claim over it. You make it sound like government and paying taxes where it still is technically the public's money. That is not the case here at all. It is not your money, you have no say on how it is spent.

You can boycott and whatever, but that just doesn't give them more money. The money they've already made is still their's to use as they please because it's their's and not your's.



True, it's no longer our money, and as you correctly point out, we can refuse to give them our business if we don't like what they do with it. So then, why all the stories about this company? Simple. To provide information to people who might frequent these establishments so that they might better understand where the money they give to them goes and let them decide if they want to indirectly fund these anti-gay organizations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRIFORCE89 (Post 7283177)
Still, I'm not super familiar with all this. Is Chick-Fil-A anti gay marriage, anti gay rights in general, or entirely homophobic in general?

Chick-fil-A is anti gay marriage, and anti gay rights. Through their contributions to various organizations they:
  • Support the re-criminalization of homosexuality (make homosexual acts illegal)
  • Support conversion therapy (a dangerous therapy that attempts to turn gays straight, which is known to cause depression and has been directly linked to a number of suicides).
  • Support nullifying the marriages of all gays and lesbians in the country who are married by making same-sex marriage illegal.
  • Support the removal of anti-discrimination laws that protect gays and lesbians in public accommodation, housing, and employment.

Something to think about whenever you buy a chicken sandwich from that place. What effect might doing so have later on on a gay relative, or neighbour, or friend?

TRIFORCE89 August 2nd, 2012 6:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay_37040 (Post 7283209)


True, it's no longer our money, and as you correctly point out, we can refuse to give them our business if we don't like what they do with it. So then, why all the stories about this company? Simple. To provide information to people who might frequent these establishments so that they might better understand where the money they give to them goes and let them decide if they want to indirectly fund these anti-gay organizations.



Chick-fil-A is anti gay marriage, and anti gay rights. Through their contributions to various organizations they:
  • Support the re-criminalization of homosexuality (make homosexual acts illegal)
  • Support conversion therapy (a dangerous therapy that attempts to turn gays straight, which is known to cause depression and has been directly linked to a number of suicides).
  • Support nullifying the marriages of all gays and lesbians in the country who are married by making same-sex marriage illegal.
  • Support the removal of anti-discrimination laws that protect gays and lesbians in public accommodation, housing, and employment.

Something to think about whenever you buy a chicken sandwich from that place. What effect might doing so have later on on a gay relative, or neighbour, or friend?

I don't think they have these eateries here? If they do I've never seen one XD Regardless, first bullet point alone makes them sound plenty homophobic so I probably wouldn't go if they did exist here.

Oryx August 2nd, 2012 6:40 PM

In addition, they donate to a group who spent money in support of the bill in Uganda that wants to make being gay punishable by death. That's what really pushed me over the edge on their policies to be honest.

Sydian August 2nd, 2012 7:56 PM

Quote:

They're a private company. Once you had over your cash, you have no claim over it. You make it sound like government and paying taxes where it still is technically the public's money. That is not the case here at all. It is not your money, you have no say on how it is spent.
The difference with taxes though is that you have to pay those, even if it goes somewhere you don't want it to go. OR WELL. You don't have to but lol you probably don't wanna get arrested. But you don't have to give your money to a chain that will give it to something you're not in support of. And I already said it's not our money once we paid for our meal, but the point is you still gave money to them, so in a sense, you're funding their anti-gay spending money. It's sad they made so much money yesterday for it from people that are intolerant and unaware of what's really going on. It's sad these organizations exist. It's more than anti-gay in my eyes. It's just...anti-people. Or anti-human. Something.

NarutoActor August 3rd, 2012 7:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sydian (Post 7283015)
It's funny that every time I sign on Facebook, people are talking about this and don't even know what the deal is. People think that everyone's up in arms because the guy doesn't believe in same-sex marriage. Like it's been said, the guy is entitled to his own opinion. But the money we pay at his Chick-Fil-A (tired of typing, seeing, and hearing that name btw) restaurants are going to anti-gay organizations. THAT is the problem that most people aren't understanding. If the money were out of his own pocket, then that's another story. It's his money, do what you want with it. But it's not his money in this case. It's ours. And one might argue that it's not our money anymore once we hand it to that cashier, but we're contributing. Isn't that just as bad? So if you want to contribute to that and all, I won't stop you, though I will wonder how you can give your money to an establishment that will turn right back around and give it to a group that will use it to go against basic human rights. It is some damn good chicken though, sadly. But there are other places I can get food from.

Something else funny? In 40 years, these people are going to look so dumb. We look at our history books now and think "omg white only places?! that's not right!" and in the future, kids will look in their books and think "omg two men couldn't get married back then?! that's not right!" I hope to be around by then.

This argument breaks apart from the fabics of free economics that what makes this country great. If you use that logic for everything, then you are the cause of every economic and social problem that was caused by someone rich. It is not the customers place to know where the money is going or care. If you want their chicken, then buy it, if not then don't. But you really shouldn't base your business on politics.

How is it a "Basic Human Right", if it was a basic human right then everyone should be able to get married, even children. To say it is a basic human right is even more obscure then even calling it a right, which marriage isn't. People are not entitled to marriage, it is a privilege, and quite frankly I wished it was more heavy regulated even between heterosexuals; maybe that would lower the divorce rate.

Race and sexuality are not the same, there are big diferences, socially, and legally. (Court Classification)

In this thread people keep saying "as long as they don't force there opinion" But what is wrong with forcing your opnion if you belive that is the right opinion. It happens all the time, if a state was to allow for gay marriage that would be forcing there opinion on the people of that state, it would be that, gay marriage is right. Teachers force their opinions on their students all the time. Depending on which subject it is, it is easier to get away with it. A debate is just one big struggle to force one opinion unto another one using logic, and truth. You can not even say that no opinion is right, or that this opinion is wrong, beaucse that would be your opinion and you would be forcing it. Even saing things like "as long as they don't force there opinion" is forcing your opnion on people who want to force there opinion; How ironic!

Mr. X August 3rd, 2012 7:48 AM

It's not forcing a opinion. It's giving these people the rights that they, as human beings, deserve.

Then again, this is the US. The entire country was based upon a double standard from the start, so it's no surprise that we are disregarding the words 'all men are created equal' again. We've done it in the past, we're doing it now, and we'll do it in the future too.

Anyway, as history shows, gays will eventually get the rights that they deserve, no, are entitled to.

NarutoActor August 3rd, 2012 8:05 AM

Why do they desire it, and why are they entitled to it. What have they done, what gives them this privilege. Marriage is not a right, this is a fact, if it is not given to other social groups, then it is not a right. How many ways does "marriage is not a right", does it have to be explained?

Zet August 3rd, 2012 9:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NarutoActor (Post 7284104)
This argument breaks apart from the fabics of free economics that what makes this country great. If you use that logic for everything, then you are the cause of every economic and social problem that was caused by someone rich. It is not the customers place to know where the money is going or care. If you want their chicken, then buy it, if not then don't. But you really shouldn't base your business on politics.

How is it a "Basic Human Right", if it was a basic human right then everyone should be able to get married, even children. To say it is a basic human right is even more obscure then even calling it a right, which marriage isn't. People are not entitled to marriage, it is a privilege, and quite frankly I wished it was more heavy regulated even between heterosexuals; maybe that would lower the divorce rate.

Race and sexuality are not the same, there are big diferences, socially, and legally. (Court Classification)

In this thread people keep saying "as long as they don't force there opinion" But what is wrong with forcing your opnion if you belive that is the right opinion. It happens all the time, if a state was to allow for gay marriage that would be forcing there opinion on the people of that state, it would be that, gay marriage is right. Teachers force their opinions on their students all the time. Depending on which subject it is, it is easier to get away with it. A debate is just one big struggle to force one opinion unto another one using logic, and truth. You can not even say that no opinion is right, or that this opinion is wrong, beaucse that would be your opinion and you would be forcing it. Even saing things like "as long as they don't force there opinion" is forcing your opnion on people who want to force there opinion; How ironic!

I'm not sure if I should describe the pain of one thousand brain cells dying from this post(and many of your other posts) or be on topic.

Claiming that people have studied the "subject" of homosexuality and is still against same-sex marriage is a joke. They can only quote old testament scripture, which is a huge riot because in the new testament we're told to love one another.
Marriage is in fact a right, people have the right to get married. When saying marriage is a privilege, you might as well be saying: breathing oxygen is a privilege. You are entitled to an opinion, you have a right to free speech and you have the privilege of being ignorant.

Oh, and instead of funding anti-gay organizations, don't you think all the money would be better off helping America's debt?

NarutoActor August 3rd, 2012 9:23 AM

Quote:

Marriage is a right:
This statement is not true, people assume that marriage is a right, and that if marriage is a right then gay marriage becomes a civil rights problem. However marriage is limited to hetersexuals as well. Roughly half of all states do not allow first cousins from marrying, and all do not allow marriage of closer blood relatives, even if said individuals are sterile. In all states, it is ileagal to attempt to marry more than one person, or even to pass off more then one person as one's spouse. Some states restrict the marriage of people suffering from syphillis, or other veneral deieses. Therefore, homosexuality is not the only group to be excluded form marriage.
As for studding it, yes there are secular arguments that can be made against gay marriage, it is not all religion.
http://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=285374

I am not sure if you read those arguments, or if you are simply trying to ignore the truth.

Sydian August 3rd, 2012 9:37 AM

Quote:

This argument breaks apart from the fabics of free economics that what makes this country great. If you use that logic for everything, then you are the cause of every economic and social problem that was caused by someone rich. It is not the customers place to know where the money is going or care. If you want their chicken, then buy it, if not then don't. But you really shouldn't base your business on politics.

How is it a "Basic Human Right", if it was a basic human right then everyone should be able to get married, even children. To say it is a basic human right is even more obscure then even calling it a right, which marriage isn't. People are not entitled to marriage, it is a privilege, and quite frankly I wished it was more heavy regulated even between heterosexuals; maybe that would lower the divorce rate.

Race and sexuality are not the same, there are big diferences, socially, and legally. (Court Classification)

In this thread people keep saying "as long as they don't force there opinion" But what is wrong with forcing your opnion if you belive that is the right opinion. It happens all the time, if a state was to allow for gay marriage that would be forcing there opinion on the people of that state, it would be that, gay marriage is right. Teachers force their opinions on their students all the time. Depending on which subject it is, it is easier to get away with it. A debate is just one big struggle to force one opinion unto another one using logic, and truth. You can not even say that no opinion is right, or that this opinion is wrong, beaucse that would be your opinion and you would be forcing it. Even saing things like "as long as they don't force there opinion" is forcing your opnion on people who want to force there opinion; How ironic!
Way to make a great holier than thou speech and take everything I said the wrong way! Just wow. For one thing, I wasn't telling people in this thread, or anywhere, to not spend their money there. That's their own business and I won't stop them. I even said that in my post. I don't know HOW that leads you to think about the economy when I'm talking about my own money and not everyone else's. I, personally, will not be spending my money there because I don't like where it's going. If you want to spend it there, that is your money. I'm not gonna stop you. You go on ahead. But to call me out and say I'm the reason for economic and social problems? Just...what. What in the world.

Who said I meant marriage when I said human right? This place donates to other organizations that are against homosexual behavior in general. Places that believe in gay camps or gay counseling. They even donate to organizations that promote the execution of homosexuals. So before you even bring marriage into this, tell me. How is the right to live happily not a human right? Why should they have to be killed? Or have someone teach them how to "un-gay" themselves? These types of things are infringing on human rights. Zet already went into the marriage thing for me, so I'm not going to be redundant.

Where did race come from? From my comparison of the 40 years ago thing? How are they not different? You don't choose your skin color, and you don't choose your sexuality. For a long time, an African American couldn't marry a caucasian, or at least the places they could marry were not plentiful. During this time, the places a man can marry a man are very limited. I will acknowledge that race and sexuality are very different, yes, but they are still very similar, especially in that it's not something you choose.

I can't wrap my mind around "teachers are forcing their opinions on students." I just...I can't. What am I reading? So, when I start teaching, I'm going to be forcing my opinion on my students that 2 + 2 = 4? That's an opinion? The way the letter A sounds. That's an opinion? The history in my state of Alabama. That didn't happen? It's only my opinion? Well shoot, I better not get in this major. The teacher example makes no sense. At all.

But you know, I'm done with this thread. I've had all I can take really. So this is it from me.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:16 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.