Rave this if you've seen enough about Chick-fil-A

by Woman of many faces~ijm Posted 2012/08/03 15:30:49

More polls by Woman of many faces~ijm

Christopher Kirchen 2012/08/08 18:40:24

I'm sick of liberals crying over spilled milk every two seconds.

reply
Titanium X 2012/08/08 15:53:10 (edited)

Tired of the drama surrounding the chain.

reply
Tastentier 2012/08/08 15:45:09

Chick-fil-A, Starbucks, rainbow-colored oreos... I'm sick of all of this. I don't care where companies stand on social issues. I just want to eat and drink without supporting anyone's political agenda.

reply
RawRsaurus 2012/08/08 14:47:57

reply
Chibi D 2012/08/08 13:41:17
Michael72380 2012/08/08 13:34:25

People can think however they want to. I personally believe that my big toe is the devil and my Mom's snickerdoodles are God. I am always in pain when I stub my big toe and I am always in heaven when I munch on those snickerdoodles. LOL

reply
Somkey the Hores 2012/08/08 10:37:58

If the Gayists hadn't gotten their collective knickers into a twist, you wouldn't have heard anything at all. Whine to them.
They're a bunch of crybabies.

reply
RawRsaurus to Somkey ... 2012/08/08 14:48:59

And this is the reason there's a problem in the first place. The finger pointing. Grow up.

reply
HAlex1972 2012/08/08 08:58:00

Raved.

reply
Stevethinks 2012/08/08 08:44:24

Y-e-s!

reply
Astro 2012/08/08 07:03:10

I have no care for Chick-fil-A, mostly because I have only heard about it in name, not what it is or what the significance of anything it is about is...

reply
KeriLynn 2012/08/08 05:30:36

+4
It is in the past and if the dude from Chick-fil-a wants to be an ignorant jerk let him it's his right just like we have the right to think he's a moron.

reply
Michael... to KeriLynn 2012/08/08 13:33:08

Damn Straight. Although, I will say that gives them the right to think we are morons too, but I get your point. lol ;)

reply
Texas Johnny 2012/08/08 02:48:43

Nothing to see here folks..... move along!!

reply
richie 2012/08/08 02:11:36

It makes no sense to dwell on it.

reply
Chukroast 2012/08/07 22:58:50

+1
Yeah, I think Shakespeare wrote something about it: "Much Ado About Nothing."

reply
Brother Bo 2012/08/07 19:50:24 (edited)

+2
It's just another distraction to keep the news away from the disasterous Obama administration...

reply
T J to Brother Bo 2012/08/08 05:22:48

Not really disasterous. That's just you projecting. Bottom line, this is about a chicken restaurant, not the president.

reply
Brother Bo to T J 2012/08/08 17:37:44

It's not about a chicken restaurant, it's about the gay agenda trying to force the rest of the world to bow to their will. Also about the rest of the world saying

reply
T J to Brother Bo 2012/08/10 02:46:13

Is that kind of like how conservatives try to force their agenda on the rest of the world. It goes both ways pal.

reply
merlinskiss 2012/08/07 19:11:03

+3
Yes, enough! Just choke that poor chicken!

reply
T J 2012/08/07 16:37:22

+4
I never ate Chck-fil-A, and I never will. The whole thing is ridiculous.

reply
Woman o... to T J 2012/08/07 17:18:51

+2

reply
intolerantrwj 2012/08/07 16:05:57

+2
.... would it not be just a hint of sincere to ask ...

....... ' Who brought this issue to the forefront ... Dan Cathy or the Media + complicit who attempted to rub his nose in the dirt '

Personally, they've caused me to frequent the establishment more frequently.

reply
Woman o... to intoler... 2012/08/07 17:18:40

+1

reply
intoler... to Woman o... 2012/08/07 17:25:29

.... always a pleasure < s >

reply
Scott to intoler... 2012/08/07 18:21:05

+2
It was just a small media story that should have been largely ignored, but conservatives got all butthurt and turned out in droves to support them which is what made it a bigger story. Notice the liberal protests against chick-fll-a have all been considerably smaller than the lines of bigots going out the door and circling the building in support of Cathy? And endlessly whining about how his free speech rights were supposedly violated? That tells you right there who's been making the bigger deal out of this. Just let it go--it's the anti-gay crowd who agree with him that have thrown a collective tantrum and turned this into way more than it should have been.

reply
intoler... to Scott 2012/08/07 18:39:50 (edited)

+1
..... Dan Cathy callled a Press Conference to announce his donations ?

I'm of the inclination that hate of Tradition as well as Religious bashing has finally brought about the desired reaction ....

.... now if you were in the midst of stirring a race riot that was somehow falling apart, added to that a couple ' False Flag ' mass shootings that are not causing the desired revolt, what would you do if you suddenly saw the opportunity in attempt to further divide the electorate ?

....... might want to ask yourself .... ' Self, who stands to benefit from mass hysteria ' ?

reply
Scott to intoler... 2012/08/07 19:03:13 (edited)

+1
Not sure what you mean by "hate of tradition", but if you meant "traditional marriage" we've already long since abandoned that. Arranged marriages solely for the purpose of procreation and to establish rules of inheritance and form family alliances are long gone. The new definition of marriage is about love and life-long partnership (as opposed to the husband essentially owning the wife) and those ideas are not at all traditional. Nor are they in any way incompatible with gay marriage.

Currently the majority of people still oppose gay marriage, so I will turn your own question back on you--who stands to benefit from mass hysteria? Look to where the bulk of the hysteria is coming from to find your answer. It's not those who support gay marriage who have made the biggest deal out of this--it's those who oppose it and they are the same one's who have the most to gain from bringing this issue to the forefront.

As far as I'm concerned marriage is primarily a religious sacrament and as such Government has no business licensing (either to allow or forbid) it in the first place. In the time of our founding fathers there was no such thing as Government marriage licenses--some words spoken over you by a preacher and a notation in the family Bible and you was hitched. .Government didn't ...

Not sure what you mean by "hate of tradition", but if you meant "traditional marriage" we've already long since abandoned that. Arranged marriages solely for the purpose of procreation and to establish rules of inheritance and form family alliances are long gone. The new definition of marriage is about love and life-long partnership (as opposed to the husband essentially owning the wife) and those ideas are not at all traditional. Nor are they in any way incompatible with gay marriage.

Currently the majority of people still oppose gay marriage, so I will turn your own question back on you--who stands to benefit from mass hysteria? Look to where the bulk of the hysteria is coming from to find your answer. It's not those who support gay marriage who have made the biggest deal out of this--it's those who oppose it and they are the same one's who have the most to gain from bringing this issue to the forefront.

As far as I'm concerned marriage is primarily a religious sacrament and as such Government has no business licensing (either to allow or forbid) it in the first place. In the time of our founding fathers there was no such thing as Government marriage licenses--some words spoken over you by a preacher and a notation in the family Bible and you was hitched. .Government didn't start licensing marriage until after the civil war and the entire reason was to prevent inter-racial marriage. The courts overturned that prohibition against the popular will of the people, and now the same is happening with gay marriage.

But in the meantime it is a wedge issue that Republicans can use to garner votes and they have used it in the past several elections and will try again to use it in this one.
(more)

reply
intoler... to Scott 2012/08/08 18:05:05

.... " who stands to benefit from mass hysteria ? "

November ring any bells ?

In my little world it's far past time to state to the voters ....' Mr + Mrs Traditionalist, your way of life is under assault by them ( point a finger ). We don't care who you screw, how you do it, if you had an abortion or if you don't own a gun. What we'd like to tell you is that your Freedom to do or own any of the previous is under assault by them ( point finger ) '

reply
Somkey ... to Scott 2012/08/08 10:40:27 (edited)

It was the GAYS that got butthurt, idiot. But then, their butts ALWAYS hurt.
And the gay demos were just FAILS.

reply
RawRsaurus to Somkey ... 2012/08/08 14:53:03

+1
There was no planned protest until that lame ass "Appreciation Day."

Anyway....BREAKING NEWS: the pity train has just derailed at the intersection of "SUCK IT UP" and "MOVE ON" and crashed into "WE ALL HAVE PROBLEMS."

reply
Somkey ... to intoler... 2012/08/08 10:39:32

+1
The Gayist crybabies,

reply
Daniel Secrist 2012/08/07 15:51:38

+2
Really. If you don't like their operation, boycott them, if you agree with them, and actually like their product, then bon appetite.

reply
Woman o... to Daniel ... 2012/08/07 17:18:31

reply
Rave 2012/08/07 15:00:29

+1
Yes! Can everyone please just drop it, the whole issue was stupid to begin with. What is the big deal even? I just don't get everyone's sudden obsession.

reply
Woman o... to Rave 2012/08/07 17:18:21

reply
Somkey ... to Rave 2012/08/08 10:42:39

Ask the Gayists, it's THEIR implosion.

reply
Rave to Somkey ... 2012/08/08 15:25:05

Both sides are making too big of a deal out of it. I don't know why it was targeted on such a wide scale for a boycott, but boycotts are fine in general because people can decide not use their money in a business, even I don't hold personal opinions of a business owner against their business myself.

But after that, all the "visit chick-fil-a" days and all the posts asking to support Chick-a-fil got a bit irritating too.

If you like their food and service, go eat there, simple as that. If you don't, eat somewhere else.

I had never even heard of Chick-Fil-A until this incident.

reply
Luv♥Luv 2012/08/07 14:37:41

+2
RAVED

reply