Violence Against the LGBT Community

[hey]

You can't pick and choose your battles.

You most certainly can. No one can fight every battle.

Exxon - they don't have any policies in the work place to prohibit harassment against those who are openly gay

Doesn't the law already handle that...?

Walmart - The son of the founder of Walmart gave a large contribution to a campaign to prevent gay couples from adopting children in Arkansas

Does his son run walmart?

[Yugl]

You most certainly can. No one can fight every battle.

You can in general, but then you cannot honestly claim to maintain principle over pragmatics. Given the breakdown that Rkenshin layed out (And even my own situation in which I've never paid for CFA but have eaten the food when offered for free), that's the only justification they may use against those continuing to eat at the restaurant.

[Demosthenes11]

You can't pick and choose your battles.

The fuck? Nobody can ever protest anything because they don't protest everything? This might literally be the dumbest thing I've ever read on the internet. Seriously. Not joking.

[Kuya]

I wish fighting off anti-gay groups was just an issue of principle. Unfortunately some people actually have skin in the game.

[Apelila]

^ I think the worst thing through all of this has been the reminder that it's not that people are against us, it's that they don't care because we don't matter to them.

[Yugl]

I may not apply to your offense since I don't eat at said restaurant, but your rhetoric is such an egregious breach of truth that it's baffling. First, the point about picking battles is only relevant when you're bitching about others not boycotting CFA (Which happens to be the case). A person that chooses not to boycott CFA is effectively "picking their battles" just as how you or other people "pick your battle" by not choosing to boycott other supporters of the anti-gay agenda. A person that argues against this with pragmatics (That Oil, Walmart, etc are more difficult to sacrifice)is no longer placing principle first. Thus, the criticism is that you are making a pragmatic, not a principled, choice just as how the people choosing to continue eating at CFA are making their own pragmatic choice. Again, rebound to what RKenshin said and it becomes clear that the difference between people high-horsing their boycott and those opting out of the boycott (Yet, still in favor of same sex marriage) is so miniscule that the high-horse becomes laughable.

Second, the claim that people don't care about you because they don't boycott is just an inflammatory tool. What's being denied by the funded group is the right to marry. Legal loopholes makes this a great deal for benefits, particularly those related to monetary and adoption benefits. What same-sex marriage wouldn't solve is the hate and general disgust for homosexuality. That hate and disgust is what it means for people to not care about you and it is that disgust that motivates anti-same-sex marriage movements. However, failing to prevent these movements is not indicative of disgust. Yet, you seem to believe that.

[hey]

What same-sex marriage wouldn't solve is the hate and general disgust for homosexuality.

No, i'm pretty sure it would, at least to an extent. When the law says gays aren't as important and are worth less than heterosexuals, then it is a lot easier for others to think the same way.

[Yugl]

Legality. Enforcement. Social acceptance.

Hate and disgust fall under the third. Legality of same-sex marriage applies to the first. Few speak of the second. Each, historically, has proven independent of each other.

African-Americans actually saw legal inclusion early (Prior to the Civil Rights movement), but it was the 1964 CRA and 1965 VRA (Arguably, the more powerful act) that brought the enforcement necessary for the prior legal provisions to matter. We still have yet to see ubiquitous acceptance.

Abortion reached legality, but still lacks enforcement (As well as social acceptance).

Although you can propose that the first two are necessary for reaching social acceptance, there's hardly any conclusive evidence to believe so. You would be engaging in speculation.

[Dimmauk]

And the worst part is, with all that greasy food you're eating and all the anger i'm causing, i might just be the end of you.

Are you calling him/her fat? What's the deal with gays and fatties? How many fat people have to kill themselves cause gays bullied them before the gays realize how horrible they are treating fatties?!

[Milkster]

Are you calling him/her fat? What's the deal with gays and fatties? How many fat people have to kill themselves cause gays bullied them before the gays realize how horrible they are treating fatties?!

You are simply the worst.

[Penthesilea]

Urban Outfitters - Donated money to Rick Santorum and also had Anti Gay Prop 8 shirts sold in their stores

And yet had an openly gay CEO (since retired/pursuing other ventures).

[Kuya]

I may not apply to your offense since I don't eat at said restaurant, but your rhetoric is such an egregious breach of truth that it's baffling. First, the point about picking battles is only relevant when you're bitching ab
out others not boycotting CFA (Which happens to be the case). A person that chooses not to boycott CFA is effectively "picking their battles" just as how you or other people "pick your battle" by not choosing to boycott other supporters of the anti-gay agenda. A person that argues against this with pragmatics (That Oil, Walmart, etc are more difficult to sacrifice)is no longer placing principle first. Thus, the criticism is that you are making a pragmatic, not a principled, choice just as how the people choosing to continue eating at CFA are making their own pragmatic choice. Again, rebound to what RKenshin said and it becomes clear that the difference between people high-horsing their boycott and those opting out of the boycott (Yet, still in favor of same sex marriage) is so miniscule that the high-horse becomes laughable.

Second, the claim that people don't care about you because they don't boycott is just an inflammatory tool. What's being denied by the funded group is the right to marry. Legal loopholes makes this a great deal for benefits, particularly those related to monetary and adoption benefits. What same-sex marriage wouldn't solve is the hate and general disgust for homosexuality. That hate and disgust is what it means for people to not care about you and it is that disgust that motivates anti-same-sex marriage movements. However, failing to prevent these movements is not indicative of disgust. Yet, you seem to believe that.

You're going to have a difficult time mounting a good argument because for the time being, the boycott remains an individual matter rather than a formal one. So for example, you can only talk about who i am or am not boycotting. Inherently you have no solid ground to stand on as you have no idea whether i personally boycott other antigay establishments, and i could tell you that i boycott all of them and you would never be the wiser.

I don't really care about principle in this issue. Like i already said, i have personal investment in this issue, thus my position is essentially pragmatic. For a straight person, however, then we may be able to talk about principle. For me, a principled action in favor of gay people would be preferable, but ultimately i don't care whether you support gay rights out of principle just as long as you do. So this squabble you have over principles and pragmatism are your own burden to carry.

I am going to assume your second paragraph was directed at someone else.

[thetruepandagod]

^ I think the worst thing through all of this has been the reminder that it's not that people are against us, it's that they don't care because we don't matter to them.

It's more that no one matters except themselves it's not that they think gays are any less important than straights, you are all equally unimportant when it comes to putting the self first.

[thetruepandagod]

Also fastfood is disgusting i hope you all get a heart attack.

[Brill Weave]

^ I think the worst thing through all of this has been the reminder that it's not that people are against us, it's that they don't care because we don't matter to them.

Panda summed it up nicely I think. It's not that people don't care about, it's that they don't care about anyone.

[Dimmauk]

Just want to say I'm never eating at Chickfila! LOL

[Fairy-Killer]

I once ate at the Chick-Fil-A at The Rim here in San Antonio. Thinking about it now, I feel like it's an awfully gay location for such an anti-gay company.

All jokes aside, what exactly does an anti gay marriage group do with the money? Lobby? Pay officials to vote against it?

[Cleveland_7795]

Just want to say I'm never eating at Chickfila! LOL

Clearly they don't need your business considering the record day they had on Wednesday.

[Melena]

I once ate at the Chick-Fil-A at The Rim here in San Antonio. Thinking about it now, I feel like it's an awfully gay location for such an anti-gay company.

All jokes aside, what exactly does an anti gay marriage group do with the money? Lobby? Pay officials to vote against it?

Pretty much that. Help with lobbying costs for anti gay legislation such as prop 8. The money has also been known to go to straight camps to try to "cure" the gay. Anti Abortion is another group that gets a lot of funding from business owners who lean heavily to the right.

[Dimmauk]

Thread still reminds me of this.