Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 03:40 PM) People are hypocrites, not a new phenomenon. I wish they wouldnt take that route because its completely unnecessary. I have no problem with Christian's, I have a problem with people who use religion as a rationale for discrimination. Fine, that's an acceptable position I totally agree with.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 03:35 PM) I know I've pointed out how silly the "you're just intolerant of intolerance!" line of 'reasoning' is before. Well I disagree. It's a hilarious double standard.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 03:34 PM) Can you point to any example of anyone in this thread, or really anywhere, demanding that Christians lose any version of their right to worship in the way that they choose? (Outside of perhaps "don't cover up for pedophiles"). Being treated negatively doesn't have to mean a loss of rights. Edit: Although you clearly think people shouldn't even be able to donate to lobbying groups (or groups that spend money to lobby) based on their beliefs, so I guess that's a right you want them to lose, no?

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 03:28 PM) lol Step 1: Complain that people sometimes regard Christianity as having a negative influence on society while posting examples of Christianity having a negative influence on society Step 2: Wait until someone points this out Step 3: GOTCHA! Just keep ignoring the fact that the people supposedly defending the notion of equal rights and equal acceptance are the same people that feel so much hate and animosity towards a specific group of people.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 03:07 PM) With some of your examples, Christian belief IS a problem that needs solving. It's not "interesting" that anyone is a Creationist. It's sad. It's not "interesting" that some people think gays should be treated poorly. It's sad. Exhibit A.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 02:27 PM) I honestly don't understand this "poor Christians" mentality. As a non-practicing Catholic, I can say that the Catholic Church (note I mean the Vatican itself) should absolutely be criticized for their handling of pedophile priests. Not all priests are pedophiles, but there were men in the Church who certainly turned a blind eye to the ones that were. It must be tough to be the majority religion. Christianity is mocked. Islam is mocked. Mormons are mocked. Every religion is mocked. Christians in government don't sit back and take it either. They amend state constituitions to make sure those icky gays cannot ever get married. They pass laws to make sure that evolution isn't taught in schools and that creationism is given equal time (without, of course, giving equal time to the creation beliefs of other religions). I don't understand what fight, exactly, it is that the Liberal boogeyman has won. Christian belief isn't covered as if it's one side of an argument, it's covered as a problem that needs solving. And it's not just "oh, that's interesting you believe that" it's "OMG, you're a f***ing dumb ass for thinking that way." Creationism? You don't believe in science, you're an idiot. Abortion? That's not a murder issue, that's an equal rights issue. Same with homosexuality. Oh, you don't like boobs on national TV, you're just old fashioned grandpa! Get with the times! Oh gawd, we have a President or Governor that believes that prayer will provide guidance? We're all f***ed! And on and on. Again, i'm not really religious, but I can see this plain as day. Religion, and especially Christianity, is still a huge part of society. No questioning that. But the coverage is almost ALWAYS negative. Some of it (priest scandals) for good reason. Most not.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 02:28 PM) nope, not even close Yep, i'll admit i'm wrong there after looking it up.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 01:37 PM) If you're for denying equal rights and equal access, you're a bigot. I'm happy that opposing bigotry is right up my wheelhouse. You're switching your arguments here, though. You said marriage started because procreation depended on it, which is silly on its face. I meant the physical marital act. Christ. The point of humans coming together as a social species, as opposed to roaming as loners, was to procreate. We've always been monogamous and "marriage" was a simple extension of that.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 01:19 PM) This statement is clearly false. Explain to me how the physical marital act between same sex couples can procreate life. My point in citing his blog was the bit about if you're against gay marriage your a bigot automatically. That's right up SS's wheelhouse, so I figured it'd get some discussion.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 01:03 PM) Um, no. We're just more open minded to being acccepting of other religions, orientations, and creeds in this generation. In my hometown, more people were Christian then not. The difference being they don't shove it on others. Almost all of my best friends are Christian, some very devote. I know they are, they know I'm a former Jewish Atheist. We never talk about it because it's pointless. One did try to convert me, I told her it was pointless and that the beauty of beliefs is that we are all right. The thing is, it's the people who are so vocal about their beliefs and try to make others folloe them that are looked down on. Because there are more Christians and the fact that Christians were allowed to do that for centuries, there are more vocal Christians. I'm not denying that Christians are still the majority, but in pop culture and the news they are not. Generally speaking they are almost always characterized in the negative because of their beliefs.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 01:04 PM) The norm for marriage has changed drastically over time. I mean, 50 years ago, interracial marriage was an abomination in many parts of the country. It's not even the same worldwide. How recent is the "No fault divorce" trend? Right, and absent some clearly rare examples, same-sex marriages have no history until recently. That's his point. Marriage started because creation of a life depended on it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 12:58 PM) Do we really need to go through how incorrect it is to state this current understanding of marriage is the one that has prevailed since homo sapiens first existed...or do you need the other 19 people in your Harem to bring you a dowry of 3 goats each first? Exception to the rule or the norm?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 07:09 AM) He didn't build that.

Sorry, I assumed your "we only care when the government enforces religious belief" point was recognizing the constitutional limitation of governmental interaction. Still, you're clearly going beyond that situation since here the CEO of CFA is not using government to enforce anything. Donations to a lobbying group is a stretch. Good response to Emanuel I hadn't seen posted yet: http://www.archchicago.org/blog/ Yep.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 11:28 AM) Well the FBI has been raping his wife for the last 7 years. True. And they took his kid(s) away.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 09:44 AM) That guy confuses the s*** out of me. My firm sorta laughs at the guy because his "food strike" is never more than a day or two old.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 09:43 AM) As soon as the government stops enforcing that religious belief, you might have a point. When prop H8 gets narrowly passed after a gigantic ad bombardment with Focus on the Family as its number 2 funder after the Mormon Church, then saying that isn't taking advantage of the government to enforce religious oppression is just false. By this logic any private campaign to lobby the government to do anything even remotely close to enforcing religious belief is unconstitutional. This is just so wrong.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 09:29 AM) Really, you want to tell me that running millions of dollars worth of ads trying to convince people to ban gay marriage has nothing to do with supporting government policy? (I don't have their spending on every issue, but they spent so much supporting Prop 8 in California they had to lay off 20% of their staff). That's like equating the guy at the Daley Center with a whistle and a sign with government enforcement of policy. So no. They're campaigning privately, which is entirely different from using the government to enforce religious belief.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 09:19 AM) No it is not. This is fundamentally false. And you know that. This is about a private company using its money and influence to make sure the government continues enforcing their owners religious beliefs and whether or not to support that company while doing so. And to a lesser extent, it's also about a pretty poor sounding government response in a number of cities. Explain to me how his donation to a group like Focus on the Family is the government enforcing those same religious beliefs. Lobbying = enforcing government policy? Really?

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 01:15 AM) With the economy turndown I encounter more people at the local grocery store using the link card. I also have run into lots of abuse. Take tonight for example. Woman in her 30's buys 80 dollars worth of groceries on the link card. Then has a seperate transaction for 120 dollars of alcohol. Walks about the front then gets into a brand new 2012 Audi A4. Leave the assistance for those who need it. This s*** makes me so sick. I used to work at a grocery store and saw this crap happen all the time. You buy all the essentials with your link and WIC stuff and then spend another $2-300 on junk food. The system is an absolute joke, but once you start providing the government teat there's no way of taking it back. And remember, 99% of the poor in this country are single mothers with 9 kids who just can't catch a break. None of those kids were bad decisions mind you, so we have the obligation to pay for them to grow up.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 08:35 AM) Greg, your god is not under siege. No one is forcing you to do anything. No one is trying to turn you gay. No one is trying to force you to get gay married. No one is saying you cannot go to church. No one is saying you cannot worship in any way you choose. All we are saying is that you cannot use the U.S. government to enforce your religious beliefs. From a believer but not necessarily a practicing Christian, being Christian in today's society, especially in the sub-35 year old age group, is equated to being a gay-hating, science-denying redneck. The liberals have absolutely won that fight, and there's really no debate about it. I think that was Greg's point. And no, you're saying more than "you cannot use the U.S. government to enforce your religious beliefs." The whole point of this thread is an owner of a private company having a religious belief that you don't agree with. And he's been raked over the coals for that belief. So don't give me this crap about it just being about people who believe AND use the government to enforce those beliefs. You obviously have a right do disagree with him and criticize him, but his Christian beliefs are absolutely under attack here.

Oh come on now, donating money to a group and telling your employees to keep the queers out of the store are two entirely different things. GMAB. Edit: and what as the CEO done to "actively promote" discrimination? Stating he doesn't like gay marriage? Edit 2: and if that's the case, that being against gay marriage is promoting discrimination, i'm sure some of you voted for/donated to Obama's campaign. You know, the guy who was also against gay marriage. So really you were actively promoting discrimination as well!

He reminds me a lot of Blago the way he thinks.

Still distinct from promoting discrimination or discriminatory policies.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Aug 1, 2012 -> 04:27 PM) ha Well Wiener Circle is notorious in Chicago, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wieners_Circle, basically the people yell and get in your face about service etc. They also have a "chocolate shake" where the women show their breasts. Late at night its fine, but this was during the middle of the day when I was the only customer. Yell at me, do whatever you want, but keeping my money is crossing the line. I had a similar experience, where I got a bunch of s*** for not tipping them $5 bucks. It literally took them 2 seconds to give me my order (for an overpriced dog to begin with). I told the b**** behind the counter to f*** off and have never gone back. Not worth the hassle. Maybe when I was 22, drunk and hungry at 2 am. But not now.