Emanuel goes after Chick-fil-A for boss’ anti-gay views

[Capt Worley PE]

What I find interesting about most political discussions on the web, is that there is a huge tendency of people who disagree with you to slap a label on you.

I guess people demonize what they don't understand.

 

[McEngr]

Haven't you heard? Jesus was a bigot!

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

 

[engineergurl]

except I know for a fact that I was the one who said

"corn and red velvet cake don't mix." ~EG

 

[wilheldp_PE]

I caught the end of a news story on NPR today that said the president and provost of a local university (don't know if it was Louisville or Kentucky) were going to stop eating at the Chick-fil-a on campus, and decide whether or not they will be allowed to renew their lease before next semester. Talk about an unprovoked over-reaction. I know that universities tend to be bastions of liberal thought, but damn...this is getting ridiculous.

 

[MA_PE]

It's funny (sad) how hate spead by one side just creates more hate on the other side and who wins in the end? No one.

I wouldn't call the CEO a hater - they just believe what the Bible says is true. That's the misinformation that exists out there - people who have never read the Bible read an article, media articles for yahoo and the like that spin information to grab readers, and then you have people posting about bad information that was never the intent of the spokesperson to begin with.

We live in the information age, but so many people believe they are knowledgable because they read about it online. We are so informed, but lack so much understanding - ridiculous.

Absolutely correct.

Concur.

Isn't this the same basis the militant muslims use to justify their jihads? They just believe whatever the Koran and their prophets say is true.

 

[csb]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/r-clarke-cooper/chickfila-empty-calorie-d_b_1711185.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false

 

[envirotex]

It's a sad state of affairs when Americans base their whole political affiliation on whether or not they will eat at Chick-Fil-A...

 

[Capt Worley PE]

A few goos quotes on the subject from This Week with George Stephanopolous's Round Table discussion"

WILL: It's a First Amendment issue that wouldn't last 10 seconds in court, to condition a government entitlement or privilege on the content of your political thought? Second, the head of Chick-fil-A is being excoriated by these people, by Rahm Emanuel, for example, for holding a view on marriage that the president held when he was elected in 2008.

WILL: The gay rights isn't driving this. The gay rights movement is far too sensible. These are pandering, third-rate politicians pandering to them.

LOESCH: Well, and here's the difference. You know, I support -- you know, I'm a Christian. I go to church on Sundays. I believe in traditional marriage, but I eat Oreos. I don't care that Oreo came out with a rainbow Oreo. Why didn't they do it sooner? Because it's like quadruple stuffed. I would have loved to have ate that.

 

[rktman]

It's funny (sad) how hate spead by one side just creates more hate on the other side and who wins in the end? No one.

I wouldn't call the CEO a hater - they just believe what the Bible says is true. That's the misinformation that exists out there - people who have never read the Bible read an article, media articles for yahoo and the like that spin information to grab readers, and then you have people posting about bad information that was never the intent of the spokesperson to begin with.

We live in the information age, but so many people believe they are knowledgable because they read about it online. We are so informed, but lack so much understanding - ridiculous.

Absolutely correct.

Concur.

Isn't this the same basis the militant muslims use to justify their jihads? They just believe whatever the Koran and their prophets say is true.

Read it and tell us if you think that's what it says. (Spoiler alert, the Bible (read in context) does not lead to violence against non believers). Your post will lead others to believe that Islam and Christianity are the same. That is exactly what McEngr was saying in his post about lack of understanding.

 

[MA_PE]

The old testament is full of passages about smiting your enemies. I went through elementary and catholic high schools. For the hard core fundamentalists there is plenty of fodder for promoting things that the vast majority believe are "un-christian-like". The bible and even the pope by his constant stance of not accepting GLIBs basically say that gay folk are destined to hell.

My point was that to use the excuse to wrong others as "they just believe what the <insert any religious creed here> says is true" can be extrapolated to any vitually any "religion". It does not justify any of it. From "name-calling" all the way to "killing the masses".

 

[rktman]

The old testament is full of passages about smiting your enemies. I went through elementary and catholic high schools. For the hard core fundamentalists there is plenty of fodder for promoting things that the vast majority believe are "un-christian-like". The bible and even the pope by his constant stance of not accepting GLIBs basically say that gay folk are destined to hell.

My point was that to use the excuse to wrong others as "they just believe what the <insert any religious creed here> says is true" can be extrapolated to any vitually any "religion". It does not justify any of it. From "name-calling" all the way to "killing the masses".

Agreed, plenty of Old Testament violence and I agree that anyone can use whatever "religious" excuse they dream up. That was happening a lot before Christ arrived on the scene (i.e. pharisee's). But that was (and is) their own lack of understanding, not a commandment from the Christian Bible. I'm not a theologian, but we are living in post New Testament times, probably getting close (if not already halfway into) the Revelation period. We are not under Mosaic law at present. (again, I'm not a Theologian but just want to make sure whoever reads these posts do not infer something that is not really stated in the Bible).

 

[MA_PE]

People interpret the printed word as commandments. The old testament is part of the "Christian Bible". I don't profess to know the Bible well enough to quote specific passages, but I believe that there are enough passages to support these radical points of view (albiet often taken out of context) but they are in fact actual quotes.

Using them this way is called propaganda and both sides good and evil are known to use it as an effective tool. Many times the people pushing this propaganda actually "just believe what the <insert any religious creed here> says is true" so I'm back to supporting my original comment. The opposing view will also never convince these hard-liners that they are misinterpreting things.

 

[DVINNY]

I think the pastor at my church put it best when discussing a story from the old testament, he said:

"many people take the bible literally, and I think we need to take the bible seriously"

he did a great sermon about how each story in the bible has a good value in it, and a lesson to be learned from it, but came just shy of saying they aren't 100% factual. I think he is in touch with how most feel about it. I do admit to know people that say "well, it's in the bible", while taking the scripture out of context as well.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

I think the gang on this board generally has pretty reasonable, informed opinions. I lurk around on a sci-fi board that is populated with a bunch of bleeding hearts that speak fluent Klingon that immediately get outraged anytime there is a social issue out there because I guess the mothership told them it's cool to be a martyr.

I can't stand those types, there is no reasoning with them, and it's why stories like these still have legs long after the fact.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

I had a Sunday School teacher for a while that was pretty cool. He once said (and wasn't the Sunday School teacher soon thereafter) that the only reason anti-gay stuff was in the Bible was that one day [one of the disciples] was walking down the street, saw two gay guys kissing, and thought, "Man, that's gross. I'm going to write something about that." Came about the same time that I learned about the Apocrypha and how the Catholic Church had met hundreds of years ago to decide what books should and shouldn't be included.

 

[rktman]

Sorry guys, I disagree with some of these viewpoints. I do take it literally/seriously and I don't believe that it was "corrupted" by the Catholic Church or by the Nicene Council or by the King himself. I'm sure their are some literary differences from the Hebrew to our modern KJV, but when you believe part of it is in error, the next question becomes "Which Part?". Just my 2c.

 

[MGX]

^ The parts we don't like

 

[mudpuppy]

^Exactly.

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

If the Bible is the exact same as it was back when it was originally written, why is it called the King James Edition?

Here's one thought:

In January 1604, King James VI of Scotland and I of England convened the Hampton Court Conference where a new English version was conceived in response to the perceived problems of the earlier translations as detected by the Puritans, a faction within the Church of England.James gave the translators instructions intended to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its belief in an ordained clergy.

http://en.wikipedia....g_James_Version (yeah, I understand it's wikipedia, so take it with a grain of salt)