Chick-Fil-A

[8manpick]

Bigot is not really a name-calling thing... more of applying the dictionary definition of a noun to a person who is acting in an according manner.

[Cartierfor3]

Well, can you give one reason not related to being a bigot that a person could reasonably want the government to give gay people less rights than straight people?

Your and my definition of bigot is probably very different.  Mostly I think its ok to have religious convictions, and try to shape the culture around you, even my convictions aren't the same. 

[8manpick]

Well, can you give one reason not related to being a bigot that a person could reasonably want the government to give gay people less rights than straight people?

Your and my definition of bigot is probably very different.  Mostly I think its ok to have religious convictions, and try to shape the culture around you, even my convictions aren't the same.

Definition of BIGOT
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

[michigancat]

Geez, than what on earth are we discussing?  If you shot down a Constitutional amendment we seem to be pretty eye-to-eye

Hate the name calling.  Hate it.  Hate the "he's a bigot!  he's hateful!" accusations made to anyone who disagrees with them.  It is so counter productive to shaping the opinions of others.  That was my original point.

Thanks, Dad, I'll keep that in mind.

However, if someone vocally opposes something like blacks voting, they aren't just disagreeing with me, they are racist. Why shouldn't I call these people racists?

[OK_Cat]

people defending bigotry are awful

[Cartierfor3]

Thanks, Dad, I'll keep that in mind.

However, if someone vocally opposes something like blacks voting, they aren't just disagreeing with me, they are racist. Why shouldn't I call these people racists?

Can't think of a reason. 

[EMAWmeister]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

[Saulbadguy]

And FTR, the Chik Fil A guy and company can say whatever on earth he wants.  And people who agree can go eat his food, and people who don't can avoid the place.  Or they can still go there because they like the food regardless of his anti-gay marriage position.  And the city of Boston or Chicago should have no role in treating their businesses differently. 

The mayors can do whatever they want.

[Saulbadguy]

Well, can you give one reason not related to being a bigot that a person could reasonably want the government to give gay people less rights than straight people?

Your and my definition of bigot is probably very different.  Mostly I think its ok to have religious convictions, and try to shape the culture around you, even my convictions aren't the same. 

I don't call people who go to Church bigots. I call people who don't want gays to marry bigots.

[HeinBallz]

There's also the chance they are opposed to the government being involved in ANY marriage or civil union, but I'm not sure those people really exist.

 

Not sure those people exist on the anti-gay marriage front.

[Dugout DickStone]

And FTR, the Chik Fil A guy and company can say whatever on earth he wants.  And people who agree can go eat his food, and people who don't can avoid the place.  Or they can still go there because they like the food regardless of his anti-gay marriage position.  And the city of Boston or Chicago should have no role in treating their businesses differently. 

The mayors can do whatever they want.

Kick all of the minorities out of town?

[j-dub]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

Yeah. It makes productive dialogue an impossibility. We've lost the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations. It's either "you're a naive, hateful bigot" or "you're going to hell."

[j-dub]

There's also the chance they are opposed to the government being involved in ANY marriage or civil union, but I'm not sure those people really exist.

 

Not sure those people exist on the anti-gay marriage front.

c43 and i both think the government has no place in recognizing or not recognizing marriage. they should give every co-habitating couple the same legal rights and benefits imo. but churches need to have the right to choose to marry who they want/not want. there is no shortage of churches on either side.

[Saulbadguy]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

Yeah. It makes productive dialogue an impossibility. We've lost the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations. It's either "you're a naive, hateful bigot" or "you're going to hell."

There is no middle ground here. "Agreeing to disagree" leaves the naive, hateful bigot with access to marriage. The homosexual still can't marry.

[michigancat]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

Yeah. It makes productive dialogue an impossibility. We've lost the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations. It's either "you're a naive, hateful bigot" or "you're going to hell."

People (including many in this thread) have rationally articulated why those opposed to gay marriage are bigots.

[HeinBallz]

There's also the chance they are opposed to the government being involved in ANY marriage or civil union, but I'm not sure those people really exist.

 

Not sure those people exist on the anti-gay marriage front.

c43 and i both think the government has no place in recognizing or not recognizing marriage. they should give every co-habitating couple the same legal rights and benefits imo. but churches need to have the right to choose to marry who they want/not want. there is no shortage of churches on either side.

Who is disagreeing with this?

[j-dub]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

Yeah. It makes productive dialogue an impossibility. We've lost the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations. It's either "you're a naive, hateful bigot" or "you're going to hell."

There is no middle ground here. "Agreeing to disagree" leaves the naive, hateful bigot with access to marriage. The homosexual still can't marry.

Productive dialogue does not mean agree to disagree. As a christian, i (and c43) am definitely in the minority in wishing the government to stay out of defining "marriage" and grant equal rights to all couples regardless of gender. My hope is that the majority of christians stop trying to legislate christian faith/beliefs.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

Yeah. It makes productive dialogue an impossibility. We've lost the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations. It's either "you're a naive, hateful bigot" or "you're going to hell."

To be fair, I don't think we have ever had the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations regarding civil rights issues. If anything, we have a much better ability to do so now than we did in the '60s, when a lot of people were outright militant with their beliefs.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

And FTR, the Chik Fil A guy and company can say whatever on earth he wants.  And people who agree can go eat his food, and people who don't can avoid the place.  Or they can still go there because they like the food regardless of his anti-gay marriage position.  And the city of Boston or Chicago should have no role in treating their businesses differently. 

The mayors can do whatever they want.

This isn't true.

[j-dub]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

Yeah. It makes productive dialogue an impossibility. We've lost the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations. It's either "you're a naive, hateful bigot" or "you're going to hell."

To be fair, I don't think we have ever had the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations regarding civil rights issues. If anything, we have a much better ability to do so now than we did in the '60s, when a lot of people were outright militant with their beliefs.

yeah. fair point.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Remember when B.O. was a BIGOT??????

All those people boycotting the democrat party????

Phony liberal partisan outrage is so disingenuous. 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

Yeah. It makes productive dialogue an impossibility. We've lost the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations. It's either "you're a naive, hateful bigot" or "you're going to hell."

People (including many in this thread) have rationally articulated why those opposed to gay marriage are bigots.

Saddening how many people don't know what the word "bigot" means.  This board is embarrassing.

[michigancat]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

Yeah. It makes productive dialogue an impossibility. We've lost the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations. It's either "you're a naive, hateful bigot" or "you're going to hell."

People (including many in this thread) have rationally articulated why those opposed to gay marriage are bigots.

Saddening how many people don't know what the word "bigot" means.  This board is embarrassing.

the dictionary definition was actually posted in this thread.

[kim carnes]

Correct me if I'm wrong CF3 but I think what he's trying to say is that bullying people into believing the same thing as you is likely to be counterproductive and make people stick to their guns more, which is a valid point.

Yeah. It makes productive dialogue an impossibility. We've lost the ability to meet in the public square and have respectful conversations. It's either "you're a naive, hateful bigot" or "you're going to hell."

People (including many in this thread) have rationally articulated why those opposed to gay marriage are bigots.

Saddening how many people don't know what the word "bigot" means.  This board is embarrassing.

the dictionary definition was actually posted in this thread.

shut up, bigot

[Bloodfart]

Thick skin is a trait that is in short supply these days.