Wendy's Supports Chick-Fil-A

[JoeB131]

I agree that CFA's behavior is unacceptable and that is my opinion.
And your opinion is the same.
And many times your opinion and my opinion is unacceptable TO OTHERS.
Doesn't give you a right to make them do a damn thing.
How do you like it Joe when someone tells you YOUR OPINION of something is unacceptable?
Or are you the arrogant son of a bitch that you appear to be here and believe everything you say is acceptable and right?
Cathy started with NOTHING with his little old Dwarf House hole in the wall restaurant.
He is worth 1.5 billion now.
Just a little bit of economic power. Power is abused when you go around telling other folks what they can and can not say.

Everything I believe is acceptable and right. Learn to deal.

I know you worship greed and somehow think it's a virtue, but I find nothing admirable about Mr Cathy, who is a bigot and someone who probably made his fortune cheating the working stiffs who work for him while selling patently unhealthy food. I just can't imagine a bigger jerk.

You claim everything you believe is acceptable and right and you call me the big jerk.

I remember vividly your support of a father of a gay kid who was a church deacon who beat the hell out of his kid for being gay and wanting to attend that church.
You are a hypocrit of the highest order.
Sorry that you are envious and jealous of folk like me that work harder than you do.
A simple "thank you" would be in order but go ahead and suffer in your cry baby world of "It is not fair Mommy".

I think I called Mr. Cathy a jerk...

And frankly, your illusion you work harder is a delusion.

But I can't let this lie pass...

I remember vividly your support of a father of a gay kid who was a church deacon who beat the hell out of his kid for being gay and wanting to attend that church.

He didn't want to attend the church. He wanted to embarrass his father in front of his friends. So obviously, your "memory" isn't as vivid as you think it was. My position was he created the situation by provoking it. But such details are lost on a guy who takes dirty pictures for a living and is somehow proud of that.

For those playing along at home, I'm a non-believer (I don't really like the term "atheist", although I'll use it for shorthand.) Do you know what I don't do? I don't walk into a church univited, and tell them all how stupid I think they are. That' just plain rude. When I am invited to a house of worship, I treat it and the people their with respect.

This kid showed no respect- of his father. That's why he got his ass handed to him, and rightfully so.

 

[Gadawg73]

Everything I believe is acceptable and right. Learn to deal.

I know you worship greed and somehow think it's a virtue, but I find nothing admirable about Mr Cathy, who is a bigot and someone who probably made his fortune cheating the working stiffs who work for him while selling patently unhealthy food. I just can't imagine a bigger jerk.

You claim everything you believe is acceptable and right and you call me the big jerk.

I remember vividly your support of a father of a gay kid who was a church deacon who beat the hell out of his kid for being gay and wanting to attend that church.
You are a hypocrit of the highest order.
Sorry that you are envious and jealous of folk like me that work harder than you do.
A simple "thank you" would be in order but go ahead and suffer in your cry baby world of "It is not fair Mommy".

I think I called Mr. Cathy a jerk...

And frankly, your illusion you work harder is a delusion.

But I can't let this lie pass...

I remember vividly your support of a father of a gay kid who was a church deacon who beat the hell out of his kid for being gay and wanting to attend that church.

He didn't want to attend the church. He wanted to embarrass his father in front of his friends. So obviously, your "memory" isn't as vivid as you think it was. My position was he created the situation by provoking it. But such details are lost on a guy who takes dirty pictures for a living and is somehow proud of that.

You did, my bad and apologies on Cathy.
I stand by the church deacon story.
I do not do domestic work dumb ass. That is for the low guys on the totem pole.
Most of my work is fighting for the little guy against insurance companies.

 

[JoeB131]

You claim everything you believe is acceptable and right and you call me the big jerk.

I remember vividly your support of a father of a gay kid who was a church deacon who beat the hell out of his kid for being gay and wanting to attend that church.
You are a hypocrit of the highest order.
Sorry that you are envious and jealous of folk like me that work harder than you do.
A simple "thank you" would be in order but go ahead and suffer in your cry baby world of "It is not fair Mommy".

I think I called Mr. Cathy a jerk...

And frankly, your illusion you work harder is a delusion.

But I can't let this lie pass...

I remember vividly your support of a father of a gay kid who was a church deacon who beat the hell out of his kid for being gay and wanting to attend that church.

He didn't want to attend the church. He wanted to embarrass his father in front of his friends. So obviously, your "memory" isn't as vivid as you think it was. My position was he created the situation by provoking it. But such details are lost on a guy who takes dirty pictures for a living and is somehow proud of that.

You did, my bad and apologies on Cathy.
I stand by the church deacon story.
I do not do domestic work dumb ass. That is for the low guys on the totem pole.
Most of my work is fighting for the little guy against insurance companies.

Funny, I thought you said you fought for the right of mining companies to hire scabs...

You know, scabs who work for the right to work for less money in unsafe conditions...

You can "stand by the statement" all day. Or we could dig into the actual thread and try to find it, but I'm betting any sensinble person reading it will find, yeah, my point was the kid's disrespect of his father and his congregation, not his sexual orientation.

 

[Zander]

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Gay marriage is a non issue, affects no one.

True, except for same-sex couples, denied access to marriage.

There is no movement toward re-defining marriage in the annals of history.

And there isn’t one currently; same-sex couples seek only access to marriage as it exists now, unaltered, unchanged, in accordance with the Constitution.

The movement is a creation of those whose intent is the neo-Marxist control of the world.


My suggestion is that the sudden introduction of the the gay marriage theme is, actually, an attack on the religious traditions of Western civilization.

There is no ‘movement,’ merely those advocating acknowledgement by the state of rights which already exist for all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation. And since homosexuals are part of the religious traditions of the West, and indeed part of Western civilization since its inception, to suggest an ‘attack’ of some sort is ridiculous.

 

[Zander]

 

[Ravi]

LOL! You know I love you PC, but blaming the lack of comment from the ancients on gay marriage on marxism is fucking lame.

And the same, no ill feelings here....but that is not what I said.

1. There is no movement toward re-defining marriage in the annals of history.

2. The movement is a creation of those whose intent is the neo-Marxist control of the world.


My suggestion is that the sudden introduction of the the gay marriage theme is, actually, an attack on the religious traditions of Western civilization.


Be well.

I'm not sure why you went on this tangent. You had asked me about Christian views on marriage....

Regardless, I think you are wrong here as well. The "sudden" introduction of gay marriage or as you call it "redefining" marriage is based on a little document called the constitution. And the last time I checked, the constitution wasn't based on marxism.

 

[PoliticalChic]

LOL! You know I love you PC, but blaming the lack of comment from the ancients on gay marriage on marxism is fucking lame.

And the same, no ill feelings here....but that is not what I said.

1. There is no movement toward re-defining marriage in the annals of history.

2. The movement is a creation of those whose intent is the neo-Marxist control of the world.


My suggestion is that the sudden introduction of the the gay marriage theme is, actually, an attack on the religious traditions of Western civilization.


Be well.

I'm not sure why you went on this tangent. You had asked me about Christian views on marriage....

Regardless, I think you are wrong here as well. The "sudden" introduction of gay marriage or as you call it "redefining" marriage is based on a little document called the constitution. And the last time I checked, the constitution wasn't based on marxism.

1. "You had asked me about Christian views on marriage...."
No I didn't.

2. The enumerated powers specify what the federal government can do. Marriage is under the purview of the state. If the people of a state sanction same-sex marriage, then it should be allowed.

 

[ima]

Wendy is a greasy fat whore. Avoid her at all cost if you value your health. Same goes for Chick-Filled-Ass chicken.

 

[Gadawg73]

I think I called Mr. Cathy a jerk...

And frankly, your illusion you work harder is a delusion.

But I can't let this lie pass...



He didn't want to attend the church. He wanted to embarrass his father in front of his friends. So obviously, your "memory" isn't as vivid as you think it was. My position was he created the situation by provoking it. But such details are lost on a guy who takes dirty pictures for a living and is somehow proud of that.

You did, my bad and apologies on Cathy.
I stand by the church deacon story.
I do not do domestic work dumb ass. That is for the low guys on the totem pole.
Most of my work is fighting for the little guy against insurance companies.

Funny, I thought you said you fought for the right of mining companies to hire scabs...

You know, scabs who work for the right to work for less money in unsafe conditions...

You can "stand by the statement" all day. Or we could dig into the actual thread and try to find it, but I'm betting any sensinble person reading it will find, yeah, my point was the kid's disrespect of his father and his congregation, not his sexual orientation.

I fight for the rights of those hard working little guys that you elitists call "scabs" because you believe you are better than everyone else and run in criminal gangs to attack individuals because you are punks.
You are not entitled to a job. We deterimine if we want you.
Get used to it. Cry about it or start your own company.

 

[Gadawg73]

And the same, no ill feelings here....but that is not what I said.

1. There is no movement toward re-defining marriage in the annals of history.

2. The movement is a creation of those whose intent is the neo-Marxist control of the world.


My suggestion is that the sudden introduction of the the gay marriage theme is, actually, an attack on the religious traditions of Western civilization.


Be well.

I'm not sure why you went on this tangent. You had asked me about Christian views on marriage....

Regardless, I think you are wrong here as well. The "sudden" introduction of gay marriage or as you call it "redefining" marriage is based on a little document called the constitution. And the last time I checked, the constitution wasn't based on marxism.

1. "You had asked me about Christian views on marriage...."
No I didn't.

2. The enumerated powers specify what the federal government can do. Marriage is under the purview of the state. If the people of a state sanction same-sex marriage, then it should be allowed.

I agree with that and believe states that ban it are ignorant.
The Constitution clearly defines #2.

 

[ima]

2. The enumerated powers specify what the federal government can do. Marriage is under the purview of the state. If the people of a state sanction same-sex marriage, then it should be allowed.

So basically, if enough people agree, you can un-sanction any equal rights? So in other words, you could vote to re-instate slavery as well?

 

[JoeB131]

You did, my bad and apologies on Cathy.
I stand by the church deacon story.
I do not do domestic work dumb ass. That is for the low guys on the totem pole.
Most of my work is fighting for the little guy against insurance companies.

Funny, I thought you said you fought for the right of mining companies to hire scabs...

You know, scabs who work for the right to work for less money in unsafe conditions...

You can "stand by the statement" all day. Or we could dig into the actual thread and try to find it, but I'm betting any sensinble person reading it will find, yeah, my point was the kid's disrespect of his father and his congregation, not his sexual orientation.

I fight for the rights of those hard working little guys that you elitists call "scabs" because you believe you are better than everyone else and run in criminal gangs to attack individuals because you are punks.
You are not entitled to a job. We deterimine if we want you.
Get used to it. Cry about it or start your own company.

Or change the laws to give workers rights...

Or use community action to change their behavior.

Here's the problem with scab miners... when you get a union out of a mine, the next thing that usually follows are any attention to safety rules. Like the Sabo Mine a couple years ago. They broke the unions (was that one one you were in on) and they went from 30 safety violations a year to 200 a year. Then the mine collapsed, and a bunch of people died.

But, hey, that's all good with you, as long as someone made a profit, eh?

It's not like you were going down into that mine. You were just taking the dirty pictures.

 

[jillian]

1. "You had asked me about Christian views on marriage...."
No I didn't.

2. The enumerated powers specify what the federal government can do. Marriage is under the purview of the state. If the people of a state sanction same-sex marriage, then it should be allowed.

you got it about 1/4 right...

yes, the designation of marriage falls in the purview of the state, but only as a designation of status and the requirements for that status.

however, the other three quarters:

the state cannot discriminate in its designation of marriage (see loving v virginia)

and

no state can give fewer rights than those required the US constitution (see the supremacy clause of the US constitution)

and

each state has to honor every other state's designation of that status, so all states have to honor marriages performed for same sex couples in their state of origin. (see full faith and credit clause of the US constitution)

so you were saying?

 

[Gadawg73]

Funny, I thought you said you fought for the right of mining companies to hire scabs...

You know, scabs who work for the right to work for less money in unsafe conditions...

You can "stand by the statement" all day. Or we could dig into the actual thread and try to find it, but I'm betting any sensinble person reading it will find, yeah, my point was the kid's disrespect of his father and his congregation, not his sexual orientation.

I fight for the rights of those hard working little guys that you elitists call "scabs" because you believe you are better than everyone else and run in criminal gangs to attack individuals because you are punks.
You are not entitled to a job. We deterimine if we want you.
Get used to it. Cry about it or start your own company.

Or change the laws to give workers rights...

Or use community action to change their behavior.

Here's the problem with scab miners... when you get a union out of a mine, the next thing that usually follows are any attention to safety rules. Like the Sabo Mine a couple years ago. They broke the unions (was that one one you were in on) and they went from 30 safety violations a year to 200 a year. Then the mine collapsed, and a bunch of people died.

But, hey, that's all good with you, as long as someone made a profit, eh?

It's not like you were going down into that mine. You were just taking the dirty pictures.

LOL, what is your fetish with "dirty pictures" Joe?
WTF R U talking about?

 

[JoeB131]

I fight for the rights of those hard working little guys that you elitists call "scabs" because you believe you are better than everyone else and run in criminal gangs to attack individuals because you are punks.
You are not entitled to a job. We deterimine if we want you.
Get used to it. Cry about it or start your own company.

Or change the laws to give workers rights...

Or use community action to change their behavior.

Here's the problem with scab miners... when you get a union out of a mine, the next thing that usually follows are any attention to safety rules. Like the Sabo Mine a couple years ago. They broke the unions (was that one one you were in on) and they went from 30 safety violations a year to 200 a year. Then the mine collapsed, and a bunch of people died.

But, hey, that's all good with you, as long as someone made a profit, eh?

It's not like you were going down into that mine. You were just taking the dirty pictures.

LOL, what is your fetish with "dirty pictures" Joe?
WTF R U talking about?

You bragged how you got pictures of scabs getting beaten up by union workers... like that was a bad thing or something.

No, the bad thing is when they throw a union out, like they did at Sabo or Upper Big Branch, and the scabs just put up with it because they know they can be replaced because they've already laid down.

And if a mine collapses and kills some people, oh, well, sucks to be them. They weren't important.

 

[Gadawg73]

Or change the laws to give workers rights...

Or use community action to change their behavior.

Here's the problem with scab miners... when you get a union out of a mine, the next thing that usually follows are any attention to safety rules. Like the Sabo Mine a couple years ago. They broke the unions (was that one one you were in on) and they went from 30 safety violations a year to 200 a year. Then the mine collapsed, and a bunch of people died.

But, hey, that's all good with you, as long as someone made a profit, eh?

It's not like you were going down into that mine. You were just taking the dirty pictures.

LOL, what is your fetish with "dirty pictures" Joe?
WTF R U talking about?

You bragged how you got pictures of scabs getting beaten up by union workers... like that was a bad thing or something.

No, the bad thing is when they throw a union out, like they did at Sabo or Upper Big Branch, and the scabs just put up with it because they know they can be replaced because they've already laid down.

And if a mine collapses and kills some people, oh, well, sucks to be them. They weren't important.

Yep, I did that but it was nothing to brag about.
A gang of male punks pummeling a 55 year old lady.
And you are proud of that. A woman wanting to feed her kids.
A mine collapsing costs a company 1000 times what it would cost them to settle a union strike Joe.
I am amazed you would post such bull shit.
You obviously do not know shit about mining. OSHA and 101 other government agencies has to okay any mine opening after a strike or during a strike if there are new workers that come in.
But you know that. You know what you are posting is a pack of lies to inflame and distort the truth.
That is what union goons do.

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. The enumerated powers specify what the federal government can do. Marriage is under the purview of the state. If the people of a state sanction same-sex marriage, then it should be allowed.

So basically, if enough people agree, you can un-sanction any equal rights? So in other words, you could vote to re-instate slavery as well?

1. Limited by the Supreme Court.

2. It seems I have a great deal more faith in the goodness of the American people. It is a hallmark of the Left, not to.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "You had asked me about Christian views on marriage...."
No I didn't.

2. The enumerated powers specify what the federal government can do. Marriage is under the purview of the state. If the people of a state sanction same-sex marriage, then it should be allowed.

you got it about 1/4 right...

yes, the designation of marriage falls in the purview of the state, but only as a designation of status and the requirements for that status.

however, the other three quarters:

the state cannot discriminate in its designation of marriage (see loving v virginia)

and

no state can give fewer rights than those required the US constitution (see the supremacy clause of the US constitution)

and

each state has to honor every other state's designation of that status, so all states have to honor marriages performed for same sex couples in their state of origin. (see full faith and credit clause of the US constitution)

so you were saying?

I was saying that "Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis envisioned the state legislatures as "laboratories of democracy" willing to tackle new and innovative approaches in meeting the needs of society."
State Legislatures as "Laboratories Of Democracy"

and, therefore, the question begins and ends with "yes, the designation of marriage falls in the purview of the state,..."


Any Supreme Court decisions not anchored in the words of the Constitution are illegitimate.

So saith Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, and others that I respect.


All lawyers should learn from them.

 

[ima]

2. The enumerated powers specify what the federal government can do. Marriage is under the purview of the state. If the people of a state sanction same-sex marriage, then it should be allowed.

So basically, if enough people agree, you can un-sanction any equal rights? So in other words, you could vote to re-instate slavery as well?

1. Limited by the Supreme Court.

2. It seems I have a great deal more faith in the goodness of the American people. It is a hallmark of the Left, not to.

So basically, un-sanctioning equal rights only limited by the SC? So you think that the SC is going to reserve some rights for some and not for everyone?