Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Cheers to McDonald's
worldnetdaily.com — While some may attempt to blackmail or terrorize McDonald's into obeying their wishes, they should know that they are in the minority. Shame on them, for trying to destroy any business in this faltering economy, especially over something so trivial. If you really want to boycott a gay-friendly organization, try Microsoft. You're using it.
Lutrasimilis- 41 diggs
- digg it
- KCLorelei39, on 07/23/2008, -14/+23dugg up for the article, but not the description. enjoy your right to protest, and savor free speech while ye may, America.
- The7Sticks, on 07/23/2008, -20/+16I don't really pay attention to these people anyway. Actually, I do, but more so to monitor them than to buy into their campaign. It really shows you the acrimony that these groups succumb to over a so-called "homosexual agenda." Is that some way of trying to be politically incorrect or something? I'm sorry, but the AFA lost me the minute they tried to get Mighty Mouse canceled because Mighty Mouse sniffed a flower a few seconds too long, thereby implying that he was figuratively snorting cocaine. Um, no thanks, I already know the truth: It's groups like the American Family Association that actually profit off of suffering by asking for donations the minute they call for a boycott.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -15/+11The whole issue is this: McDonald's does NOT need to support one group over the other, period. It would be the same if McDonald's OPENLY supported ONLY and donated millions of dollars to Christan schools or something along those lines. You bet your bottom dollar there would be absolute HELL to pay for that.
Don't cater and pander to any one group. Its really that simple. While your at it get your head out your but.- Herkimer56, on 07/23/2008, -8/+19You've confused refusing to discriminate with catering to a group. I can see where you would fail to understand that since your past comments show a demonstrable bias against homosexuals.
- idoj, on 07/23/2008, -5/+18"The whole issue is this: McDonald's does NOT need to support one group over the other, period. "
They don't. McDonald's gives money and donations to a wide variety of causes and organizations.
http://www.mcdonalds.com/corp/about/mcd_faq/donati ...
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -14/+8@Herkimer56: Go look in the mirror. Your bias against Christians', so what is your point here?
- Herkimer56, on 07/24/2008, -1/+7I have zero bias against Christians being one myself. I do, however, have a bias towards mindless, soulless bigots like you.
- Phyraxus, on 07/23/2008, -7/+14UsNavyBlue: You're confusing bias against christians with bias against stupidity and bigotry, but I can understand the error, they seem synonymous.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -15/+11The whole issue is this: McDonald's does NOT need to support one group over the other, period. It would be the same if McDonald's OPENLY supported ONLY and donated millions of dollars to Christan schools or something along those lines. You bet your bottom dollar there would be absolute HELL to pay for that.
- dlarson, on 07/23/2008, -14/+17I agree with Lutrasimilis. If you people who are boycotting McDonald's are not boycotting every single one of the 195 gay-friendly companies listed here, then you are hypocrites: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTI ... Boycotting doesn't do anybody any good. Live your life as you see fit and let others do the same.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -11/+8Thanks for the list! I did not realize their was one. I printed it out and PLAN to NOT shop their either.
- ssn697, on 07/23/2008, -5/+17And, of course, you are boycotting every organization that has a divorced person on the board, right?
Cuz you follow ALL the Bible, right? - USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -10/+7FYI: I posted this above but applies to you too.
The whole issue is this: McDonald's does NOT need to support one group over the other, period. It would be the same if McDonald's OPENLY supported ONLY and donated millions of dollars to Christan schools or something along those lines. You bet your bottom dollar there would be absolute HELL to pay for that.
Then basically issued a statement calling Christians "hateful" bunch of trolls - that was the tipping point for me.
Don't cater and pander to any one group. Its really that simple. While your at it get your head out your but. - USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -10/+8@ssn697: I forgot to comment on a "divorced person on the board, right?" You do have a point. However, I do agree heterosexuals have ruined marriage all by themselves and gay marriage in NOT the biggest threat to the sanctity of marriage, heterosexuals are the threat.
This article sums it up nicely. I would post it but it is too long for that. Link: http://digg.com/politics/How_Heterosexuals_Destroy ...
FTA: Jesus, in Matthew 7, said that we were not to judge another if we were guilty of the same thing. Don't try to take the speck out of your neighbor's eye, He said, if you have a log in your own. In verses 3 through 5, He said that we FIRST SHOULD CLEAN UP OUR OWN ACT [You got that right /emphasis mine] and then we can see clearly to help our neighbor.
In our opposition to gay marriage, CONSERVATIVES ARE HYPOCRITES [so true/emphasis mine]: with our tax-payer finances prophylactics for fornicators, with our apathy about legal adultery and homosexual sodomy, and with our no-fault divorces and our remarriages - all of which are much more of a threat to traditional marriage than "gay marriage." - lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -2/+16"The whole issue is this: McDonald's does NOT need to support one group over the other, period."
And the whole issue is they are not. They don't. McDonald's gives money and donations to a wide variety of causes and organizations, and ANTI-DISCRIMINATION on the basis of sexual orientation (not supporting one sexual orientation over another) is not supporting one group over another.
- ssn697, on 07/23/2008, -5/+17And, of course, you are boycotting every organization that has a divorced person on the board, right?
- elcalrissian, on 07/23/2008, -2/+6There are many problems facing America. Yet some people choose to direct their efforts towards hate.
Whats worse, these hypocrites have enough voice to make a $20,000 donation from a multi billion dollar company into news! What if McDonalds donated to a gay tolerant Church, like the Church of England? Would you care?
In 1 Corinthians chapter 14, women are forbade to even speak in church! Tell me where god says being a homosexual is wrong?? ask me any day you'd like, and I can show you where treating any human with hate is specifically deemed as sinful.
Dont pick and choose what parts of the Bible to obey. Dont hate. Hypocrites.
Wanna help this country? Look at improving yourself before criticizing others.- KJeffV, on 07/24/2008, -3/+2Hey, Lando: You're lacking in serious study time in the Word, typical of liberal, "I heard that the Bible sez" types. Here, you can get started immediately☞
John Gill's Exposition of the Bible
1 Corinthians 14:34 [KJV]
"Let your women keep silence in the churches…."
"This is a restriction of & an exception to one of the above rules [that all might prophesy] in which [Paul] would be understood 'of men only & not of women' and is directed against a practice which seems to have prevailed in this church at Corinth, to wit: allowing women to preach and teach in it, this being a disorderly practice—ie, not used in other churches—the apostle forbids and condemns, not w/o reason: '[F]or it is not permitted unto them to speak in public assemblies. In the church of God, they might not speak w/tongues, nor prophesy, or preach, or teach the Word.' All speaking is not prohibited; they might speak their experiences to the church or give an account of the work of God upon their souls; they might speak to one another in psalms, hymns, & spiritual songs; they might speak as an evidence in any case at a church mtg; but they may not speak in such sort, as carried in it direction, instruction, gov't, & authority. It was not allowed by God that they should speak in any authoritative manner in the church; nor was it suffered in the churches of Christ; nor was it admitted of in the Jewish synagogue. There the men came to teach, and the women 'to hear.' One of their canons runs thus: 'A woman may not read [in the law], in the congregation, or church b/c of the honour of the congregation' for they thought it a dishonourable thing to a public ass'y f/women to read, though they allowed children to do it who were capable.
"They are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. Gen 3:16 says '[T]hy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.' By this the apostle would signify that the reason why women are not to speak in the church, or to preach & teach publicly, or be concerned in the ministerial function is that it is an act of power & authority of rule & gov't & so contrary to that subjection which God in His law requires of women unto men."
You're welcome. - elcalrissian, on 07/24/2008, -0/+0I don't believe in your version of the Bible. There is something called Translation Bias.
http://linguisticmystic.com/2006/11/26/the-languag ...
And if that isn't enough, the earliest copy of New Testament is from 300 years AFTER Jesus died. And that could have been copied. You can copy a crystal clear photo of your naive head 5 times and you'll look like a pink, hairy lion.
AND I voted for Bush and work in Oil.
Ooooo...and just to make you question your whole life.....The Christian God (via Abraham...David....Jesus), the Jewish God (via Abraham's son Issac, father of the 12 tribes) and the Muslim God (via Arbaham's son Ishmael)...are all the same!!!! WOW! Did the KJV mention that?
The difference, is that I read the Bible, and you had someone tell you their Bible.
- KJeffV, on 07/24/2008, -3/+2Hey, Lando: You're lacking in serious study time in the Word, typical of liberal, "I heard that the Bible sez" types. Here, you can get started immediately☞
- Evilena, on 07/23/2008, -2/+4No Apple, Sun Microsystems, Google, Xerox, or Intel.
You guys are going to all have to get Amigas
PepsiCo is on the list so you also can't eat at KFC, A&W, Long John Silvers, Pizza Hut or Taco Bell.
You also have to get rid of your Visa, Mastercard, and American Express cards.
& no more Clorox. From now on you have to pray the germs away.- KJeffV, on 07/24/2008, -3/+2All worthless anyway. Gone!
- elcalrissian, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2Did your computer just blow up?
Im pretty sure Digg uses heavy flash code (adobe), especially for the comments!
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -11/+8Thanks for the list! I did not realize their was one. I printed it out and PLAN to NOT shop their either.
- congresssucks, on 07/23/2008, -16/+26Micky Ds got busted in Nevada for hiring illegal aliens and supplying the aliens with false documents to the tune of $1 million with some jail time. What is next, homosexual toys for the kiddies?
- StaticThunder, on 07/23/2008, -3/+6Oh gosh, I sure do hope so. I loves me playing with some fornicating plastic made in China. /sarc
- ashfish, on 07/23/2008, -5/+6Um, how does hiring illegal immigrants relate to giving a donation to the NGLCC? I don't get it. You do know that all McD's franchises are independently owned and operated so its not like corporate McD's was doing this or anything. There are TONS of independent businesses that do this, its just smaller ones take a little longer to catch up with. Our Taco Bell recently had to let go of all of its workers for being illegal, don't know if they provided the documents to them or if they got them from somewhere else.
- congresssucks, on 07/23/2008, -5/+5How about MD corporate standards are slipping, they do determine who gets the franchises.
- StaticThunder, on 07/23/2008, -3/+6Oh gosh, I sure do hope so. I loves me playing with some fornicating plastic made in China. /sarc
- VinBea, on 07/23/2008, -19/+16Digg.com is a fag promoting enterprise - and is insane - digg's a joke!
- Herkimer56, on 07/23/2008, -12/+16And you're a bigoted. Buried and reported.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -10/+10And who is the ONE being intolerant here? YOU ARE! The ones who SCREAM tolerance are the most hateful intolerant people on earth. HYPOCRITE! Grow a damn backbone while your at it.
- durlek, on 07/23/2008, -3/+15You are right. Digg’s an insane idea. Why should anyone want to see the expressed opinions of news readers? And why should news readers have the right to harbor independent thoughts anyway? Let’s just allow the major news outlets tell us what we should think and let that be it. Independent thinking can lead to the formation of politically incorrect ideas and we just can’t have that.
- PierceArrow, on 07/24/2008, -2/+3VinBea, you appear to be a liberal troll. You have a lame imitation of Fred Phelps, who is a cult leader, NOT a Christian.
- alanhlake, on 07/23/2008, -13/+27No, Lutrasimilis, I'm not using Microsoft, although I acknowledge that most readers are. Because of Microsoft's business practices, I changed to the use of Linux about ten years ago. I have a higher quality operating system and more software choices than Microsoft users have. Mine are all legally free. Did you know that your suseptibility to viruses is a Microsoft business decision? I don't get them.
I'm not interested in the destruction of McDonalds, as you state. But I feel no need or desire to do business with those who have contempt for me and my children and would use my customer dollar to corrupt my society.- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -8/+11"But I feel no need or desire to do business with those who have contempt for me and my children and would use my customer dollar to corrupt my society."
Okay, so... what's your problem with McDonalds? - Evilena, on 07/23/2008, -1/+4Their food sucks and they corrupt society by supersizing America. I don't care what good causes they give money to.
- KJeffV, on 07/24/2008, -4/+2Ah, so even a broken clock is spot-on twice a day!
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -8/+11"But I feel no need or desire to do business with those who have contempt for me and my children and would use my customer dollar to corrupt my society."
- lajaw, on 07/23/2008, -14/+27What a sorry article description. People who boycott are not trying to destroy. They are trying to , not only get the word out, but to get the attention of the board of directors and management.
Trivial? Homosexual deviancy is not trivial in the eyes of most Americans. No, it is seen as a destroyer not only of the family and individuals, but of the country as well. There is no good to come of the deviant "rights" agenda. After deviant marriage is allowed, then (regardless of what you say) the flood gates of hell are opened and the man/boy deviants, pedophiles, etc. will want theirs too. This mess had got to stop and if you don't make your voice louder than the deviants now, your voice will continue to get smaller. Let's put a stop to it America!- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -4/+8Good luck trying to get people to stop doing what they want in the bedroom.
I'm glad that's a pressing issue for you. Not like there's anything more important going on.
Let me guess, you're for the wars of peace in Iraq and Afghanistan because "they're of the Lord", right?- flip2trip, on 07/23/2008, -11/+6And we should care what a troofer thinks, why?
- lajaw, on 07/23/2008, -8/+9No, I'm against the wars and I'm against giving special "rights" to a bunch of deviants. You deviants have every right that I have, plus more leniency in many things. If this country doesn't stop you and things like abortion, we are doomed.
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -3/+11What special rights? What special rights would they be granted that you wouldn't have?
- lajaw, on 07/23/2008, -9/+8Special as in marrying someone of the same sex. Special in that they can marry same as I if they choose someone of the opposite sex. They are now getting rights to use any toilet, male OR female that they choose. They are afforded special protections when someone robs, beats or kills them. They are out to be a protected class of citizen. You can't discriminate based on sexual preference by federal code. If I have a house to rent, and decide not to rent to a deviant, if I get HUD money, they will get me. It is BS, and you and your kind know it.
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -5/+11"Special in that they can marry same as I if they choose someone of the opposite sex." Oh, so gays wouldn't be getting special rights, everyone would be getting more rights, and they'd still be equal. More rights in the sex that interracial marriage was more rights, not special rights.
"They are now getting rights to use any toilet, male OR female that they choose."
This is a transgender issue, not a gay issue. Transgenders cannot be denied access in some states based on their gender identity vs. biological gender. Whether the transgender is straight or gay is irrelevant.
"They are afforded special protections when someone robs, beats or kills them."
Incorrect. All perpetrators of robbery, assault, or murder, will receive harsher punishment if the crime was motivated by the victim's sexual orientation, race, or gender... regardless of the sexual orientation, race, or gender. Homosexuals and heterosexuals, whites and blacks, males and females. These are equal.
"They are out to be a protected class of citizen."
Incorrect. People are out to promote equality for all types of citizens.
"You can't discriminate based on sexual preference by federal code."
You cannot discriminate based on sexual orientation, race, religion, gender, disability, etc. Correct.
"If I have a house to rent, and decide not to rent to a deviant, if I get HUD money, they will get me." If you have a house to rent, and decide not to rent to someone based on their sexual orientation, race, religion, gender, disability, etc., I believe you can be sued or fined.
"It is BS, and you and your kind know it."
Incorrect. It is equality, and you and your kind know it, and just don't want it. Just like people didn't believe race was deserving of equality, or gender was. - ashfish, on 07/23/2008, -4/+11Here's the thing, renting a home is a business. I don't care if its on the side or what. Because it is a business that means that there are certain anti-discrimination laws that you must abide by. Its same thing as not being able to refuse service to someone because of their skin color.
They cannot marry the same as you can. You love your wife correct? Well they love their partners, but simply because of their genitalia they can't get married. That just doesn't even make sense to me. I was taught that above all marriage was about love and a sacred pact between two people to always care for each other and to always be there for each other through thick and thin. And on top of that you have other legal rights issues surrounding marriage. Once the government starts sticking its nose into things like this EVERYONE of EVERY race, creed, and gender needs to be able to participate. That's the way our system works. If you don't like it tell the government to get out of marriage.
And btw, if a gay person beat you to death because you were heterosexual, they would be brought up on hate crime charges. It works both ways, it just happens that its normally the homosexuals and transgendered folks who are getting picked on. It seems to me that no one actually reads the -law-, they just see news stories about people being brought up on charges of hate crimes because they killed a gay guy and assume the law specifically states that it protects only homosexuals and transgendered people. - KJeffV, on 07/24/2008, -5/+1"[R]enting a home is a business."
Renting a home is not a business. Look it up.
"[I]if a gay person beat you to death b/c you were heterosexual, they[sic] would be brought up on hate crime charges."
You meant "murder charges," right?
I observe that your world exists only as you see it "should be." When I was seven or eight, my parents informed me this practice is known as "wishful thinking." - lydecker, on 07/24/2008, -0/+7"You meant "murder charges," right?"
He means hate crime designation in addition to murder charges. As would happen if someone beat anyone to death for their sexual orientation. - KJeffV, on 07/24/2008, -4/+2Thanx, Capt O.
- lydecker, on 07/24/2008, -1/+7Your welcome. What does that make the person who asks the obvious?
I guess nothing. Doesn't the saying go, "There are no stupid people. Just stupid questions."? /sarcasm - ApokalypseNow, on 07/24/2008, -1/+4I always heard it as, "There's no such thing as a stupid question, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
- ashfish, on 07/24/2008, -0/+6Look it up eh? Alright, here's the definitions:
1. an occupation, profession, or trade: His business is poultry farming.
2. the purchase and sale of goods in an attempt to make a profit.
3. a person, partnership, or corporation engaged in commerce, manufacturing, or a service; profit-seeking enterprise or concern.
Gee, seems to me that renting a property falls under the definition of a business. The income is taxed on your tax returns, and some states even make you get a sales or excise tax license to tax you on the rents you earned. It may not be a business entity that owns the property but you ARE conducting business.
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -6/+11Homosexuality is not seen as a destroyer of family and individuals and the country by most Americans by far. There is plenty to come from civil rights and equality for homosexuals and heterosexuals alike. After interracial marriage was allowed, people complained the floodgates would open to allow beastiality marriage, that all marriages would go to hell. But there's a lot of difference in marriage between two consenting adults and marriage between adult and a legal child who doesn't have the ability to fully comprehend nor consent to marriage.
Here's a gallup telephone interview poll that highlights trends and current views on homosexuality.
- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -4/+8Good luck trying to get people to stop doing what they want in the bedroom.
- michael4lsu, on 07/23/2008, -14/+18What business does a fast food chain have in promoting vile, disgusting, shameful, behavior, and expect not to receive any backlash from it? I hope this boycott spreads like wildfire to the point where McDonald's stockholders completely replace McDonald's queer board of directors next time around.
And that disgusting queer Lutrasimilis (is that an STD?) who posted his own pro-gay opinion in the article summary is an example of how those queers abuse systems to jam their pro-deviance message on everyone to try to convert them. Leave your disgusting sinful behavior in the closet where it belongs and quit trying to destroy our country as an attempt to ease your guilt!- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -4/+940 years ago they would have said the same thing about putting black people in their commercial ads.
All homosexuals : Please flaunt your homosexuality even more after seeing this hate ;)- fredrick1, on 07/23/2008, -11/+5"40 years ago they would have said the same thing about putting black people in their commercial ads." what does being a ligitimate minority have to do with it. Black people can't change their skin by the will of their minds. Homosexuality is a choice to live a fithy and distructive life style. So "get in touch with reality".
Their isn't going to be a Big Mac or Happy Meal bought by this family until they kick the ***** agenda out of McDonalds - lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -3/+9Being a legitimate minority has everything to do with being a legitimate minority. Black people and gay people can't change their skin or sexual orientation by the will of their minds. Homosexuality is not a choice, it is a sexual orientation. It's not a way to live, it's not a filthy or destructive lifestyle anymore than heterosexuality. Get in touch with reality.
Am I supposed to be upset that you won't be purchasing McDonalds until they don't support anti-discriminatory practices? - twitchr, on 07/23/2008, -0/+6Whatever will he feed his family now?
Serving that crap to your family is more vile and disgusting than any homosexual will ever be. - SOLGAARD, on 07/24/2008, -7/+1oooh, i'm sure your ability to lie, will aid your sinful desires, (at least within the peremeters of your own world).
- fredrick1, on 07/23/2008, -11/+5"40 years ago they would have said the same thing about putting black people in their commercial ads." what does being a ligitimate minority have to do with it. Black people can't change their skin by the will of their minds. Homosexuality is a choice to live a fithy and distructive life style. So "get in touch with reality".
- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -4/+940 years ago they would have said the same thing about putting black people in their commercial ads.
- RSandman, on 07/23/2008, -14/+20Idiots.
They should stick to selling their Billions of calories and stay out of funding liberal culture-destroying political movements of any kind.
Non-profit and neutral "help the kids" things, fine.
Even the stock holders can support that kind of thing every day of the week.
Hospital support, RM house to help families of kids with diseases, all kinds of responsible community assistance...
...all down the drain so some pervert can sit on a board and say "look at me, I took down a major US corporation" by 'advising' them to support sexual behavior.
What were those morons on the McDonald's board thinking? Becoming a "Corporate Partner and Organizational Ally" of something like the NGLCC?
Well...there goes my family and our enjoyment of those McGriddles every Sunday morning on the way to church.
We are cousins to the original McDonald's family that sold the rights to Ray...and believe me, they will be turning in their graves over this mess, and the long, dark road 'corporate' has been slinking along recently.- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -7/+7I'm glad you are deciding which companies can donate to which charities.
I bet every company you use has hired a gay person in the past.
Oh no! Boycott!!!- flip2trip, on 07/23/2008, -6/+8He's not deciding which companies can or cannot do something. He merely chooses not to support McDonald's and has every right to do so for ANY reason. I personally started boycotting McDonald's when I grew up and realized their food is crap.
Giving equal rights is not the same thing as supporting NGLCC.
- flip2trip, on 07/23/2008, -6/+8He's not deciding which companies can or cannot do something. He merely chooses not to support McDonald's and has every right to do so for ANY reason. I personally started boycotting McDonald's when I grew up and realized their food is crap.
- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -7/+7I'm glad you are deciding which companies can donate to which charities.
- InRussetShadows, on 07/23/2008, -12/+17Because I refuse to support homosexuality, then I am in the wrong? Amazing how black has become white, and black white.
- Herkimer56, on 07/23/2008, -11/+17Nothing's changed. Bigotry is still bigotry. You're safe.
- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -7/+14Herkimer...him choosing not to support something is not "bigotry".
That's not saying he isn't a bigot, either. - StaticThunder, on 07/23/2008, -5/+6There are lots of straight, white religious people who work at McDonalds, on the whole, he's probably hurting them more than he's hurting the homosexuals, so I support his boycott, I just won't join him in it.
- KJeffV, on 07/24/2008, -5/+1"There are lots of straight, white religious people[sic] who work at McDonalds; on the whole, he's probably hurting them more than he's hurting the homosexuals."
No, they're safe: Minimum wage just went up.
- KJeffV, on 07/24/2008, -5/+1"There are lots of straight, white religious people[sic] who work at McDonalds; on the whole, he's probably hurting them more than he's hurting the homosexuals."
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -7/+11@Staticthunder: white religious people" what no other colors of religious people work at McDonald's? Why are you making a point to emphasize "white people"? I think you may be a closet racist?
- StaticThunder, on 07/23/2008, -8/+6Actually I'm making the point that you're a bunch of thoughtless bigots, and arguments like that appeal to you. But, you were too dense to get it. Its subtle, I know.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -9/+7Don't start stooping to the level of name calling. It is not necessary. And the same could be said about you being a "thoughtless bigot" against Christan peoples. See the hypocrisy here? I personally DO NOT wish you or anyone else any harm or ill will period.
I got what you where where trying to pull off BUT I wanted to hear your explanation on the matter at hand. BTW: that was a piss poor example. Even I could have come up with one better that that. - StaticThunder, on 07/23/2008, -2/+8In my considered opinion, you are a thoughtless bigot. Its not an ad hominem, its accurate. If you want to appear otherwise, maybe stop being one. You could start by not getting all bent out of shape what relationships other people decide to pursue.
"bigot - One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ." - SOLGAARD, on 07/23/2008, -8/+5lol, where'd the 'white' part go-?
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -8/+7StaticThunder: The same can be said about you.
I want YOU TO KNOW AND realize that my best friend in the whole world I grew up with and still speak with from time to time (only because he lives in another state far away due to a job relocation for more money) decided is was GAY! I would love for him to speak to you directly. He would tell you differently! Moral of the story: He knows how I feel and I know how he feels, period. We don't sit there and bust on each other either. However, he DOES respect HOW I feel and knows that I pray for him everyday. And I know how he feels too. In addition, we don't try to cram each others lifestyle down each others throat either and FLAUNT it.
@SOLGAAD: I like the answer to that myself. LOL - however I will not hold my breath either:) Good Love ya - Keep up the good work my brother in CO! - lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -4/+5I guess your friend doesn't have a business. If he did, he should know that McDonalds is a corporate partner with the NGLCC and therefore doesn't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. How it must suck if corporations did all discriminate which business they were going to work with depending on if they were gay or not, your friend would probably not be able to run a successful business without keeping quiet about sexual orientation or pretending to be heterosexual!
- StaticThunder, on 07/24/2008, -1/+5"I want YOU TO KNOW AND realize that my best friend in the whole world I grew up with and still speak with from time to time (only because he lives in another state far away due to a job relocation for more money) is black!"
Works well that way too. Oh yes, homosexuality is a wrong and horrible choice in spite of what all the research indicates about sexual orientation. As a straight man I'll just "decide" to be attracted to men. Sounds ridiculous doesn't it?
Yes yes, some of my best friends are gay, but God forbid anybody tries to make life a little better for them. We'll have to boycott those people's businesses and put the people they hire out of work immediately. You utter hypocritical bigot. I hope your God rewards you for your attitudes because I'm hard pressed to see why anyone else should.
"StaticThunder: The same can be said about you. "
Yes yes, I am thoroughly bigoted against hypocrites and false prophets.
- DuggDowner, on 07/23/2008, -15/+20Good to see McDonald's standing up to these fascist Christian thugs. I hope the rest of the nation does as well.
- Herkimer56, on 07/23/2008, -11/+16Agreed.
- SOLGAARD, on 07/24/2008, -12/+6Dang, you musta been Bible-thumped as a kid, (i've never met a "Christian-thug") seems all pagans are inherantly scared of a "Book", or Christians...
Are you a "Christo-phobe"-? - Evilena, on 07/24/2008, -3/+7To the Lions!
- SOLGAARD, on 07/23/2008, -19/+11[L O L ]
Poor fagellah.
Poor McDonalds.
God loves the sinners, (thank God).- DuggDowner, on 07/23/2008, -10/+6Classic closet case.
- SOLGAARD, on 07/23/2008, -10/+7lol, (as long as fagellah are diggning me down, i must be right)-lol
- DuggDowner, on 07/23/2008, -10/+6Classic closet case.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -13/+15The whole point of this issue is why in the hey does McDonald's have to support any one group of society, period? When McDonald's decided to do this and donate thousands of dollars to ***** organizations they set themselves up for excluding other groups of people! Don't donate to any of them. Sound's fair to me. How about you?
Oh - no McDonald's just couldn't do that could they? In addition, wrote a response basically stating Christians are hateful and no good.- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -6/+8I thought we were in America for a second!
No way should a company be able to donate to WHOMEVER they want!!! That is insanity!!!
You might get someone mad if you donate to the wrong charity!
Give me a break...- flip2trip, on 07/23/2008, -8/+6This is not donating to a charity-- quit trying to smokescreen the issue.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -6/+5Charity? Who said donating anything to charity? Get your head out your tale.
- ashfish, on 07/23/2008, -6/+7Well they are a not-for-profit entity who is involved in community enrichment relations on a rather national level...Yeah, I'd say they fit the bill.
- Phyraxus, on 07/23/2008, -8/+4Damn, duggdowner had it right, FACIST christian thugs. Apparently, you aren't free to do what you want with your own money.
- Brownds, on 07/24/2008, -2/+0Are you really that ***** stupid?
- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -6/+8I thought we were in America for a second!
- delriaan, on 07/23/2008, -11/+11Hey, Lutrasimilis:
I made the switch to Linux about 8 years ago, and I couldn't be happier. The article description is garbage, not only for its lack of substance, but because the premise that businesses shouldn't be called out just because of the economy is just wrong because it puts money above God -- a sure-fire way to fail. I'd rather not see any legit business fail, but if their practices are exposed to be, shall we say, less than wholesome, then they should be opposed. And if they're gonna call Christians promoters of hate and dig their heels in, then I hope they take some punishment at the top until they see the light. The fact that you equate opposing something with seeking its destruction is disturbing. I oppose your view, but I'd rather you change it than see you destroyed -- think about it.- StaticThunder, on 07/23/2008, -6/+7Lots of Christian businesses have failed, I don't see how God has any power over their success. And, as you no doubt know, you are hurting many more Christian employees than homosexuals (who may have well disagreed with their company's decision) through a boycott, so go for it. (And if you aren't hurting them economically, then what is the point?) As a pro-gay rights atheist I'm 100% behind you. Christian's shooting themselves in the foot economically has a long tradition in this country and its one of the few things I like about them. They react predictably and without thinking. Its fun to watch.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -7/+10Lutrasimilis: The fact that you equate opposing something with seeking its destruction is NOT surprising to me because that is what you seek to DO with anyone who opposes your RADICAL AGENDA! Its the truth!
So you seek to silence Christians or anyone who opposes your radical views on homosexuality by means of but not limited too, intimidating people with threats of physical violence and verbal, being augmentative to the point of outright abuse, accusing people of being oh so "hateful, mean and intolerant". Grow a dam backbone will ya?
Think about this, if you are capable of it. If you truly were confident, secure and happy with your lifestyle and your life in general you would NOT care what other people thought of you. You would NOT try to FORCE acceptance of your lifestyle down the throats of others. So the only way to do that is to manipulate the current laws in the US to make is "hate crime" to speak out against you!
And you have the nerve to call anyone who does not accept your filthy perverted lifestyle intolerant. LOOK IN THE MIRROR.- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -3/+9Have you ever had oral sex? I find that disgustingly perverted.
Of course, because I think that, YOU HAVE TO THINK THAT TOO!!!! OR YOU ARE GOING STRAIGHT TO HELLLLLL!!!
HELL I TELLS YA!!!
What do you think this is, America? You can't do whatever you want in your bedroom! You might offend a Christian!!- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -7/+6LOL - your post is irrelevant to my post. Makes absolutely no sense. You can't even refute what I said and if you call your post a refute you obviously are unable to comprehend what your reading. However, I don't except any better either.
In a refute to your lam rantings.
Christians don't need to have a "Heterosexual Parade" and flaunt in PUBLIC oral sex, anal sex and any other indecency to the PUBLIC on a Float in broad day light - GAY PEOPLE DO.
We, Christians do keep our private life in private were it belongs. NOT THE PUBLIC SQUARE for all to see. - Cate320, on 07/23/2008, -2/+8So then why don't you protest at events like Mardi Gras? Where heterosexuals are out in the public square flaunting their sexuality?
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -2/+8Nobody needs to have a pride parade, but people can and do.
I've also seen no evidence of anal, vaginal, or oral sex performed on floats in broad daylight. - USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -5/+3lydecker: You obviously have not been to San Francisco on business and accidental went out for lunch and discovered the "Gay Parade" and what goes on, on the FLOAT! I could have DIED! That is sickening to say the very least and YES I would be just as sickened if it were heterosexuals doing the same vile actions. So I think that is something we could both agree on - keep in the bedroom so to speak and I don't care who it is. YUCK!!!!!!!!!!
Cate320: No I don't approve of that. And yes many groups to protest that event too. - lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -2/+6I haven't been to a Gay Pride event. Multiple of my friends, both heterosexual and homosexual, went to the Seattle Pride this year. I heard disappointment that there weren't more floats. One of my friends grabbed a ton of stickers, his favorite being "I'm Loved By PFLAG."
You should have taken pictures if people were performing anal, vaginal, or oral sex on floats in broad daylight, and brought those complaints to an officer to complain.
Bit it's good to know your issue is the content you witnessed of some individuals, not the sexual orientation of the people involved, and not the parade itself. - ThoughtfulWi, on 07/23/2008, -3/+7Us Navy Blue, plleease. You went to SF on business, and "ACCIDENTALLY???" encountered the gay parade. Well yeah, cuz it's such a tiny little parade that one could just stumble on it without having realized it was there. I don't believe you.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/24/2008, -3/+2Its easy to stumble across things when you took a wrong turn and ended up LOST. Quite Frankly ThoughtfulWil I don't care if you don't believe me or not.
- StaticThunder, on 07/24/2008, -1/+2NavyBlue, you're one of those people who isn't happy unless there is something they can be outraged about. You probably went looking for the parade just so you could have something new to be upset over. You're looking for things that confirm your own distorted world view so you can lord your holiness over everyone, comfortable that everyone else is a sinner and damned, and you, you are God's chosen one, you are the one who isn't making a horrible mistake.
I guess whatever gets you through your life, but honestly, its really a bit sad. I see you dying a bitter old woman. - card51short, on 07/24/2008, -1/+4"Christians don't need to have a "Heterosexual Parade" and flaunt in PUBLIC oral sex, anal sex and any other indecency to the PUBLIC on a Float in broad day light - GAY PEOPLE DO."
Sure...you don't have to do that.
But this is America...you're not going to stop others from doing it.
Worry about yourself stop judging others...you do not speak for God.
- USNavyBlue, on 07/23/2008, -7/+6LOL - your post is irrelevant to my post. Makes absolutely no sense. You can't even refute what I said and if you call your post a refute you obviously are unable to comprehend what your reading. However, I don't except any better either.
- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -3/+9Have you ever had oral sex? I find that disgustingly perverted.
- ROaks, on 07/23/2008, -9/+13This is what happened when we decided the United States would not continue to stand for the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob. Back in the 50s and 60s when the atheists were running amok hollering for there to be no expression of Christianity in our schools and during public government functions a big problem was created. The US of A is trying to be everything to everybody. The country is trying to stand for everything the people want that it doesn't stand for anything. You want law and order, decency? The only way it can happen is a return to the foundation our forefathers and Founding Fathers built. Return to the God of the Bible. The Body of Christ needs repent, ask God's forgiveness and then get back out there, spread the Gospel and not ever again go back to the comfort of their church buildings. Church go back into the highways and by ways compelling the people to repent and receive the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior. No Jesus, no peace, Know Jesus, know peace. We don't hate the sinner, we as does God hate the sin(bad behavior). America Bless God and God WILL Bless America.
- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -7/+6"Back in the 50s and 60s when the atheists were running amok hollering for there to be no expression of Christianity in our schools and during public government functions a big problem was created."
Sir, would you be opposed to an expression of atheism in our schools?
Of course you wouldn't. How about if the whole class stops and sings a prayer to Mohammed?
I'm sure you would be for that, right? Of course you wouldn't! - ItsMe22, on 07/24/2008, -1/+2"You want law and order, decency? The only way it can happen is a return to the foundation our forefathers and Founding Fathers built. Return to the God of the Bible"
I see ROaks would like to go back in time to help re-write the constitution to establish a state religion.
Oh wait, didn't we fight a war with British so that we wouldn't have one state sponsored/sanctioned religion, didn't we?
I always amazes me to see how thin skin some people are. I know that our enemies are thrilled that we are occupying our selves with trivial things why our border is still wide open.
- card51short, on 07/23/2008, -7/+6"Back in the 50s and 60s when the atheists were running amok hollering for there to be no expression of Christianity in our schools and during public government functions a big problem was created."
- durlek, on 07/23/2008, -8/+11I don’t oppose McDonald’s right to market gay meals to the homosexual population. My family just doesn’t happen to fall under that particular demographic, so we dine elsewhere.
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -5/+10This isn't about marketing policies at all. They aren't marketing exclusively to homosexuals. Your family does happen to fall under the particular demographic they market to.
- durlek, on 07/23/2008, -9/+9I’m not sure about why a restaurant like McDonalds would choose to have any involvement regarding issues of sexual deviance, but that’s apparently what they did. I’m not against homosexuals, but their problem is obviously very destructive and sad. People who would openly condone it really do not need to be near my young children. Thank you.
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -5/+9Most businesses have involvement with promoting diversity in their employment, including on race, gender, and sexual orientation. There are many studies that have shown diverse environments are productive
Homosexual orientation is not a problem, is not destructive and not sad any more than heterosexual orientation is. People who openly realize that people don't choose their sexual orientation would be very good for your children, especially if one of them is a gay youth.
For more information on the benefits of diversity, read some of the following links:
http://www.lloydstsbbusiness.com/support/businessg ...
http://www.asaecenter.org/PublicationsResources/ar ... - durlek, on 07/23/2008, -7/+3Hi lydecker,
Homosexual youths attempt suicide at a rate several times higher than heterosexual youths. I believe suicide is “sad and destructive”. On the other hand, I respect your right to describe suicide as “happy and creative” if it makes you feel more politically correct.
Many people who used to practice homosexuality now live as heterosexuals. Some people who used to live as heterosexuals have decided to practice homosexuality. Most of them are where they are because of their own personal choices. People who don’t get to choose ... but are coerced or forced by others into sexual deviance should call the police and bring the offenders to justice. - lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -2/+10Suicide is sad and destructive. Suicide correlates to homosexuality, that does not mean homosexuality is sad and sestructive. Let's see what else suicide correlates to:
Teenagers attempt suicide at a rate several times higher than other age groups. That does not mean teenage years are sad and destructive.
White males account for 72% of all suicides, and, together, white males and females account for over 90% of suicide completions. That does not mean that being white is sad and destructive.
http://www.intheknowzone.com/teen_suicide/who_comm ...
Researchers found that men with exceptionally low scores were two to three times more likely to commit self-murder or suicide. That does not mean that having low IQ is sad and destructive.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/152142/in ...
---
Many people who practiced homosexuality now practice heterosexuality (cite a number?), but there is no evidence of any change in sexual orientation. Many people who practiced heterosexuality now practice homosexuality (a much greater number), but there is no evidence of any change in sexual orientation (rather, many were closeted homosexuals who had yet to come to terms with their sexual orientation. Sexual acts are a choice, sexual orientation is not a choice, and there is no evidence it is caused by personal choices.
Anyone who is forced into something should contact the police and bring offenders to justice. Also, seek the advice of a therapist if this has happened to you. - durlek, on 07/24/2008, -8/+2Homosexuality is a pattern of behavior. Behaviors are acts which are usually chosen by the participants (except for cases of coercion). The same can not be said for being a teenager, white, or having low intelligence (except perhaps for cases caused by drug of other types of abuse).
Some people are tempted by homosexuality and others are not, but everyone has been tempted to do something wrong. Homosexuals are people who have experienced the temptation of homosexuality and have chosen to act upon it. I can feel tempted by the beauty of a woman I’m not married to, but unless I give into that temptation in some way I don’t become a fornicator, adulterer, or a rapist. That being said I’ll tell you that all of us have sinned and I have no interest to judge you.
If you have an interest to learn about people who have chosen to leave the homosexual lifestyle, I recommend that you communicate with people who have been there. Here is a link to an article about Michael Glaze, a former “gay rights” leader who decided to turn away from homosexuality.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/301661/fo ...
I hope my information is helpful for you. - lydecker, on 07/24/2008, -1/+9Homosexuality is not a pattern of behavior, homosexuality and heterosexuality are sexual orientation. They are attractions to people. They are not behaviors. Sexual orientations are not acts chosen by participants, they are attractions, the way people think, the way people act, in the way that sexuality is human. The same can be said for being a teenager, white, and having low intelligence.
All people are tempted sexually, whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. Homosexuals are people who feel homosexual temptation, whether or not they have acted upon it. Heterosexuals are people who feel heterosexual temptation, whether or not they have acted upon it. You can choose not to act on your sexual attraction to someone, but that doesn't mean you're not homosexual or heterosexual, that you are asexual.
Anyone can feel tempted by the beauty of a woman not married to, but unless they give into that temptation in some way they don’t become a fornicator, adulterer, or a rapist. But it DOES make them attracted to a woman, which does mean men have heterosexual feelings and women homosexual feelings.
I read that link, and I feel sorry for Michael Glaze's past. It seems he was expecting a sexual orientation to fill voids in his life, which is not true of any. I hope he, and others, read Michael Glaze's letter here, and this open letter in response to his:
http://www.thoughttheater.com/2007/07/an_open_lett ...
If you have interest to learn about former ex-gays, and the harm that ex-gay ministry causes people, I recommend that you communicate with Ex-gay survivors (they are plenty more prevalent and willing to converse than ex-gays).
Here's a link to an article about three former LA Ex-gay leaders, including the cofounder of Exodus International:
http://www.beyondexgay.com/article/apology
Here's a youtube apology and link to an article about former Ex-gay leaders in Australia:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDiYeJ_bsQo
http://www.soulforce.org/article/1296
Here's an article about Exodus-affiliated, ex-gay, live-in treatment facility Love In Action which drew national attention in 2005 when it became known that the program was admitting teen-agers against their will, with people speaking about malpractice and emotional and spiritual abuse at LIA:
http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/ex-gay-boot-camp- ...
I hope this information, and some of the things I've said, help you clear up misconceptions about homosexuality and sexual orientation. If you have other questions, I'd be happy to help. - durlek, on 07/24/2008, -7/+1Hi lydecker,
The most deceptive people are often those who do so by redefining terms. When you say that homosexuality is not a pattern of behavior, that’s just ridiculous. It’s like the folks who decided to describe homosexuals as “gay”. The word used to mean “happy”, but now it refers to people with a wildly elevated rate of suicide. By your “logic”, everyone who ever has felt an urge to kill is a killer. I think you are trying hard to rationalize away the truth in order to make you feel better about yourself. I feel sorry for you because I believe that homosexuality is a very harmful and difficult to overcome. - lydecker, on 07/24/2008, -1/+8"When you say that homosexuality is not a pattern of behavior, that’s just ridiculous."
From Merriam Webster, homosexual means "of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex." Heterosexual, accordingly, means "of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward the opposite sex."
From the American Heritage Dictionary, homosexuality means "Sexual orientation to persons of the same sex." Heterosexuality, accordingly, means "Sexual orientation to persons of the opposite sex."
Both of these words also describe sexual acts, but DO describe orientation and attraction, which are not patterns of behavior. Redefining the terms otherwise, durlek, would be quite dishonest on your part.
"The word [gay] used to mean “happy”, but now it refers to people with a wildly elevated rate of suicide."
In the English language, words can have multiple meanings that do change over time. The word still has the same meaning as happy, and does not refer to "people with a wildly elevated rate of suicide," but now to homosexuals. The two are not synonyms.
Historically, from 1178, gay meant "full of joy or mirth," based in Old French. The word gay in the 1890s had an overall tinge of promiscuity -- a gay house was a brothel. Gey cats also were said to be tramps who offered sexual services to women. The "Dictionary of American Slang" reports that gay (adj.) was used by homosexuals, among themselves, in this sense since at least 1920. For more study of its etymology, see this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay#Etymology
While the words homosexual and heterosexual define feelings, killer does not. That is not logic, definitions are not logic. If it were true that these definitions did refer to behaviors and actions, then all virgins would be known as asexual, which is incorrect. Asexual means "Lacking interest in or desire for sex."
"I think you are trying hard to rationalize away the truth in order to make you feel better about yourself."
This is correct in that spreading the truth does not make me feel better about being a contributing member of society, and hopefully alleviating some of the pain that homosexuals feel by those who do not understand them, aren't familiar with any, and who believe stereotypes. Most often, it seems the people I encounter with these beliefs have little exposure to homosexuals (perhaps due to being from towns with small populations), and religious.
"I feel sorry for you because I believe that homosexuality is a very harmful and difficult to overcome."
Your feelings are misplaced, because I am not homosexual, and I have seen no evidence that sexual orientation can be changed, or that an orientation can be "overcome." - durlek, on 07/25/2008, -5/+0That’s interesting lydecker.
You started one post by saying “homosexuality is not a pattern of behavior”, but later you said “both of these words (homosexuality and heterosexuality) also describe sexual acts”... You seem a bit confused, lydecker. Anyway, thanks for the history lesson. Apparently we can agree that the “gay“ word meant “happy” long before it meant anything sinful. That’s good.
Let’s go back to the main point of this conversation. You said “I have seen no evidence that sexual orientation can be changed, or that an orientation can be “overcome”.
The people who have left the homosexual lifestyle seem to be living proof that you are wrong. I say homosexuality is difficult to overcome and you say it’s impossible. In a way, we’re not so far from agreement on that subject. For the purpose of this conversation, let’s assume that you are right. I think that would be a very good reason for me to keep my impressionable young children away from open homosexuals and homosexual advocates. - lydecker, on 07/25/2008, -0/+10"You started one post by saying “homosexuality is not a pattern of behavior”, but later you said “both of these words (homosexuality and heterosexuality) also describe sexual acts”... You seem a bit confused, lydecker."
Not at all. The words are used to describe both. When you are using the adjective referring to a person, instead of using the adjective referring to sexual acts, you are talking about a sexual orientation of the person, as opposed to a gender involved.
i.e., If a heterosexual man molests a male youth, and that child is also heterosexual, the act was homosexual. Their sexual orientation, however (being attracted to females) is heterosexual.
This article is referring to "people" who are homosexual, which is not a pattern of behavior.
"The people who have left the homosexual lifestyle seem to be living proof that you are wrong."
And do the people who have yet to come out of the closet prove I am wrong as well? No. Since you seem to have forgotten or overlooked, I quote from before, "Many people who practiced homosexuality now practice heterosexuality... Many people who practiced heterosexuality now practice homosexuality (a much greater number), but there is no evidence of any change in sexual orientation." Just because you change the acts you do, by coming out or going back in the closet, is not evidence of a sexual orientation change. These people are simply living proof that you can deny your sexual orientation. I've yet to see a study on how the brain changes.
The people who have chosen not to engage in homosexual acts, or heterosexual acts, are making choices about their behaviors. Everyone can choose their actions, but I've seen no evidence that their sexual orientation has changed. In fact, MANY who don't embrace their homosexuality say it's still there, that the homosexual orientation is still tempting them.
"I think that would be a very good reason for me to keep my impressionable young children away from open homosexuals and homosexual advocates."
Why? Because you would rather a homosexual child of yours not know that there are homosexuals who are comfortable with themselves, and rather that (s)he pretend (s)he is heterosexual for all his/her life? You would not want it impressed upon him/her that homosexuals shouldn't be afraid of their homosexuality? I hope that your child would be able to deal with his sexual orientation despite your bias, and hopefully you would come to accept him, and not abandon him (as some do). - durlek, on 07/25/2008, -4/+0You really do seem to be confused, lydecker.
Regarding your defense of your claim that “homosexuality is not a pattern of behavior” ... you said “When you are using the adjective referring to a person...” Why did express disagreement with something I didn’t say? If you’ll look into your dictionary, I think you’ll be able to see that “homosexuality” is not an adjective.
Regarding people who stopped practicing homosexuality, you said ... “These people are simply living proof that you can deny your sexual orientation. I've yet to see a study on how the brain changes.” Are you under the impression that all homosexuals are born with a different kind of brain than heterosexuals? Maybe that’s where much of our disagreement lies. I believe that the behavior patterns of people are usually strongly influenced by the way they are raised, what they are taught, the behavioral examples they see in their parents ... and of course the decisions they make in life. - lydecker, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7Ah, yes, I can see where I made a mistake. With "adjective", I was referring to the word "homosexual," which is properly an adjective (and improperly a noun).
But with both homosexual and homosexuality, either can be used in terms of a realm of behaviors encompassing male-male sexuality (anything that associates with that, as you would using the word "biology"), or sexual orientation. None are defined as a pattern of homosexual behaviors.
"Are you under the impression that all homosexuals are born with a different kind of brain than heterosexuals?"
Absolutely. Homosexuals of one gender's brains do commonly work differently than heterosexuals of their same gender. In many studies, it's been shown that homosexuals in fact have a lot of similarities with heterosexuals of the opposite gender. I.e., gay men's brains work the way straight women's brains do. It affects plenty of parts of the brain aside from sexual orientation, and you can see plenty of references to studies done in the following links:
This study compares the sizes of brains, symmetry, and activity in the brain
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/jun/16/neur ...
Gay men's brains work like women when navigating, recognizing landmarks, as opposed to men's spatial thinking:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7069
Lesbian's brains react differently to sex hormones than straight women's brains:
http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?2006/05 ...
And a similar study on sex hormone reaction done for gay men and straight men:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/10/science/10smell. ...
Regarding your perception of how "behavior patterns" are formed, there are no observed common factors on how children are raised, what they are taught, behavioral examples, and decisions that are common among genders and/or homosexuals that would cause some brains to work differently. Straight males, straight females, gay males, gay females, when growing up in similar environments still have different personalities and functions of the brain that aren't attributed to common environmental factors. - durlek, on 07/26/2008, -2/+0Hi there lydecker.
I actually tend to agree with part of one of your referenced articles when it indicates that there may be “biological factors that contribute to sexual orientation”. I also believe people can be biologically affected a great deal by the things we eat and the chemicals we are exposed to. I even think it may be possible for something like that to happen before birth. For example ... are you familiar with the health concerns regarding the estrogen which naturally occur in soy products? If the brains of homosexuals are really physically different than heterosexuals, do we know why? It is known that mental activity does have physical affects of the brain.
Regarding the idea that homosexuality is something which can be learned, you stated:”there are no observed common factors on how children are raised, what they are taught, behavioral examples, and decisions that are common among genders and/or homosexuals that would cause some brains to work differently”
Maybe YOU haven’t observed those common factors, but I think it’s difficult for one of us to know that nobody else has made any particular observation. Here is a link to an article which discusses non-biological causes of homosexuality.
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron3.html
Interesting quote from the article:
“The first homosexual encounter is usually initiated by an older person. In separate studies 60%, (6) 64%, (3) and 61% (10) of the respondents claimed that their first partner was someone older who initiated the sexual experience.”
Those initial homosexual encounters obviously would happen less if children were not exposed to homosexuals. McDonalds has made efforts to distinguish itself as a “gay-friendly” eating establishment, and I respect their right to focus their marketing efforts as they see fit. But there will be no “gay meals” at McDonalds for my family. - lydecker, on 07/26/2008, -1/+5"Are you familiar with the health concerns regarding the estrogen which naturally occur in soy products?"
Yes, I am.
"If the brains of homosexuals are really physically different than heterosexuals, do we know why?"
I don't know of any study that has in depth theorized what factors can help predict the differences, or the complete cause of all differences in brains between heterosexual men, heterosexual women, homosexual men, and homosexual women. I have read one study where hormone levels in developing mice were manipulated, injecting male mice with estrogen, which caused the grown rats to behave more female and be homosexual.
"It is known that mental activity does have physical affects of the brain." To a degree, yes, but not to the extent that people who come out as homosexual have somehow trained their brains to be homosexual and to think differently and to have different sized brains like people of the opposite gender.
"I think it’s difficult for one of us to know that nobody else has made any particular observation." I haven't read a peer reviewed study that shows common environmental factors that cause male children to develop differently than females, or common environmental factors that cause homosexual children to develop differently than heterosexual children. They may be out there, but most of the studies I've read cite that there isn't something common that's causing all of this.
Reading this, I can tell this isn't an article strictly about non-biological causes of homosexuality. It seems more an anti-gay article. I also looked up the author, and now I'm not surprised, his work apparently doesn't meet ethical standards of psychology. You can read some about him here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Cameron
"Homosexuals overwhelmingly believed their feelings and behavior were the result of social or environmental influences." As did many people of that era, mind you. Homosexuality was commonly thought to be result of environment, whether you were heterosexual or homosexual people believed it. It was a common psychiatric belief, that wasn't based in evidence, but in unevidenced theory.
Do you really find it interesting that 60-65% of people's first sexual encounter was with someone who was older than them? Leaving 35-40% who's first encounter was with someone younger? I don't. I would find it more common for people's first sexual encounter to be with someone who is more experienced. I remember older women hitting on me in youth, I don't remember people younger than me.
Not finding a biological or genetic factor, age differences in sex experiences, change in sexual orientation identity... these don't deal with the causes of homosexuality at all. And the rest of the study shows a lot of correlation, nothing about causation. The article isn't consistent.
And it doesn't show that homosexuality can be learned, or that it is learned. Since any child is around heterosexuals more, it should learn that, and it can't explain why homosexuals occur in heterosexual environments. From the statistics shown (thought it's only perception), the minority of people believed other homosexuals influenced their sexual orientation. There's no study shown that shows the majority of homosexuals know and are influenced by other homosexuals to a greater extent than heterosexuals.
"Those initial homosexual encounters obviously would happen less if children were not exposed to homosexuals." And initial heterosexual AND homosexual encounters obviously would happen less if children were not exposed to heterosexuals. A lot of people's first encounters are with someone in the closet. Me and my fraternity brother were both hit on once by the self-identified heterosexual uncle of one of our other brothers.
"I respect their right to focus their marketing efforts as they see fit." I respect their marketing to heterosexual couples and families too, and the fact that they don't market to homosexuals is fine. - durlek, on 07/27/2008, -4/+0Well, we have established that we have several points of disagreement. I think we could probably go back and forth for a prolonged period with our discussion, but we probably wouldn’t find a lot of agreement. I’m too busy for that because I have many children. I do have one more question for you, however. If McDonalds really “isn’t marketing to homosexuals”, why do they have an executive on the board with the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce? If the purpose for that is not marketing, what IS the reason? Do they need input from the sexual deviant community to improve their line of food products?
- lydecker, on 07/27/2008, -0/+7It's for non-discrimination in employment and business cooperation with LGBT businesses, "expanding the economic opportunities and advancements of the LGBT business community." Their marketing campaign and ads are completely separate, and unaffected.
The NGLCC does not give McDonald's input, it's more that the McDonald's employee gives the NGLCC input by being on the board. This board then comes up with possible solutions to address issues faced by LGBT owned businesses.
This isn't marketing. Most people wouldn't have heard about and still wouldn't have cared if not for the AFA involvement.
Read the NGLCC mission statement here:
http://www.nglcc.org/about/mission - durlek, on 07/28/2008, -4/+0Oh, I see now. McDonalds supports an orgainization with the specific mission to promote the economic growth and prosperity for gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people. Does McDonalds happen to support any organizations with the specific mission to promote the economic growth and prosperity for white male heterosexuals who are Christian? You know ... there is a great deal of economic pain in the WMHC community today ... and a great deal of discrimination against WMHC’s too.
- lydecker, on 07/28/2008, -0/+7White, male, Christian heterosexuals aren't typically advantaged and need little organizations to specifically identify and target issues to support helping them grow to equality in the market. I don't know of any McDonald's partner organization with that specific mission. Of course, this doesn't mean that they are disadvantaged. McDonald's is dedicated to diversity, as you can see on their corporate diversity page and top article in the Corporate Responsibility Blog.
http://www.mcdonalds.com/corp/values/people/divers ...
http://csr.blogs.mcdonalds.com/default.asp
I haven't seen evidence of economic pain, I think they are still economically doing very well. Personally, as a WMHC, I am doing very well. Do you have evidence that they are economically disadvantaged?
According to this study of college graduates, white and hispanic males earn 10 to 15% more than females, black and asian males.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/1191075 ...
Also, in high income countries like the US, religion is found to correlate to higher income families.
http://ideas.repec.org/p/dgr/uvatin/20080014.html - durlek, on 07/28/2008, -5/+0You haven’t seen evidence of economic pain (for white male heterosexual Christians)? Do you think they get a special discount on their gasoline? Don’t you think the many government sanctioned racial discrimination programs like “affirmative action” have caused economic pain for white male heterosexual
Christians? How about the whole “hate crime” fiasco? You’d have to be an idiot not to notice that “hate crime” justice is just a way to administer justice disproportionately in a way to discriminate against heterosexual whites. Here is an interesting article regarding that subject for your enjoyment.
http://www.loompanics.com/Articles/hatecrimes.html - lydecker, on 07/28/2008, -0/+6No, I'm not aware of any discounts on gasoline for anyone other than what I get from buying enough groceries at Safeway. I'm not sure what you are referring to with this statement. And I also do not see evidence of a great economic pain caused by affirmative action. While you have theory that this may economically disadvantage WMHC, is it rooted in fact? I haven't seen any evidence of economic disadvantage, but please cite your evidence.
You have to be an idiot to think that hate crimes only discriminate against heterosexual whites. Hate crimes apply to all sexual orientation, and all races. While media coverage is one issue, which is addressed by the article, statistics show that hate crimes are more commonly committed by blacks on whites than by whites on blacks, which can be seen in this article. It's ridiculous to assert that black-on-white crimes aren't charged as hate crimes, as shown by this evidence:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTI ... - durlek, on 07/28/2008, -1/+0Your article indicates that blacks are charged with hate crimes 50% more often per capita. USDOJ stats indicate that in recent years blacks have murdered about 600% more than whites. Murder is a pretty hateful act, but I think rape is too. Do you agree? Interracial rape stats seem to be extremely disproportionate. Here’s an interesting quote regarding that subject from frontpage magazine.
“ In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man. What this means is that every day in the United States, over one hundred white women are raped or sexually assaulted by a black man.”
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=F3 ...
If the legal system were administering “hate crime” justice without substantial racial prejudice, I would expect the arrest rates to be roughly proportionate with the offenses committed. I see that you disagree with me on that issue, and I respect your right to do so. Perhaps ... as a white male ... you could commit a hate crime or at least confess for one you didn’t commit ... so you could even things out a bit. - lydecker, on 07/28/2008, -0/+5"Your article indicates that blacks are charged with hate crimes 50% more often per capita."
More accurately, that blacks are charged with hate crimes against whites 50% more often per capita than whites are charged against blacks.
"USDOJ stats indicate that in recent years blacks have murdered about 600% more than whites."
I believe from this statement this would refer to all murders, hate crimes and not, and regardless of perpetrator-victim skin color. This therefore can't be used as a direct comparison to the 50%, if that was your intention, because the data pools differently.
"Murder is a pretty hateful act, but I think rape is too. Do you agree?"
Yes. Hate crime/ bias crime isn't synonymous with hateful, though. It can be a hate crime if the motivation is bias, just as in murder. An act doesn't just have to be fueled by anger to be a hate crime.
It's not logical that all people of a race who have raped a female of a different race did it because they hate them for their skin color, and therefore not logical that hate crimes would always be proportional to number of crimes. If the legal system is administering hate crime justice without racial prejudice, it just has to prove that bias against a victim for their race, gender, orientation, etc. was present in the crime.
---
You've shown that crime is demographically disproportionate for race. No surprise. You haven't shown connection to your previous argument that hate crime justice administers justice disproportionately against heterosexual whites. In fact, it's not motivated by prejudice against white heterosexuals, it's motivated by recognizing the great harm that simply hate can motivate people to commit crime. As the New York State Legislature said:
"Crimes motivated by invidious hatred toward particular groups not only harm individual victims but send a powerful message of intolerance and discrimination to all members of the group to which the victim belongs. Hate crimes can and do intimidate and disrupt entire communities and vitiate the civility that is essential to healthy democratic processes." - durlek, on 07/28/2008, -1/+2Hi lydecker,
I need to clarify something. It’s about my statement “ USDOJ stats indicate that in recent years blacks have murdered about 600% more than whites.” I should have mentioned that it was a per capita comparison. Blacks and whites murdered roughly similar numbers, but the whites were about 7 times more numerous. Sorry for the ambiguity. - durlek, on 07/29/2008, -2/+0You believe that I “ haven't shown connection to your previous argument that hate crime justice administers justice disproportionately against heterosexual whites”. We can observe more detail if you would like. I have shown that blacks commit interracial rape in the US about 3500 times more often than whites. And you know that blacks murder 7 times more often than whites (per capita). You would like to know more, and fortunately the information is readily available. Interracial murder comparisons are even more disproportional. According to the FBI Uniform Crime reports, between the years 1995 and 2000, the average Black kills a "White" 15.9 times more often than the reverse. Here is a link to a very interesting article called “hiding black interracial crimes”. It was authored by a black man of very high intelligence and great integrity. I hope you enjoy the read.
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5086
I admit that I haven’t provided any statistical information about scientific racial hatred measurements which were administered to whites and blacks while they were committing interracial crimes. I don’t have access to that information, so I go with the bold assumption that hatred motivates people to commit murder and rape. Blacks in the US commit interracial rape 3500 times more often than the whites and interracial murder 15.9 more often ... and they are only charged with 50% more hate crimes than whites. Our nation’s white population is being victimized disproportionately by the criminals from the black population, and the white population is being discriminated against by the disproportional enforcement of “hate crime” laws.
My favorite cousin was raped and brutally murdered in her own home after her neighborhood turned majority black. I hope you can forgive me for failing to consider the possibility that those crimes were committed without hatred. I don’t know what the “benefits” are suppose to be, but violent crime was much lower and there was much less trash on the sides of the roads before our neighborhood gained racial “diversity”. - lydecker, on 07/29/2008, -1/+5While again you show that blacks more commonly commit crime, you haven't shown a connection that these are hate crimes and that enforcing hate crimes is disproportionately administered against heterosexual whites.
"I don’t have access to that information, so I go with the bold assumption that hatred motivates people to commit murder and rape."
Again, don't make the mistake that hatred is the necessary factor in hate crimes. It's bias against a person because they are part of a group. And don't synonomize interracial, interreligious, and intersexual crime with hate crime. Hate crimes (also known as bias motivated crimes) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion, sexual orientation, disability, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender, gender identity, or political affiliation.
"The white population is being discriminated against by the disproportional enforcement of “hate crime” laws."
Though you admit you haven't provided any statistical information about scientific racial hatred measurements, or anything that shows that the problem is in enforcement of bias crimes, and not that not all can be classified bias crimes.
"I hope you can forgive me for failing to consider the possibility that those crimes were committed without hatred."
I do. I see why you might be motivated to consider that as a victim, she was targetted because the perpetrator had a bias against whites and set out to commit a crime against whites. This might be why I've felt you stepped out of line asking me to "commit a hate crime or at least confess for one." - durlek, on 07/29/2008, -2/+0Well ... let me know if you find a way to scientifically measure an individual’s racial hatred and find a way to administer your testing system to a statistically significant segment of the interracial crime committing community while they are committing crimes. Until you or someone else can do that, I’ll stay with my belief that murder and rape are usually hateful events.
If there really is no correlation between hatred and the criminal offenses ... then there is no reason for the law enforcement community to care about peoples’ thoughts. A great deal of legitimate police work is neglected while our law enforcement community talks about “hate crimes”. Innocent people die because or law enforcement resources are wasted on “hate crimes”.
It shouldn’t matter if some highly educated government paid idiot thinks the man who raped and killed my cousin was biased against whites. What does matter is ... she is dead, she was raped, she was murdered, and those events were no accident. The man who did those things needs to be identified and executed so he will not commit additional crimes. - lydecker, on 07/29/2008, -1/+5"Until you or someone else can do that, I’ll stay with my belief that murder and rape are usually hateful events."
...but not hate crimes/ bias crimes.
"If there really is no correlation between hatred and the criminal offenses"
Of course there is a connection between malice (or sometimes need) to criminal offenses. But that's not what a hate crime or bias motivated crime is.
"Innocent people die because or law enforcement resources are wasted on 'hate crimes'.'"
Can you cite evidence to what you are referring to? - durlek, on 07/29/2008, -2/+0Innocent people die because or law enforcement resources are wasted on “hate crimes”. A great deal of time, money and effort is spent in efforts to evaluate and punish “thought crimes” like racial bias. Those resources could be much more wisely spent on detectives, rope, and excavators to identify, hang, and bury violent criminals like the one who killed my cousin.
- lydecker, on 07/30/2008, -1/+4In other words, you can't cite evidence that people have died due to lack of resources. Okay, thanks.
"A great deal of time, money and effort is spent in efforts to evaluate and punish “thought crimes” like racial bias."
Can you cite evidence to what you are referring to? - durlek, on 07/30/2008, -2/+0We really can’t be sure that any law enforcement resources have ever saved any lives or stopped any crimes. Perhaps every criminal ever arrested or killed by law enforcement officers was just about to stop offending anyway. It’s possible, but not likely. It’s also possible that embracing homosexuality will help McDonalds make better hamburgers.
- lydecker, on 07/30/2008, -1/+3"We really can’t be sure that any law enforcement resources have ever saved any lives or stopped any crimes."
And we can be incredibly less sure that a lack of resources is stopping law enforcement from saving lives or stopping crimes they otherwise could.
"Perhaps every criminal ever arrested or killed by law enforcement officers was just about to stop offending anyway."
There's many things to consider, including this (which is why thought crime doesn't work, it's not always a predictor of a crime to come), rights of suspects, rights of victims, ability to solve criminal cases, ethics, etc.
"It’s also possible that embracing homosexuality will help McDonalds make better hamburgers."
It is, but it's much more likely that pushing non-discrimination measures for homosexuals will help McDonalds succeed in the business world. - eir574, on 07/30/2008, -1/+5@durlek,
What happened to your cousin was truly terrible. I'm sorry to hear that.
I'm confused, though, as to whether you think that the police are busy investigating "thought crimes" in cases in which no physical crime has taken place. That's not the idea behind hate crimes. It's a label attached to crimes that were motivated by things like the victim's race, gender, sexual orientation, and so on in order to attach greater penalties at trial.
I'm uncertain as to whether those things should incur longer sentences, but so far as I'm aware, it takes little to no extra effort from the police and prosecutor to investigate a murder they've termed a hate crime vs. one they haven't. Motive is always investigated since it helps convince the jury that the defendant committed the crime and because it helps in understanding the criminal mind so that we can work to prevent future crimes and to apprehend criminals more quickly.
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -5/+10This isn't about marketing policies at all. They aren't marketing exclusively to homosexuals. Your family does happen to fall under the particular demographic they market to.
- FritzKatz, on 07/23/2008, -9/+13Lutrasimilis -- your title and description seem a tad dishonest. Here's what the article actually says:
_____________________________
McDonald's hears: 'I'm NOT lovin' it!'
In front of local restaurants, fed-up Christians protest company's support of same-sex marriage
The corporate headquarters for McDonald's is hearing from store managers in California that customers are upset over the company's pro-homosexual advocacy and they aren't going to take it any longer.
Yuriy Popko, one of several Christians who staged a sign-waving protest at the Golden Arches in Citrus Heights today, said the protest at that location was suspended when store officials agreed to convey protesters' objections to the corporate office.
It was because of a decision by the restaurant chain known for Happy Meals and its Golden Arches to deliberately advocate for homosexuality. The company has given $20,000 to the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and placed one of its executives on that group's board. The NGLCC, among other things, lobbies for same-sex "marriage" provisions.
"If McDonald's restaurants and franchises … follow the small business advice of the company's new homosexual partner – the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC), which received a $20,000 grant from McDonald's – there would be chaos," said Peter LaBarbera, chief of Americans for Truth. ...
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.vie ...
- InRussetShadows, on 07/23/2008, -6/+9Of course it's dishonest. The number of honest, fair-minded leftists is astonishingly low.
- ThoughtfulWi, on 07/23/2008, -2/+2And you have solid data to back that up, right?
- SOLGAARD, on 07/23/2008, -3/+3Hear-hear, (proof being many articles on the mental instability of liberals).
but hey, TWi, you've been pretending- for the duration of your existance, (why stop now)-? - card51short, on 07/24/2008, -1/+2yes the conservatives have been stalwarts of sanity these last 8 years. *rolls eyes*
BOTH YOU LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES WITH YOUR "MY TEAM IS BETTER" POLITICS ARE RUINING AMERICA!!!
- InRussetShadows, on 07/23/2008, -6/+9Of course it's dishonest. The number of honest, fair-minded leftists is astonishingly low.
- WaitingForJesus, on 07/23/2008, -10/+12We must use these tactics of the devil to normalize homosexuality in order to keep people slaves to their sin, against him. Meaning, we are seeing who needs the gospel because of their openness to flaunt their sin, so witness to them---stop hating them. Tell them the gospel. Jesus not only will forgive them, but will enable them to resist the temptation to sin in this way. Of course the devil doesn't want them to know this or believe it, but it is the Christian's job to make sure this message gets across. Are we called to hate sinners? No. We are called to continue to give the gospel no matter what society is like or what is going on.
Anyone out there who is gay please pay attention. We are all sinners with our own set of circumstances that have led us all down the path of anger, hate, sex outside of marriage, disrespect, rebellion against God, and also homosexuality. All of those things are sins that all people are only capable of resisting, if that is their particular struggle, with the help of Christ. I know you don't believe that you can stop having homosexual sex because this society that is controlled by the devil wants you to believe that. I implore you to listen to your heart.
It is possible that you were sexually abused at some point in your life and that event scarred you. Someone taking advantage of you in a sexual way is possibly confusing because though it is wrong that sick twisted person may have tried to make your flesh body feel good. This could make you feel guilty on some level getting sexual gradification out of it. And now you tell yourself that it only felt good because you must be gay or something. Or because it felt good, you want to repeat it. Not all people...some are abused in a way that is only violent...but not all. I personally know someone who said her own father did this to her as a 6 year old child and he would make it so it felt good. This is sick, but this confused her because she didn't know any better. Her adult life was messed up by sex because of it until she found Jesus.
If a male is sexual abused by a male, this could account for why that child grows up to gravitate towards males...it was the first sexual experience. It makes sense, but the gay agenda people who you think are your friends don't want you to look at it this way. Use your head and evaluate your own life. Right now we have people "trying" gay sex simply because society is tempting them with it as "normal", so many are just want to try something that was once forbidden. Does that make it normal? No. People always want to push the envelope.
I would like all gay people to know that true Christian love them and want to introduce them to Jesus who will free them from this rebellion that enslaves them. Sex is a strong impulse and people love to feel good, but the cost is huge for that short term feeling. Homosexual sex is just a spin off of fornication, which is sex outside of marriage. God sees marriage only as a man and a woman making a union...and it doesn't matter if you force the law to change it. God is not going to change His view, so all sex outside of the man/woman marriage bed is fornication and the price of it is hell, if the person doesn't not find Christ before death. We are all struggling with our sin on some level, but the key is struggling against what our flesh wants. If there is no struggle, then you have given in to it and there is no way Christ lives in you. You'll never be perfect, but the general direction of your life should be going in the direction of following Christ, not rebelling against Him.
If He lives in you, you will be able to conquer the temptation. You will always be tempted, but NOT beyond what you can stand. Christ died for that sin you are doing, so that you could live in heaven with Him. If you choose that sin over that gift, you must know that it will be you that pays the penalty for your sins in full. It is real whether you choose to believe it or not. This goes for all people, not just gays. Turn from that sin that enslaves you and follow Christ and trust Him.
If you don't seek God, you will not find Him. You must seek to find and be like a child who is willing to be taught, not a know it all who thinks they know everything. God wants you and loves you, but He will always do what is just. Either Christ's pays for your sin, or you do. He will not break His own laws of justice because that would go against His purity and holiness.
Come to know Him. Read His word and believe it because it is true. Don't choose to be a slave to sex that is impure and on some level you know it is perverted. Please face this fact and turn from it and ask God to help you see the truth.
May God open your eyes and love you as you should be loved.- tradcath4ever, on 07/23/2008, -4/+4What a beautiful post WaitingForJesus! Very simple and to the point. I would just like to add that in God's natural order marriage can only be between one man and one woman because its primary purpose is procreation. God Bless!
- ROaks, on 07/23/2008, -2/+3WaitingForJesus, thanks for helping the "Christians hate gay people" excuse. Real Christians don't hate any body. JUST AS GOD HATES HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOR, LYING, CHEATING, GOSSIPING, THIEVERY, (you should get the idea)REAL CHRISTIANS HATE BAD BEHAVIOR. It's the behavior sir, not the person.
- Evilena, on 07/24/2008, -1/+2If god hates lying it must be a sin to watch Fox News after they fought in court for their first amendment right to lie.
http://www.relfe.com/media_can_legally_lie.html
Repent or burn in Hell
- Evilena, on 07/24/2008, -1/+2If god hates lying it must be a sin to watch Fox News after they fought in court for their first amendment right to lie.
- chiefquanah, on 07/23/2008, -7/+7Since everyone is stuck on Charity I thought a definition of that word should be posted so as to define exactly what is being discussed here.
charity
Noun
1. pl -ties an organization set up to provide help to those in need
2. the giving of help, such as money or food, to those in need
3. help given to those in need; alms
Based on their website descriptions, notes, etc. NGLCC doesn't apper to fit the definition of Charity (at least not to me) so McDonalds giving to this organization is not the same as giving to a Chartiy that provides for those in need who cannot provide for themselves. However neither does the AFA so I wouldn't support corporate donations to them either. As it should be Corporations like Micky D's should remain neutral when it comes to non charitable organizations.
I choose not to do business with Micky D's or organizations like them with my feet by going elsewhere.- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -7/+3Yes, I don't know where charity came from in people's heads, but the NGLCC is an advocate for the GLBT community equality on many levels, including its three-year-old supplier diversity initiative.
When it comes to corporate partners and promoting diversity in the work environment, I don't believe corporations should remain neutral, I think it's best to support diversity and work with organizations like NAACP.
"The goal of NGLCC is to level the playing field for GLBT owned businesses to have increased opportunities
for supplier contracts with corporate America," said Justin Nelson, NGLCC co-founder. "Corporate diversity
programs often include racial and ethnic minorities but do not include GLBT as a criterion. We are
encouraged to see that Americans value diversity and see the important role diversity initiatives play in
expanding the types of vendors they hire as well as the diversity of the workforce."
You can find a big list of corporate partners of NGLCC here:
http://www.nglcc.org/corporate/partners
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -7/+3Yes, I don't know where charity came from in people's heads, but the NGLCC is an advocate for the GLBT community equality on many levels, including its three-year-old supplier diversity initiative.
- garclar, on 07/23/2008, -9/+11Hey I have never liked their greasy slimy fatburgers or chinzy breakfast anyway and for them to suck up to the queers only goes to show how hard up they are. If you want a great burger go to Hardee's and do the steakburger or go to Burger King and do the double whooper if you want some good chewin. But Mickey D's? Come on, their food sucks as well as their politics. Count me out, the way to get to these clowns is stop buying their slop, I have a long time ago!! gkb
- ItmightbeJB, on 07/23/2008, -9/+9You'd think McDonald's would have learned their lesson after the successful boycott of Ford Motor Co. I'm proud that so many of my Christian brothers and sisters are letting their thoughts be known on issues of morality. Morality matters and I'm so tired of the shortsighted dullards among us who say you can't legislate morality. The fact is you can't legislate anything BUT morality! Think about it. Every law ever written was representative of someones idea of right v. wrong. From deviant sexual perversions to speed limits it's ultimately the same thing.
Rebuke evil. Resist the Devil and he will flee.- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -5/+7Maybe they're learning the lesson that Disney did after AFA's uncussessful boycott. Many people don't think the boycott of Ford had a significant impact on Ford profits.
"Attributing Ford’s fall to AFA’s boycott not only ignores the automaker’s failure to respond to changes in the marketplace, it also ignores the record of past AFA boycotts. In 2005, it ended its boycott against the Walt Disney Corporation, with president Tim Wildmon claiming that the organization had made its point."
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the_success_of_afas_f ...
I'm so proud that many of MY Christian brothers and sisters, as well as non-Christians, are promoting equality for everyone regardless of their sexual orientation.- SOLGAARD, on 07/23/2008, -8/+3Then you lie, no Christian promotes sin as equal.
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -0/+7I don't lie. Many Christians do promote equality toward people who have divorced. Oh, of course, they're not Christians.
- Evilena, on 07/23/2008, -2/+6Good point.
If McCain isn't a Christian do you think he secretly could be a Muslim?
- ROaks, on 07/24/2008, -6/+5lydecker, real Christians will never help promote the homosexual BEHAVIOR, as equal. It is not. That is just the way it is.
- lydecker, on 07/24/2008, -1/+7Homosexual sex and heterosexual sex are different. I'd never say one can replace the other for anybody. That's just fact, something Christians and non-Christians can agree on.
- StaticThunder, on 07/24/2008, -2/+2No TRUE Christian would EVER think that one could disagree about the moral weight of homosexuality.
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -5/+7Maybe they're learning the lesson that Disney did after AFA's uncussessful boycott. Many people don't think the boycott of Ford had a significant impact on Ford profits.
- BigB8615, on 07/23/2008, -5/+11Not sure what all the fuss is about. McDonalds has a right to donate their money to whatever organizations they choose.
And if people don't like or appreciate who McDonalds donates that money to, we all have the right to stop giving them that money.
For the time being anti-discrimination laws in this country still allow us to discriminate against a business for any reason we deem fit. Some people may not like McDonalds because of the color of its arches and guess what....that's okay. Some may think their food sucks (which it does) and that's okay. Some may not like that they donate to homosexual agendas and that's okay too.
Suggesting that someone is wrong for boycotting McDonalds for any reason is ridiculous. People have every right to do so whether you agree with their reasoning or not.- ROaks, on 07/24/2008, -2/+5Seems simple enough to me BigB.
- viejoverde, on 07/23/2008, -5/+9Newsflash to lutrasimilis YOU ARE IN THE MINORITY live with it.
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -5/+5The minority in what sense?
- SOLGAARD, on 07/23/2008, -7/+5pick, oh just ANY-
The same should be said for you- - lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -2/+6In what sense? At least for me, that not true in many ways, Solgaard.
I am a man though. We're in the minority (49.1% to 50.9%)
- SOLGAARD, on 07/23/2008, -7/+5pick, oh just ANY-
- ashfish, on 07/23/2008, -4/+9And America has continually shown that it takes the concerns of minorities seriously, they may not do it quickly but this is the government we're talking about.
- StaticThunder, on 07/24/2008, -1/+7Its like a fallacy convention. When all else fails, convince your opposition by saying, well, lots of people agree with me.
Who? Theres a McD's across the street from me. It seems to be doing just fine this morning. There's a line of cars at the drive-through. Most of America isn't fundamentalist; they are cafeteria Christians who don't even think about homosexuals (because they have more important things in their own lives to worry about) unless they are propositioned by one and then they say "No thanks, I don't swing that way."
- lydecker, on 07/23/2008, -5/+5The minority in what sense?
- SOLGAARD, on 07/23/2008, -11/+5Very funny, (never thought-of "special sauce" purveyors - being just that).