Truett Cathy died this morning...

Appleseed wrote: Portillo's is great...for charging a ton for what is regular dinner food. When I pay $8.00+ for two dogs, fries and a drink, something is wrong. Its good food, no doubt, but, damn, they are sure proud of it.

On the flip side, if you got all that for 99 cents it would be suspiciously cheap. What would the hot dogs even be made of?

stanger_missle wrote:

Fueled by Caffeine wrote: http://www.tacotimenw.com/default.aspx

Nobody knows what you are talking about I haven't lived in the PNW for 13 years but my folks still do. Everytime I go visit them, I HAVE to go to TacoTime.

Mexi Fries.

SVreX wrote:

Fueled by Caffeine wrote:

SVreX wrote: When Truett Cathy makes a business decision to sacrifice 1 weekend day of business every week (which costs over $700 million every year I n lost revenues), he's a bigot.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shane-l-windmeyer/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a_b_2564379.html Here is a well written article by an LGBT advocate in support of Mr. Cathy.

Wow. That's really good. My sentiments exactly. I hope some other folks here read that. Thank you for sharing it.

I later found out its his son.. but hey.. Healing takes time.

logdog wrote:

Appleseed wrote: Portillo's is great...for charging a ton for what is regular dinner food. When I pay $8.00+ for two dogs, fries and a drink, something is wrong. Its good food, no doubt, but, damn, they are sure proud of it.

On the flip side, if you got all that for 99 cents it would be suspiciously cheap. What would the hot dogs even be made of?

Well, I do not get the hot dogs there. And I agree that it is expensive. However, I could not make it as good as they make it.

dculberson wrote:

ronholm wrote:

dculberson wrote:

ronholm wrote:

Duke wrote: Calling someone out for bigotry is NOT the same as being a bigot. And being pro-equality is NOT being anti-Christian. And I have stipulated that it's a private company and they can do whatever they want with it. And the Cathys are free to live what they feel is a proper life without any interference from me. I just get cranky when a "proper life" includes telling *other* people how it's acceptable to live.

So you have no problem calling people bigots, but get cranky if other people tell you about an acceptable way to live? Are you willing to acknowledge the contradiction you have posted?

Calling out oppression is not the same as oppressing people. I'm not clear on why you think it is. Whether or not bigotry is present in the Cathys or at Chik-fil-a, pointing it out is NOT bigotry in itself. That's an absurd stance to take. If I point out something being green, am I suddenly the color green?

A false sense of oppression is very often the most effective tool of the most oppressive. Look at all so called"open minds" spewing hate about this man who likely didn't have a hateful bone in is body. This all because he supported causes which promote a family unit that statistically is much more healthy and stable than alternatives. Just because you can and do have the right to deviate from this doesn't make this man a bigot. To scream he is a bigot because you not only think that everyone has the right to do all kinds of weird things (which I support BTW) but that he should be required to accept every whim of culture as wholly 'equal' and praise it as such, lest you treat him as an outcast from society, is to be by definition, oppressive.

I see no screaming, especially not from me. Yet again you equate the expectation to be treated as human to oppressing other people. It's bizarre. If I am "X," and you don't agree with "X," no problem. But if you expect to remove rights from "X" due to your beliefs, problem. And pointing out that it is a problem is not bigotry or oppression in itself. To put it simply: by crying to be free, I am not imprisoning you.

Not sure what you are arguing.. It is kinda bizzare? As while I don't really disagree with you, yet in the context of the Cathy family very little of it applies, very little.

I am good friends the the man who runs the Chik Fil A franchise down the street from me. Like the owners of the brand he is also a VERY genuine and good man. There is simply no discrimination in who they hire, serve, or how they act. It doesn't happen. Yet he also is painted by certain local clowns as a bigot and all kinds of things, and all for very unjustified reasons.

Look at the things people are saying about this man in his death. It is hateful, rude, disgusting, debased, intentionally misleading, and oppressive to good men such as him who wish no ill will on anyone.

So while I may generally agree with what you are saying, in this context I see a forked tongue.

Fueled by Caffeine wrote:

SVreX wrote:

Fueled by Caffeine wrote:

SVreX wrote: When Truett Cathy makes a business decision to sacrifice 1 weekend day of business every week (which costs over $700 million every year I n lost revenues), he's a bigot.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shane-l-windmeyer/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a_b_2564379.html Here is a well written article by an LGBT advocate in support of Mr. Cathy.

Wow. That's really good. My sentiments exactly. I hope some other folks here read that. Thank you for sharing it.

I later found out its his son.. but hey.. Healing takes time.

Yeah, but it's his son, Dan (who is the same guy who made strong statements about marriage which led the offense by the gay community), so it's still relevant (since no one seems to be able to tell them apart anyway).

It's a great article, regardless of who it is about, and it is a strong endorsement of the Cathy family and their values by a strong leader in the LGPT community.

Fueled by Caffeine wrote:

stanger_missle wrote:

Fueled by Caffeine wrote: http://www.tacotimenw.com/default.aspx

Nobody knows what you are talking about I haven't lived in the PNW for 13 years but my folks still do. Everytime I go visit them, I HAVE to go to TacoTime.

Mexi Fries.

Man I want their stuffed fries and a crisp meat burrito now. Granted I have one in town so that could be lunch lol.

I read that entire article, twice. While it certainly is positive, it never mentions the primary issue: that fundamentalists (of any persuasion, not just Christian) uphold and promote their own beliefs by attempting to repress others' beliefs and rights. This differs COMPLETELY from a more liberal (small-L) person who simply wishes to be allowed to live according to his own beliefs.

If Person A is a fundamentalist, it's perfectly acceptable (and potentially admirable) for Person A to live the most orthodox life that they wish to.

But if Person B does not share those beliefs, Person B's desire to live an unorthodox lifestyle in NO WAY violates Person A's rights. If person B is a homosexual, substance user, consumer of pork ribs or shellfish, or even just likes to show her face in public - whatever - Person B's actions in doing those things simply HAVE NO EFFECT on Person A's ability to live their own orthodox life of abstaining from those "sins".

If the State does not create any difference between a two-gendered marriage and a single-gendered marriage, that ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT MEAN that anyone who disapproves will have to do anything differently than they already are. They can find an appropriate mate of the opposite gender, get married, and live their lives as they desire. Their church is not required to perform same-sex weddings if it is against their principles. The mere existence or equivalent legal status of differing values does not deny them their own values.

It's always possible to live a more conservative life than the law allows if you choose to. Setting minimum standards is NOT the same as setting maximum standards. That's why the law should always be as permissive as possible, while still protecting the rights of ALL citizens. And that's the underlying difference that most "moral" activist groups tend to ignore.

ronholm wrote:

dculberson wrote:

ronholm wrote:

dculberson wrote:

ronholm wrote:

Duke wrote: Calling someone out for bigotry is NOT the same as being a bigot. And being pro-equality is NOT being anti-Christian. And I have stipulated that it's a private company and they can do whatever they want with it. And the Cathys are free to live what they feel is a proper life without any interference from me. I just get cranky when a "proper life" includes telling *other* people how it's acceptable to live.

So you have no problem calling people bigots, but get cranky if other people tell you about an acceptable way to live? Are you willing to acknowledge the contradiction you have posted?

Calling out oppression is not the same as oppressing people. I'm not clear on why you think it is. Whether or not bigotry is present in the Cathys or at Chik-fil-a, pointing it out is NOT bigotry in itself. That's an absurd stance to take. If I point out something being green, am I suddenly the color green?

A false sense of oppression is very often the most effective tool of the most oppressive. Look at all so called"open minds" spewing hate about this man who likely didn't have a hateful bone in is body. This all because he supported causes which promote a family unit that statistically is much more healthy and stable than alternatives. Just because you can and do have the right to deviate from this doesn't make this man a bigot. To scream he is a bigot because you not only think that everyone has the right to do all kinds of weird things (which I support BTW) but that he should be required to accept every whim of culture as wholly 'equal' and praise it as such, lest you treat him as an outcast from society, is to be by definition, oppressive.

I see no screaming, especially not from me. Yet again you equate the expectation to be treated as human to oppressing other people. It's bizarre. If I am "X," and you don't agree with "X," no problem. But if you expect to remove rights from "X" due to your beliefs, problem. And pointing out that it is a problem is not bigotry or oppression in itself. To put it simply: by crying to be free, I am not imprisoning you.

Not sure what you are arguing.. It is kinda bizzare? As while I don't really disagree with you, yet in the context of the Cathy family very little of it applies, very little. I am good friends the the man who runs the Chik Fil A franchise down the street from me. Like the owners of the brand he is also a VERY genuine and good man. There is simply no discrimination in who they hire, serve, or how they act. It doesn't happen. Yet he also is painted by certain local clowns as a bigot and all kinds of things, and all for very unjustified reasons. Look at the things people are saying about this man in his death. It is hateful, rude, disgusting, debased, intentionally misleading, and oppressive to good men such as him who wish no ill will on anyone. So while I may generally agree with what you are saying, in this context I see a forked tongue.

I think I was clear enough, if you read what I wrote without thinking about your friend. I said nothing about Chik-fil-a or Mr Cathy or his family. I was addressing your arguments which are bizarre.

My arguments are no less bizarre than yours in the context of this thread.

rebelgtp wrote:

Fueled by Caffeine wrote:

stanger_missle wrote:

Fueled by Caffeine wrote: http://www.tacotimenw.com/default.aspx

Nobody knows what you are talking about I haven't lived in the PNW for 13 years but my folks still do. Everytime I go visit them, I HAVE to go to TacoTime.

Mexi Fries.

Man I want their stuffed fries and a crisp meat burrito now. Granted I have one in town so that could be lunch lol.

WINNAR!

Fueled by Caffeine wrote:

rebelgtp wrote:

Fueled by Caffeine wrote:

stanger_missle wrote:

Fueled by Caffeine wrote: http://www.tacotimenw.com/default.aspx

Nobody knows what you are talking about I haven't lived in the PNW for 13 years but my folks still do. Everytime I go visit them, I HAVE to go to TacoTime.

Mexi Fries.

Man I want their stuffed fries and a crisp meat burrito now. Granted I have one in town so that could be lunch lol.

WINNAR!

And I just finished lunch. Guess what I had?

rebelgtp wrote: And I just finished lunch. Guess what I had?

In reply to Autolex: Can you provide evidence of "discriminatory hiring practices"?

In reply to Duke:What if doing what they want involves sex with children? Or killing people who don't look like them? Or painting unicorns on the bumper of someones miata?

peabody wrote: In reply to Duke:What if doing what they want involves sex with children? Or killing people who don't look like them? Or painting unicorns on the bumper of someones miata?

Sex with children is illegal

Killing people is illegal

Vandalizing other peoples property is illegal

Other than trolling, what is your point?

Those things were not always illegal, and are still legal in some cultures and circumstances.

The law is imperfect, and always being revised.

I believe the point (though not well made) was that there is no such thing as a freedom or a right that does not impact others.

Case in point where I live it use to be legal to shoot a Chinese person if you saw them on the street after dark. You just can't do that anymore.

I can legally have sex with a 17 year old, but if I take her 20 minutes south and cross the FL state line, I will be arrested for statutory rape.

If I take her further south and cross the Mexican border, her 12 year old little sister is legal.

The "sex with children is illegal" comment is a red herring, designed to side-step the question.

Appleseed wrote: Portillo's is great...for charging a ton for what is regular dinner food. When I pay $8.00+ for two dogs, fries and a drink, something is wrong. Its good food, no doubt, but, damn, they are sure proud of it.

Dick Portillo went from this in the beginning:

to selling it all for $1 billion? I myself like the food and agree it is a little high but it is some of the best food in the Chicago area.

I could eat these every day - Combo sandwich (Italian beef with Italian sausage and peppers - side order of fries) and I would weigh 300+ too.

Datsun310Guy wrote:

Appleseed wrote: Portillo's is great...for charging a ton for what is regular dinner food. When I pay $8.00+ for two dogs, fries and a drink, something is wrong. Its good food, no doubt, but, damn, they are sure proud of it.

Dick Portillo went from this in the beginning: to selling it all for $1 billion? I myself like the food and agree it is a little high but it is some of the best food in the Chicago area. I could eat these every day - Combo sandwich (Italian beef with Italian sausage and peppers - side order of fries) and I would weigh 300+ too.

Better off to go a little south and enjoy the same meal from Boz(o). I could eat there every day and those mozzarella beef sandwiches are the best!

In reply to Datsun310Guy:

Which says that there is STILL room in the economy for a well thought out fast food restaurant chain.

Just like a lot of other businesses.

Datsun, my mouth is now watering. I might even get a chocolate milkshake to go with it.

Next weekend, I'm having that.

peabody wrote: In reply to Duke:What if doing what they want involves sex with children? Or killing people who don't look like them? Or painting unicorns on the bumper of someones miata?

Wow, there's an obvious red herring. Does being shot interfere with the victim's right to live his life? I think it does. So offensive violence is covered by that. As I stated, you are welcome to exercise your rights as long as they do not infringe in the rights of others. I hope you have a better try than that.

Oh, and on the "sex with children" thing - is a child a consenting adult? Is an animal or mentally deficient person a consenting adult? No. Still covered. Next.

mtn wrote: Datsun, my mouth is now watering. I might even get a chocolate milkshake to go with it. Next weekend, I'm having that.

Bring $15-$20. Just trollin".