chick-fil-a

Duke Juker · RSBandB Donor since 07/01/2010

Killjoy4eva wrote:

Duke Juker wrote:

Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable. - Leviticus 18:22 NIV

You could google Bible and homosexuality and find a lot of verses concerning homosexuality online.

Excuse me if I don't completely agree with a book written 1800 years ago. It also endorses killing, stoning, burning people alive, slavery, and other acts that we no longer agree with. Should we bring all those back too? Should we follow the bible work for word or use our own heads for a change?

If Jesus came back, what would he say about *** marriage?

You asked for an explanation. I'm giving you one.

To say the Bible endorsed these things without considering the context and or bigger picture of the Bible is slightly discourteous. I'm not saying take the entire bible word for word. I'm just saying when God says something is wrong, he doesn't change his mind later.

Warren wrote:

Uhm, no. Your idea of free speech is a venue where you can spew hate and not get criticized or judged for it. I'm sorry, but that's not part of free speech. You have the right to say what you want, I also I have the right to say what I want back. I have the right to criticize what you say and you have the right to criticize what I say.
And yeah? The hardcore Christians in my family are non vocal on their disagreement with homosexuality because they know it's wrong to interfere in others' lives. So? I don't understand what you're getting at. It's not like I think they should be that way or that I tell them to be that way or that I'm saying everyone should be like them, I just respect it. They disagree with it and yet because they're rational people they still will stand up for *** rights. I'm sorry if that's too crazy to comprehend. Seriously. They used their brain and came to the conclusion that it's not their duty to try to oppress people. I'm sorry, must be Warren trying to silence Christians! Ugh.

And I do believe "tell me where I judged him because of his religious associations" does contain the words "because of his religious associations". Seriously. SERIOUSLY. I don't care that I judged him. Isn't it obvious I judged his opinion? Because I did. I didn't do it harshly but he deserves it. But I'll keep saying it in a broken record even though you wont understand, you don't have to be religious to be homophobic and you don't have to be homophobic to be religious. Seriously? Don't you understand? You're the one bringing religion into this. Seriously. I don't CARE about religion.

I don't care about your religious morals. I'm talking actual morals. Morals that come from your heart. The difference between good and bad. You don't need a higher power to define that for you. Most people have the ability to distinguish right and wrong and there is absolutely nothing right with homophobia. But go ahead and keep at it I guess.

People agree that hate speech isn't right and as such it isn't protected by free speech. Saying you support traditional marriage is not hate speech nor does it infer that you are homophobic.

Adbot · **Posted:** August 17th, 2012, 3:17 pm

Killjoy · **Posted:** August 17th, 2012, 3:26 pm

Duke Juker wrote:

I'm just saying when God says something is wrong, he doesn't change his mind later.

"If a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you." -- Leviticus 20:14

"And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the *****, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire." -- Leviticus 21:9

LETS GO BURN SOME PEOPLE

Whosoever toucheth the mount shall be surely put to death. Exodus 19:13 (Referring to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Sinai)

****... I better not go touch the mountain....

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him. Leviticus 24:16

Stoning Party Anyone?

A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:27

Come on... Don't you just want to go get those Wiccans?

Thou didst blaspheme God and the king. And then carry him out, and stone him, that he may die. 1 Kings 21:10

That's a lot stones we need to use.

Have I made my point?
If you didn't get it.... The Bible is outdated and has stupid rules.

Also, have you ever said "Jesus Christ" with a bad tone in your voice, or "God **** it!" so that I may kill you? FOR IT WILL BE GOD'S WILL

KefkaticFanatic · **Posted:** August 17th, 2012, 4:20 pm

People seem to forget that the Bible was written in ancient times by primitives, and that while much of its contents are good and show great values etc etc it also has a lot of crazy **** (i.e. all of old testament) that really should just be disregarded.

I mean, most religious people do think this, but then there's the people that misread it and think that it says BE HOMOPHOBIC which is kinda lame.

Shane · **Posted:** August 17th, 2012, 5:13 pm

I'd like to point out that this topic has strayed quite a bit from the point of a chicken shop owner to be able to express his own views. I'd like to see a bit more relating what's being discussed to the actual owner of Chick-fil-a or his right to say it

.

I think the Bible and what it means would be best discussed in another topic

.

Duke Juker · RSBandB Donor since 07/01/2010

Understood Shane, but I have a short rebuttal.

@Killjoy and Kefkatic
I remind you of what I said in my post.

Duke Juker wrote:

To say the Bible endorsed these things without considering the context and or bigger picture of the Bible is slightly discourteous. I'm not saying take the entire bible word for word. I'm just saying when God says something is wrong, he doesn't change his mind later.

In saying this, I intend to say that the you can't just single out passages and take them on their own. Context is more critical than the individual statement. In terms of what you pointed to Killjoy, do you think it would be easy to prove that someone was breaking those specific laws? It's not like the kind of police state we have today where cameras are almost everywhere catching everything. Thus, it would be likely that these crimes were not discovered often if at all. Therefore, how effective were these laws in actuality? Probably not that effective.

Second, if I recall correctly, God may say something is right or wrong, but not necessarily prescribe a punishment for it, leaving it to humans (or in this case, the Jews) to decide the punishment. Ultimately, the Jews understood that God will judge you (not man) for what you've done after you've died. Yet, people still need to live together in society and thus must find a way to manage the chaos and crime until then.

Lastly, just like you say it's absurd what punishments were in the Bible, I could equally say that any punishment that is used for any crime in today's modern times is just as absurd as well. Who among us defines what is right and what is wrong and who is best to judge as to what the best fitting punishment for those wrongs ought to be? If you can answer those questions to my satisfaction, then I would concede the argument.

That's my wrap up on that topic.

momsrascal93 · **Posted:** September 8th, 2012, 10:57 am

I will not begrudge the owner of Chic Fil A for having an opinion, but he will not be getting my money for the sole reason that he has donated money, that we as consumers have given him, to harmful anti-gay groups like Exodus International which fueled the persecution and execution of homosexuals in Uganda and used harmful "therapy" techniques attempting to change sexuality. Another group they donated to was labeled as a hate group. They will get my money when they stop trying to stifle people's right.

Adbot · **Posted:** September 8th, 2012, 10:57 am