Chick-fil-A location at DIA paused after Denver Council cites chain's LGBT stances

Says the person who previously wrote: Homosexuality should be hated. It's against God.
And now claims it has nothing to do with God.

You're too late. You dug your grave. It has everything to do with ultra conservative Christian rules. You're confirming this has to do with Christianity. Hene I call that the Christian version of Sharia.

 

You rebel. LOL. Homosexuality is against the creator. That's why there is such hatred among homosexuals directed towards Christians.

 

It is: Sharia law was limiting marriage between men and women. But it's gone now in the enlightened world.
As for your birds... that's a no.

An estimated one-quarter of all black swans pairings are of homosexual males. They steal nests, or form temporary threesomes with females to obtain eggs, driving away the female after she lays the eggs.

Studies have shown that 10 to 15 percent of female western gulls in some populations in the wild exhibit homosexual behavior

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

Nature in your face!

 

Hence Christians are still trying to install the word of their God in to law... that makes it a Christian Sharia law.

^^
And I don't say homosexuals with such hates. Just Christians.

 

Are you claiming that homosexuals don't hate God and Christians? Of course they do, and you believe it's justified.

 

You seem to have missed that your definition doesn't even include a reference to marriage and my statement didn't include any mention of "sexual activity". Odd interpretation on your part. If two closely related people were permitted to marry, the 49 state laws that prohibit such sexual relations would remain. And Rhode Island is small enough that Im not going to worry about fathers having sex with their adult daughters, if Rhode Island isn't concerned with it.

You do realize the forum records your earlier posts, don't you?

A comparison of "incest and homosexuality". I suspect your source of hopeless confusion is that some state laws refer to a marriage between two people closely related as "incestuous marriage". NOT because they engage in "sexual activity" but instead because they are closely related. Doesn't matter if they have sex or not, such an "incestuous marriage" is illegal regardless. No one is suggesting ANYONE engage in "sexual activity" with someone they are closely related to.

 

isn't this the picture you posted that got you backed into the corner you are currently in.

that man who claims to be Christian does hate gays. He would instill whatever Christian Sharia law is.


That is NOT Dan Cathy, however. If you have a picture of Dan Cathy holding up signs like that, I would agree with you that Dan Cathy hated gays (before he passed)

The only thing Dan Cathy did was support traditional marriage and didn't want the definition of marriage expanded to include same sex. That's not hate anymore than it's not hate that you don't support the current definition of marriage expanding to include familiar relationships getting married.

 

You're just nitpicking. See that I care that your trolling on that.

 

Cathy still financially supports the hate campaign against homosexuals. It is in the link of the OP.

 

you know he's dead, right?


beyond that.... supporting traditional marriage is no more "against homosexuals" than it is "against polygomists" or "against inter-familiar marraige"


That didn't mean he hated any of those groups any more than you hate a father/daughter that wants to get married.

 

It still is.. making a hate campaign against homosexuals. I don't care at all if that is on par with other things.

 

so you hate pro-familiar couples that want to be included in the definition of marriage?


#lovewins, right? or does your arbitrary line of when it's hate and when it's not conveniently stop JUST BEFORE where you draw the line of acceptability.


Going to answer yet?


Do you support Familiar-marriage?

Yes or no


Do you hate those that do want to marry a close relation?

Yes or no

 

I think the issue with people like Not Me, is that when Marriage became an "emotional" thing, which it really never was and still in may places isn't (people marry without any "love" people just decided to tear down the foundation of the word and change it how they like. That's "excluding" religion as well,

 

he's still avoiding directly answering, I notice... lol

 

You lost. CFA won. It's over for now. Unclench your butt cheeks and deal with it.

 

the bad thing about the CFA victory, is now, people are doubling down on trying to punish people/organizations like CFA by suggesting Christianity be made illegal

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...ase-criminalizing-political-christianity.html

it's a locked thread... but this is the next step.


CFA wasn't punished enough for their opinion. In fact, they actually benefitted when all was said and done, and LGBTQQi can't have that. if boycotts don't work.... they want to criminalize it.

It's a scary world we live in if you happen to be Chistian anymore.

 

In short you're only proving how fascist progressives actually are..

So now businesses must SUPPORT gay rights???

And progressives wonder why I want them in (*)(*)(*)(*)ing labor camps drilling oil...

 

Is it? Last time I checked, the christian sharia squad was unable to stop gay marriages.

 

It's the fascists who demand their culture must be the only one in the country and others must be banned.
To accept other cultural things is the opposite of fascism / parts of fascism.
So it's the Christians sharia squad that has that fascistic thing on them.

 

Time to ethnic cleanse Christian sharia squad !!!

WTF is Christian sharia squad, anyway? Last I've checked, it was sharia lovers and followers that kill Christians

 

The Christian squad that demand the word of God must be implemented in to law, and everybody must bow down to it.

 

I've only heard of Muslim sharia squads, patrolling streets of London and elsewhere, and now apparently, there are Christian sharia squads.... Hey, let's ethnic cleanse them too, for good measure?

 

Your responses show a lack of critical thinking. Not everyone that supports Chic Fil A sp? is a bible thumping Christian. Not only to I support gay marriage I go even further and support multiple person marriages since I think marriage is a contract between individuals and not the state. I am sure that the owners or Chic Fil A are opposed to that as well. That being said I am 100% completely against using government coercion against individuals or organizations for no other reason than censorship and that is exactly what this case is about. The actual business does not discriminate against gays. They employ them and they serve them food.

This is literally no different than if some city banned a business because they gave donations to the DNC or RNC. The concept of free speech is anathema to the left. They abhor it and only quote it when it serves their purposes but they will not tolerate any dissent. Welcome to the new age of Maoism.

 

Except that the profit was used for hate campaigning against homosexuals.

 

ABSURD to portray support of men and women coming together to become husbands and wives, fathers and mothers to their children, to work together in the home to provide and care for those children, as a "hate campaigning against homosexuals". The limitation to men and women is a product of biology, not hatred of homosexuals. And the purpose is to improve the wellbeing of children that are only produced by men and women coming together. Because the most common alternative to being born into a home with both the mother and father is a single mother on her own with an absent or even unknown father. Children who have higher rates of poverty, juvenile delinquency, teenage pregnancy, HS dropouts and criminal conviction as an adult.