Zakuska Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Adam Smith, Vante CFO, Fired For Chick-Fil-A Drive-Thru Video, Calls Chicken Chain A 'Hateful Company'http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/370223/20120803/adam-smith-vante-chic-fil-video.htm
Libs Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 The differences of opinion are very clear. Mr Terrel defiantly said that to express the opinion that marriage should be between was anti-gay hate speech and should be censored. Do you really agree with that?I do not agree that it should be censored, no. Not at all. We don't censor "hate speech" in this country. We criticize it...sometimes fiercely.
mtomm Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Dan Cathy should take some lessons from the Marriotts.Bill Marriott has managed to avoid controversy with compromising his beliefs. 1
Zakuska Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 I do not agree that it should be censored, no. Not at all. We don't censor "hate speech" in this country. We criticize it...sometimes fiercely.And you have yet to demonstrate what Mr. Cathy said was "hate speach".
ERayR Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 I do not agree that it should be censored, no. Not at all. We don't censor "hate speech" in this country. We criticize it...sometimes fiercely.Definitely not or else any one who is hateful enough to call Mr. Cathy's statement hate speech would themselves be censored.
Libs Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) And you have yet to demonstrate what Mr. Cathy said was "hate speach".I didn't characterize any of it as "hate speech". But, I do think his characterization of acceptance of gay marriage (and likely that lifestyle, in general) as "bringing God's judgment on this country", cannot reasonably be viewed, by many, as exactly a show of "loving tolerance". Edited August 3, 2012 by Libs
Libs Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Very awkward and long sentence, in that last post, but hope you get the gist.
Libs Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) Show of hands......how many people here think that legalizing gay marriage will bring God's judgment on this whole nation?Doesn't God judge us according to our own acts, alone? Edited August 3, 2012 by Libs
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 It is not support of the traditional family that is considered "anti-gay". It is the non-support of ss marriage and their families, Wow, We now have a new definition of what it means to be "anti" something.This is seriously the most lame thing I have heard in a long time. You just can't make this stuff up. 2
ERayR Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Show of hands......how many people here think that legalizing gay marriage will bring God's judgment on this whole nation?Doesn't God judge us according to our own acts, alone?Nations are judged on the collective obedience to Gods decrees. Individuals are judged on their personal obedience.
Zakuska Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) Show of hands......how many people here think that legalizing gay marriage will bring God's judgment on this whole nation?Doesn't God judge us according to our own acts, alone?What ever happened to..."Given this land IF they live righteously." ? Edited August 3, 2012 by Zakuska 1
Calm Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) UPDATE: It seems as though Mr. Smith who harassed the poor Chick-fil-a team member got fired from his job for acting in a way not consistent with the values of his company. His company released him from his CFO position with this statement:Good for them. Harassment of a rank and file employee like that....just wrong. And good for her, she handled it well and is probably now famous. Should get a raise too. Edited August 3, 2012 by calmoriah 2
Calm Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 I am sorry Mr. Smiths intolerance cost him his job. It places a hardship on him and his family.It is unfortunate that one's foolish actions don't result in consequences just for oneself.
Calm Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 What ever happened to..."Given this land IF they live righteously." ?Do you want to do the hand movements too? (Too many years as a Primary teacher....see the words, instant trigger of melody in head, almost bouncing up to do the dance )
wenglund Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 I am not sure I agree with Mr. Smith being fired for expressing his opposing views and "not reflecting the company values"--as hypocritical and inane as they were. To me, it is only separated by degrees from Chicago's mayor claiming that expression of certain traditional views are not welcome in his city, or public officials denying business license and resorting to extortion using the excuse that the certain political statements don't reflect their values. I prefer to stay as far away from this form of infringement/punishment, and instead let free speech (public condemnation) address Smith's inappropriate and freely spoken nonsense.Thanks, -Wade Englund- 1
wenglund Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Libs,Do you consider gays who oppose SSM, anti-gay?Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Calm Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 I am not sure I agree with Mr. Smith being fired for expressing his opposing views and "not reflecting the company values"--as hypocritical and inane as they were. Thanks, -Wade Englund-If it was just expressing his views then I would agree. OTOH, harassment of the young lady including filming her against her wishes and then placing it for public viewing.....
wenglund Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) If it was just expressing his views then I would agree. OTOH, harassment of the young lady including filming her against her wishes and then placing it for public viewing.....Yes, that made it all the more asinine. But, I don't view assinine political behavior outside the office as a reason for someone to be fired.Now, were Smith to do the same thing to his own employees or customers, rather than some other business, then that would be a different matter.Of course, the company is free to make that own business decisions, and there is nothing legally or ethically wrong with what they did--unlike certain liberal public officials who are trending towards infringement on First Amendment rights. It is just that it may appear as punishing, in a business way, people for expressing, and the way they express, divergent political views.Thanks, -Wade Englund- Edited August 3, 2012 by wenglund
Tacenda Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 I never said that and neither did Mr. Terrel. I'm not going to go fifteen rounds on this issue, again. The differences, in opinion, are very clear...or should be, at this point. Those who support SS marriage, believe they are being discriminated against, based on things written in the Bible (rather than our U.S. Constitution). I wouldn't call it "hateful", but I understand why some feel that it is. And, why would you think that? Seriously? I support traditional marriage, between a man and a woman. I also support same sex marriage. I see no contradiction in that. Families of all kinds need support...not just traditional families.I, like you Libs support Gay marriage but have this nagging thought that if it becomes legal everywhere will it open marriage up to having polygamy legal along with marriage to siblings cousins or underage children? Are my thoughts absurd or unmerited here?
ERayR Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 I, like you Libs support Gay marriage but have this nagging thought that if it becomes legal everywhere will it open marriage up to having polygamy legal along with marriage to siblings cousins or underage children? Are my thoughts absurd or unmerited here?No some of those (polygamy advocates) are already seeping in around the edges.
wenglund Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 I, like you Libs support Gay marriage but have this nagging thought that if it becomes legal everywhere will it open marriage up to having polygamy legal along with marriage to siblings cousins or underage children? Are my thoughts absurd or unmerited here?Not that this is on-topic, but there is historical evidence that extending civil unions and marriage to same-sex couples actually diminishes the over-all rate of marriages, presumably because it devalues the notion of marriage.Thanks, -Wade Englund- 1
Calm Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 But, I don't view assinine political behavior outside the office as a reason for someone to be fired.I didn't realize you were making a distinction between doing it during working hours and on his own time. I would have to agree with you, but when it comes to high profile officers in a company, PR is part of the job and if he was seen as a liability to the company now because of bad PR, I can see why they would kick him out.
Zakuska Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) Let the Kiss in Begin."LA Chick-Fil-A gets tagged."Liberals at their best!http://latimesblogs....-media-mob.htmlChick-fil-A ‘Kiss In’ Doesn’t Spark Much Passion in West Des Moineshttp://waukee.patch....west-des-moines***Beware of content***Chick-fil-A kiss-in is hit-or-missin'http://www.politico....9357.html?hp=r2 Edited August 3, 2012 by Zakuska 1
Libs Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 I, like you Libs support Gay marriage but have this nagging thought that if it becomes legal everywhere will it open marriage up to having polygamy legal along with marriage to siblings cousins or underage children? Are my thoughts absurd or unmerited here?Siblings? No. It's already legal to marry your cousins, in some States. And, I wouldn't, personally, object to polygamy among consenting adults. I had no problem with polygamy, when I joined the church. What startled and upset me were the ages of some of the girls.Those on the other side want people to believe there will be a "slippery slope" (to hell, I guess), but I don't believe it's a valid concern. I'm sure people said the same thing about interracial marriage...it was going to be the end of the white race and civilization as we know it. It's just fear talking, plain and simple.
Libs Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 What ever happened to..."Given this land IF they live righteously." ?Old Testament?I was taught, in the LDS Church, that we were responsible for our own sins, not the sins of our fathers (or anyone else's). I'm sure I could find the verses (I think that is in the Book of Mormon).
Recommended Posts