How does this happen? Chick-fil-A branded as anti-gay?

[loinburger]

Letters

Are you trying to trick more people into claiming that it's unconstitutional for mayors to write letters?

[Al B. Sure!]

Are you trying to trick more people into claiming that it's unconstitutional for mayors to write letters?

I'm trying to get Asher to actually agree with something happening in Philly.

Or maybe this will be like when someone agrees with Ben, they know they're wrong.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Freedom cuts both ways. I don't give a **** what your constitution says. If another American conflates the constitution with freedom I'm going to go postal.

Feel free to do so, but my guess is you have no firearms to back up your postal proclivities.

[Hauldren Collider]

Feel free to do so, but my guess is you have no firearms to back up your postal proclivities.

Canada

[Asher]

No one is conflating the constitution with freedom. Not one single person here. You seem to think that because the constitution does not guarantee all the rights you think it should (basically, you think it is imperfect in certain ways) that we should ignore what it actually says.

Okay, then. Here's a challenge.

Defend how states are democratically passing laws which ban gays from marrying, without referencing the constitution. Are they restricting the freedom of its citizens? If so, where's your outrage?

Furthermore, there is no difference between regulating businesses based on what they say and regulating what they say. Your failure to understand this is puzzling.

There is a difference, just one you choose to ignore. I'm free to respond however the **** I want to your comments, but that doesn't restrict your freedom of speech. If I duct-taped you before you could say something to prevent you from saying something, I'm restricting your freedom of speech.

[Asher]

I'm trying to get Asher to actually agree with something happening in Philly.

Or maybe this will be like when someone agrees with Ben, they know they're wrong.

I saw Philly letterlead and the signature of a large councilman and didn't read it.

Who writes letters? Really?

[Al B. Sure!]

Canada has a lot of guns, I thought

[Uncle Sparky]

Instead of Chick-fil-A, what if a compamy called Pedo-phil-A wanted to set up brothels filled with childern? They too would have a chicken sandwich special. Of course, they would also donate to anti-Jewish and anti-Communist orginizations, with a few cents from every transaction going to these groups that reflect the owners heartfelt beliefs.

None of you would be against such a company setting up in your neighborhood, would you? Do you all love commies that much, or do you just hate small buisiness?

[Al B. Sure!]

I saw Philly letterlead and the signature of a large councilman and didn't read it.

Who writes letters? Really?

It was typed

And letters provide a nice personal touch. You're a cold uncaring computer nut so you wouldn't understand. To you, the little traditions are wastes of time.

[Asher]

Canada has a lot of guns, I thought

Our guns are predominately hunting gear, not handguns or semi-automatic rifles. It's hard to go postal with a 0.22.

[Al B. Sure!]

Our guns are predominately hunting gear, not handguns or semi-automatic rifles. It's hard to go postal with a 0.22.

The Colorado shooter did...

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Instead of Chick-fil-A, what if a compamy called Pedo-phil-A wanted to set up brothels filled with childern? They too would have a chicken sandwich special. Of course, they would also donate to anti-Jewish and anti-Communist orginizations, with a few cents from every transaction going to these groups that reflect the owners heartfelt beliefs.

None of you would be against such a company setting up in your neighborhood, would you? Do you all love commies that much, or do you just hate small buisiness?

Example is flawed, that is a nonprofit known as PSU.

[Al B. Sure!]

I'm waiting for Crown Fried Chicken to get reamed. That Muslim Afghan-owned business probably is prejudiced, too.

And what gives with the Church in Church's? Suspicious.

[Hauldren Collider]

Okay, then. Here's a challenge.

Defend how states are democratically passing laws which ban gays from marrying, without referencing the constitution. Are they restricting the freedom of its citizens? If so, where's your outrage?

Under our constitution, they are allowed to do this. Personally I don't think gay marriage is a right, so I'm not outraged at all. I can tell you that our democracy functions just fine without it, and would not rate marriage of any form above free speech. That being said, none of this has anything to do with whether it is okay for Chicago to infringe on the free speech of Chick Fil A. The lack of one right does not make it okay for there to be the lack of two rights.

There is a difference, just one you choose to ignore. I'm free to respond however the **** I want to your comments, but that doesn't restrict your freedom of speech. If I duct-taped you before you could say something to prevent you from saying something, I'm restricting your freedom of speech.

This is simply false. We call this the chilling effect.

[Asher]

Under our constitution, they are allowed to do this. Personally I don't think gay marriage is a right, so I'm not outraged at all. I can tell you that our democracy functions just fine without it, and would not rate marriage of any form above free speech. That being said, none of this has anything to do with whether it is okay for Chicago to infringe on the free speech of Chick Fil A. The lack of one right does not make it okay for there to be the lack of two rights.

This is exactly my point. You don't see a problem with democratically elected groups of people voting to restrict the freedoms of others, except in cases where it violates what you term a "right". A right which comes from where? What document?

Now that you've established that you don't have a problem with democratically elected institutions restricting the freedoms of its residents, what is your argument?

Oh, it comes back to a document again.

This is simply false. We call this the chilling effect.

It's not false. Do you proclaim that we all must respond positively to the speech of others, lest we be accused of opposing free speech?

You are opposing my free speech right now!