Admiral Beez
Superstar
I see your point. Right oh, carry on then I say.I'm not one for the banning train, but I will be taking my money elsewhere.
|
|
|
I see your point. Right oh, carry on then I say.I'm not one for the banning train, but I will be taking my money elsewhere.
Heterosexulality is the biological and societal norm, while the urban left is trying to remake the world to its own image. Strolling naked in Pride parades and looking like exaggeratingly fake women (the latter being something that's inherently contradictory to the principles of homosexuality when you stop and think about it) like some of these protesters is a surefire way to cause backlash. Ever wonder where the Yellow Vests came from? Your rebuttal is a stubborn refusal to recognize this.
Can't wait for you to do race science, Mr. Molyneux.It's the reason why strip clubs, etc, don't cause heterophobia (per AoD's response). And there lots of people against overt displays of heterosexuality too.
Most gays and leftists are urban, and those are the most radical. URBAN Toronto isn't full of leftists by coincidence. And by the sound of it, the 3 in Harper's cabinet weren't flamboyant. The downtown hipsters are the ones giving the finger to traditional norms and thinks anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle are "bigots".
Is that supposed to be an intelligent rebuttal?
It's about men being attracted to other men. Why they'd want to go around looking like women is beyond me. And this was a common thing with gay men long before transgenderism became a thing.
Yes, really. Radicalism begets radicalism from the other side.
Urban Toronto is the ultimate echo chamber. On Redditt or international urban affairs sites like Skyscraperpage, at least there are some on the left who admit radicalism among the left creates an image problem for their causes. Not here.
The Cathy family are the masters of the Streisand effect. To them, there's no such thing as bad publicity and they can afford to have Sundays off.I can't help but imagine that all the negative press surrounding this opening has achieved the opposite intended affect and led to most Torontonians becoming instantly aware that Chick-fil-A is now an eatery option at Bloor-Yonge.
Hey, this isn’t Mandarin.microwaving of live kittens....many would still flock to Chick-fil-A to eat.
This cracks me up. Nike, Adidas and other major fashion brands still have sweatshops, Nestle causes deforestation and exploits child labour, FIFA looks the other way as hundreds of migrant workers die building stadiums, our own government happily does business with at least one country that simply beheads gay people. Wars have been waged and entire countries occupied for corporate benefit, but a chicken restaurant that donates to 'bad' charities is where people today will draw the line and protest, lol. This is why the occupy movement failed. There are still lineups out the door weeks later, by the way.
I am surprised it took so long for a lazy whataboutism argument to appear.
I am surprised it took so long for a lazy whataboutism argument to appear.
Never seen such a vacuous thread.
I'd eat at Chick-fil-a if for no other reason than a bunch of drama queens who don't face actual discrimination anymore are raising such a fuss.
Would change my mind if someone produce evidence of actual hateful or bigotry towards gay people by Chick-fil-a. If they're bible-thumpers who simply disapprove of gay marriage, who cares? That is not hate, its just an opinion.
That's not hypocrisy at all.He just proved what a bunch of hypocrites you are.
7 pages of hysteria about chSounds to me like you're the one who is raising a fuss. If gay people disapprove of Chick-fil-a, who cares? That is not hate, its just an opinion.
You misunderstood my use of word “hate”. Chick-fil-a has been accused of supporting hate. In 7 pages the claim hasn’t been supported by evidence. So why all this fuss and outrage?Sounds to me like you're the one who is raising a fuss. If gay people disapprove of Chick-fil-a, who cares? That is not hate, its just an opinion.