Report on the news that matters to your community and don't let us miss a beat. Send in your stories and photos.
My Recent Comments
@Engaged Voter: Well, one would hope the crazy would reveal itself before they find themselves in the Oval Office, much less the Big Red Button. You have a point, though.
I think a more prudent tack with that question would be to consider the current conflict between Israel/Palestine in light of Iran. I would like to see a candidate, any candidate, who could look at the objective information before them and not be beholden to any particular party for religious reasons.
I can't underscore how much I don't want another war on our hands, especially since one with Iran has the potential to involve more parties, should alliances be called, than our wars with Afghanistan and Iraq.8 months ago
Romney's religion makes no difference to me - they're all equally ridiculous and a waste of time to think about.
That said, I don't choose my candidates based on their personal religious beliefs, and I wouldn't vote an atheist into office strictly based on their lack of belief. They'd have to convince me based on other issues that actually matter to public service.8 months ago
"How does a guy saying it was his belief that he was in favor of traditional marriage translate into people thinking he is also then in favor of someone murdering homosexuals." - VofReason
These two things are separate occurrences. Cathy made his statement, which has been correctly identified as free speech. Bigoted speech, but it's fine.
What Chick-Fil-A has also done is donate millions of dollars to the WinShape Foundation. Between 2008 and 2010, it donated $28.4M to WinShape, as shown by that company's IRS filings (reported at http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/chick-fil-opponents-stage-sex-kiss/story?id=16917414).
You know what, I'll let Media Matters explain the rest: http://mediamatters.org/mobile/blog/2012/08/01/foxs-campaign-to-defend-chick-fil-a-from-its-an/189060
Again, I'm fine with Cathy saying whatever he wants. I'm also fine with choosing not to eat there. We live in a great country where you can believe in God, I can think your belief is ridiculous, and we can just agree to disagree. I have reality, you have conservative pundits. Everything's peachy...
...Until you throw in hate groups. Under no circumstances is it okay for one group to marginalize another based on identity. That goes against the spirit of the Bible, if not the letter (and I refuse to enter into quoting competitions with Biblethumpers), and it should be unacceptable to anyone with a shred of morality, empathy, or independent thought.
So to all sympathizers, please, go ahead and choke down your spite-burgers - along with whatever else your icons tell you to swallow.9 months ago
This whole "reverse boycott" is ridiculous. To quote @cargoweasel on Twitter: "there is no better metaphor for america right now than obese, wheezing christians stuffing fried food into their maws out of rage and spite."
Mr. Patton, I'm amused that you think Chick-Fil-A's contributions to anti-gay groups are acceptable because of "free speech". As others have pointed out, the reverse trend does not happen. Regardless of the rhetoric pushed around these days, to be pro-gay is NOT to be anti-straight. You will find that no corporations donate to anti-straight groups, period.
There is no moral equality in lobbying to reducing one group's rights while that group lobbies for the same rights you have. Your rights are not diminished or diluted in any way, and the meaningless appeal to "tradition" and "sanctity" are not a valid defense. The stupidity of Boston's mayor aside, this is not about free speech. This is about denying other humans the same rights you enjoy as a human.
I say this as a white, straight native of North Carolina who has spent a year in Arizona and values fiscal responsibility. My home state leaned blue in the last election, but the state itself is very strongly conservative (you have the Baptists to thank for that). I understand and appreciate the conservative Republican perspective, but I do not understand the party's obsession with moral bankruptcy when it comes to this particular topic. In summary, I'm very disappointed in Mr. Patton's column.
A more eloquent post on the immoral stance of Chick-Fil-A sympathizers is located here: http://www.owldolatrous.com/?p=288.9 months ago