Tis the election season once again. Where the poor white Americans can once again vote against there best interests and even against their very religion. You see, all the crap that the GOP and the Religious leaders keep peddling is only hurting those poor white people (among other things! I'm sorry I'm focusing on the whites, but the other ethnic groups seem to get that the GOP doesn't like them! Kudos!) These rich people care not what YOU need, they care only about keeping THEIR money. Job creators my ass.
Your own loving God, Jesus, was all about the poor, all about helping them, NOT judging them and indeed he told the rich to give away their money to HELP the poor. (I just want to say that I'm not against rich people, but do they really need all that stuff? Can they not pay a bit more to help others who have little to nothing? Help them so they to can get well and stay healthy?) So why are you voting for the group that has consistently voted against you? Refuses to help you because it might cost them a bit of money so they can't buy that third house... they have completely let you down. How did this happen?
Not anything from the Bible in this case, but from the rich preachers of that book. The ones who are supposed to lead people to that god, but only seem to take money from those who really need it. You see they are using you, they have brain washed you, programed you, with faith. So now, when they tell you things like, who to vote for, you do it. You don't think, you don't question you simply follow their orders. If they tell you to vote against your best interest you do it, with gusto! With signs and religious ferver! God hates fags! Abortion is murder! Gutter is a tool!
Now I' not exactly happy with the status quo at the moment. But he at least seem to have the country's best interests at heart (he was stupid and DIDN'T force some things through when he had the chance.) The other guy? He's almost as bad as Will Ferral in that new movie... its quite clear what his fancy education and station got him... complete ignorance of the 99%. It's almost like he's playing a part like Stephen Colbert but the scary thing is, he's not!
Sorry I sort of got off track, I'm still reeling from the insanity of this Chick-Fil-A thing. I'm worried, that these sheeple, are going to just go an vote for whoever there religious leader tells them to, instead of looking at the facts and realizing they are only hurting themselves. That's the legacy of religion, the legacy of ignorance.
And this is for Chris Hall. It's about all those poor employees of the fast food place mentioned above.
Due to the current troll infestation we will be requiring you to sign in to leave a comment. Also, please note that we will be very nice in the regular posts, but we will not be gentle in the Sunday Blaspheme posts. You will be expected to back up any ideas with facts.
I am always happy to answer any questions I can:)
I am always happy to answer any questions I can:)
New Rule! Staff reserves the right to cuss you out and post your correspondence if you send us annoying emails.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
This Sunday, how about some outside persepctive?
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I've tried for years to get people in this mindset to consider the issues.
It. Does. Not. Work.
One of the things that drove me from Christianity was in 2004, when I was volunteering for the Kerry campaign here (a total quixotic mission if there ever was one!), someone told me that it didn't matter what I said, George Bush was a Christian and God would take care of this country.
He sure did a heck of a job!
My grandfather, who was in his 70's at time almost came to blows over someone who told him that Kerry was a baby killer. He was getting tired of this line of political iquiry, and he shut this guy up by asking him if "pro-life" extended to Iraqi children.
I kept hearing people say they were voting for Bush because he was Christian, even though he was a crooked, fairly evil son of a bitch.
And that started my questioning:
Is religion a good thing?
Good story. I literally LOLed at the "Even though I did my best to make the salads and wraps extra-gay" line.
Even though this particular employee has changed her stance, her opening observations are still valid. If a boycott were to do any damage(doubtful)it would hurt employees in the long run, far more than the owners. As shown in the article though, there appears to be more than enough bigotry to keep Chik-fil-a open and successful.
If I were employed at a Chick-fil-a I would seriously be quietly looking for another job.
I found this video:
on Dangerous minds and am not nearly as amazed at the lack of knowledge and sheeple-ness of the people being interviewed as I should be.
It does and it doesn't, not any one thing will change someone's mind. It's really lots of little things and then one final straw. The more things to doubt you toss at them the more they accumulate. Some will change some won't. Some people are simply stubborn and will refuse no matter what. It's not black and white.
Again yes and no. As the owner of the company it' his resposebility to look after his employes. He put his 'morals' over the well being of his employes. Do I have to keep funneling money to him so he can continue to do so?
And what about the lives this donated money has ruined? It's not simply to ban gay marriage, they also fund things like those good old turn the gays to straights camps. Something the medical community has deemed harmful. What about those people? What about the people who are bullied and commit suicide to escape it? Are their lives worthless that we can't sacrifice a few minimum wage jobs? I feel bad for the employes, but I feel bad for the ones that loose their jobs because their food is just bad, or their product contains lead and they all get laid off. At some point you have to draw a line in the sand. They work for a deeply Christian company, we know the Christian stance, they knew what they were getting into, if not they have learned a valuable lesson.
Good points Brett. I also didn't know they financially supported those fucking despicable gay to straight camps. For now the American public does have the right to spend it's money where it sees fit, and lining the pockets of a known business entity that supports such hate and intolerance is pretty much financially supporting a hate group. Employees at this establishment who are LGBT, other, and those who do not support the company views probably should be quietly looking for other employment. I mean if you are capable, and aren't actively trying to find a life boat off of a hostile, sinking, ship, then what can really be said about you?
Haha! Awesome Chris! You're way smarter than Peter David, who had your initial idea and was a total dick when called on it! Apparently because I haven't been boycotted I can't say anything. Ass. I'm sure people have stopped picking up my stuff because of the blog, I just don't complain about it.
Retreiverman, had a long talk with Jess last night as she holds your view. But it's not really all that different, she see's people as unable to change after adulthood. I'm not so sure, but I think the more information that out there for them might sway them, or at the very least help their children. I simply can't believe they are ALL completely unlike me. Cause the only other option would be to divide the country.
Haven't been boycotted? Maybe not directly, but I heard things were pretty tough after the 90's comics bubble burst. A lot of the venom being spewed, was being directed(and still is)at Image. Hell, I still hear people complain about this "God hatin blog" and the awful 90's style "Image art" people who don't even have a valid gripe and are just hating the 90's because it's hep to do so.
I can understand where Jess is coming from, but there are plenty of examples of people changing their views as adults. Adults do tend to stick to their views more tenaciously than children, But I believe that comes from ideas and values defining who the adult is as a person, and seeing a challenge to those as a personal attack on them and not the idea. Whereas young children seem less inclined to be "married" to their knowledge and more dependent on the ideas and values of the adults in their life defining who they are.
I have to say, I find it sad that CFA have such a strong anti-homosexuality foundation. But then again, name me one fast food restaurant who doesn't have complete disregard for their fellow man, be they McDonalds or Burger King.
You know, some attitudes just seem to either grow like weeds, or die out completely. And homophobia is one of those diseases that continues to exist every flipping century. One hopes that it will go out with Small Pox, but then it returns like whooping cough to a child who has not been vacinated against potentially fatal illnesses.
My cousin married her girlfriend about two years ago, and by golly, there were alot of people not happy with that. Personally, I would rather see someone share their life with someone they love, rather than hide who they are and live in misery. So it did not bother me. Yet, about two years later, there are members of my immediate family who won't even talk about it, or will savagely condemn it. That the woman she married is black is another source of vitriol. Yet that does not bother me. We don't choose who we love, do we? Yet I know I cannot change their minds, as they are set in their ways, so I just bow my head and stay quiet. They may not like something, but they are not gonna torch a building belonging to a homosexual. It's just something they don't like.
With Chick Fill A, what I do admire is the number of companies who have pulled out of promotions with the company, such as Jim Henson's workshop. They cite the fact that Sesame Street, and the Muppets, are all about acceptance. Now I know why I always loved anything from Jim Henson and co. Yet, what I find disturbing about CFA, is they are actively using funding to change those who cannot be genetically changed. No more than opening a camp and encouraging people to grow tails will do just that. Politics is ticking me off too, as more people should be coming out in support of issues, yet they are afraid to because the 1 million moms, and support family values group call for boycotts. And in this economy, people are not willing to take the risks of fear of losing money, or votes. I see their point, yet the human in me would rather not take their money at all than put up with that crud.
Sadly, money comes before anything else. Obama has made some changes, alot of them good, but he has reneged on others. Gay marriage is important, but means little when people cannot get jobs or pay their bills. The country, nay, the world, is in an absolute sinkhole, and continues to sink further. I think Romney is an opportunist who has little to no solutions. Yet considering how angry many people are at Obama, he, sadly, has a strong chance.
Some people will always find justification for hatred and prejudice. I think stopping the Abrahamic religions from being one of those reasons is a worthy goal. South park hit it right on the head though, something else will just take it's place.
I don't think Romney has as strong of a chance as you think.
1. History does show that when able(not dead) and willing most presidents were elected to a second term. People usually go with what they know, over a unknown.
2 Even in the Christian community Mormons are considered at best weird and over zealous. At worst the batshit crazy uncle of Christianity that everyone keeps their distance from, and no one talks about at family reunions.
Something has already taken the place of religion. The fanaticism displayed towards sports and music is one of those things. Or look at the Twilight fanaticism. Same story. Before that Harry Potter, and before that Star Wars, till George Lucas blew that to hell with his midichlorians and other crap.
I would love to say that Obama has a strong chance of retaining his place, but then again, George Bush Sr was supposedly a sure thing to hold his seat in the White House, but then a hitherto unknown governor called Bill Clinton usurped him, rather easily too. Considering Romney has also raised more money from donations for his campaign compared to Obama also doesn't give me alot of hope. For once, I hope I am wrong. I really do. Obama, to me, comes across as a guy who respects every opinion, and belief. He's one of those rare folk who went from non-belief to belief. So he respects both sides. Romney seems to follow the same line of thinking as the guy before Barack. Believe or GTFO. We saw more people publicly coming out as non-believers or agnostic under Bush jr, because, I feel, they wanted him to know they were American and proud, but did not believe nor were they going to say 'One nation under God', a tacked on line of dialogue.
Honestly, it makes me ashamed to be a believer.
By the way I have to say that looking back on my original post, it seemed like I was saying that interracial marriage bothers me, but not at all. That's like a different coloured car. I don't care, I am indifferent. I just want to clear that up, as I felt that it came across completely wrong in the original post, like it should be an issue.
Ahh, but WHY did Clinton usurped him is the pertinent question. Because ol Bubba made sure to be seen as a younger, charismatic,smart guy, with his his thumbs directly on the pulse of what mattered to voters. Whilst making senior look like the staunch, unwavering, outdated old, republican fart that he was, electoral college be damned.
I believe Obama has that going for him, in addition to many other things that Mittens simply does not. There are of course other very important factors, but this is definitely a plus in his corner.
There is an interesting article on Mark Evanier's blog about free speech, where he links to this essay, and notes the right to free speech.
Post a Comment