I'm not saying I agree with his religious views on marriage, but am simply pointing out he has the right to free speech, and the right to practise his religion.
- Doppleganger

And people have the right to protest against his bigoted beliefs.

And people have the right to protest against his bigoted beliefs.
- Feeling Glucky?

He believes in his religion's biblical interpretation of marriage, and promotes that interpretation. He feels that traditional marriage as he sees it, as being under attack and has also voiced his fears on that issue.

None of what he said was anything that could be considered hate speech, and he did not blame anyone group for what he sees as an attack on his religious beliefs.

But you are...

Why is it that those of you who support the "Gay agenda" are always condemning those who do not share your views?? Has Dan Cathy done anything close to that?

Why is it that when someone has a different belief system than the Gay community, they're instantly labels as homophobic or an idiot, simply becasue they don't fall in line with the Gay community??

Where are the quotes of Dan Cathy insulting Gays???

Also, don't you believe in freedom of speech and religion???
- Doppleganger

The "gay agenda" is equality. Condemning those who do not agree with equality is pretty standard practice, because those people are... you know... wrong.

But you are...



The "gay agenda" is equality. Condemning those who do not agree with equality is pretty standard practice, because those people are... you know... wrong.
- Feeling Glucky?

None of what he said was anything that could be considered hate speech, and he did not blame anyone group for what he sees as an attack on his religious beliefs.


He has every right to say what he did, and to practise his religion.

He is not saying everyone else should believe as he does, and nor should he.

I'm not saying I agree with his religious views on marriage, but am simply pointing out he has the right to free speech, and the right to practise his religion.

K you guys. this really is the worst thread ever. just stop.

K you guys. this really is the worst thread ever. just stop.
- GuyLaDouche

I agree.

Some people just don't respect the first amendment of the Constitution of the Unites States of America.

There is no way I'm going to convince them that individuals have these protected rights in the USA, and that if you attack one person for exercising his or her rights of free speech and religion, you are attacking everyone's rights to them.

They have their agenda to push, and see no problem in trampling someones Constitutional rights to advance their cause..............even distorting or lying about what he actually said.

We all have to protect the freedom of speech, whether you agree or disagree with what is being said, and that's what I've been doing.

But I've been attacked, insulted and mocked by those who want to drag me into their "issue' of gay marriage vs Religious freedom & free speech................even though I've not supported one side of the "issue" or the other.

They clearly don't want individuals to have the right to free speech, only unless it supports their POV, and will do anything to shut those people up who don't fall into lock step with them.

If people are afraid of a backlash from those who don't agree with their POV, decide to self censor themselves, or be forced intro political correctness and not address issues that may offend a group(s) of people or simply not speak out on a issue they believe in, then in effect freedom of speech is being stifled, weakened and slowly being taken away.


“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell

“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.”
― Oscar Wilde

“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
― George Washington

“Because if you don't stand up for the stuff you don't like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you've already lost.”
― Neil Gaiman

“My own opinion is enough for me, and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time. And anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.”
― Christopher Hitchens

“People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they never use.”
― Søren Kierkegaard

I agree.

Some people just don't respect the first amendment of the Constitution of the Unites States of America.

There is no way I'm going to convince them that individuals have these protected rights in the USA, and that if you attack one person for exercising his or her rights of free speech and religion, you are attacking everyone's rights to them.

- Doppleganger

Actually, you are, by attacking their right to respond, and their right to protest, which is also an amendment.

Actually, you are, by attacking their right to respond, and their right to protest, which is also an amendment.
- prock

Again, a left wing progressive putting words in my mouth.

I have not attacked anyone's right to free speech, or to protest.

If you are referring to the Mayors of a few Cities that threatened to keep Chick fil a from opening a legal business within their jurisdictions................you'll find that these Mayors will actually violate the Constitution if they follow through on their threats.

The First Amendment protects an individual from government action suppressing your right to free speech. It does not protect you from private individuals' negative reaction to your speech.


Under the SCOTUS Umbehr decision, cities (Mayors) cannot punish firms or withhold even discretionary benefits like zoning permits over their free speech.

SCOTUS long ago ruled that firms have free speech rights in its rulings in favor of Consolidated Edison and the First National Bank.

Chick-fil-A has faced unusually few discrimination claims of any kind for a restaurant chain. There is no evidence that Chick-fil-A discriminates against gay patrons, and it has restaurants in many cities than ban anti-gay discrimination.

In addition of supporting his Christian beliefs, Dan Cathy forgoes Millions of Dollars by closing his restaurants on Sundays, one of the busiest and most profitable days for a business of that type. Restaurants typically make close to 30% of their weekly profits on Sundays.

You've pointed out that Jean Chretien and Paul Martin were responsible for reducing the deficit and putting Canada's economy on a strong foundation.

I wonder if you forgot that it was Brian Mulroney's PC government that negotiated signed the Free Trade agreement with the USA, and also brought in the GST, which six months later allowed Chretien-Martin to begin to reduce the deficit??
- Doppleganger

pssst, The GST was in effect for over two and a half years under Mulroney. And the defecit STILL grew.

You never stop with the lies and BS, do you?

pssst, The GST was in effect for over two and a half years under Mulroney. And the defecit STILL grew.

You never stop with the lies and BS, do you?
- prock

Honest mistake, I misread an article I was referring to. Thanks for the correction and the typical left wing progressive insults.

I guess you couldn't refute my support of Freedom of speech will an intelligent argument, so went "mining" for something to lash out at me with.

good job!

However, the implementation of the FTA and the GST helped the Liberal government(s) much more than it did the PC government.

This is indisputable.

Honest mistake, I misread an article I was referring to. Thanks for the correction and the typical left wing progressive insults.

I guess you couldn't refute my support of Freedom of speech will an intelligent argument, so went "mining" for something to lash out at me with.

good job!

However, the implementation of the FTA and the GST helped the Liberal government(s) much more than it did the PC government.

This is indisputable.
- Doppleganger

Nah, I knew you were full of crap before, but at the time, didn't have the time to reply. Remembered now, as I saw you were posting more crap.

I love how pointing out your lies is "lashing out". Are you attacking my freedom of speech? AGAIN????

Nah, I knew you were full of crap before, but at the time, didn't have the time to reply. Remembered now, as I saw you were posting more crap.

I love how pointing out your lies is "lashing out". Are you attacking my freedom of speech? AGAIN????
- prock

Can't stop your natural inclination for insulting other can you??

Anyways, did the implementation of the FTA and the GST help the Liberal government(s) much more than it did the PC government.

Again, a left wing progressive putting words in my mouth.

I have not attacked anyone's right to free speech, or to protest.

If you are referring to the Mayors of a few Cities that threatened to keep Chick fil a from opening a legal business within their jurisdictions................you'll find that these Mayors will actually violate the Constitution if they follow through on their threats.

The First Amendment protects an individual from government action suppressing your right to free speech. It does not protect you from private individuals' negative reaction to your speech.


Under the SCOTUS Umbehr decision, cities (Mayors) cannot punish firms or withhold even discretionary benefits like zoning permits over their free speech.

SCOTUS long ago ruled that firms have free speech rights in its rulings in favor of Consolidated Edison and the First National Bank.

Chick-fil-A has faced unusually few discrimination claims of any kind for a restaurant chain. There is no evidence that Chick-fil-A discriminates against gay patrons, and it has restaurants in many cities than ban anti-gay discrimination.

In addition of supporting his Christian beliefs, Dan Cathy forgoes Millions of Dollars by closing his restaurants on Sundays, one of the busiest and most profitable days for a business of that type. Restaurants typically make close to 30% of their weekly profits on Sundays.
- Doppleganger

I posted this a few pages back... you might have missed it. I'd love a clarification if you have it.

"There are three separate mayors that have beef with Chik Fil A, so I might be getting things a little confused, but has the mayor of Boston actually banned them yet? I wasn't aware that he had. I thought he, like the mayor of SF, wrote in a letter that he found Cathy's opinions insulting, and that they shouldn't try to open a restaurant because it will be empty (that the people of Boston wouldn't stand for it). That's decidedly different from banning them. I believe the representatives from Chicago said that Chik Fil A will run into difficulties there only insofar as they are in league with anti-gay organizations, lending creedence to the idea that it isn't entirely to do with Cathy's singular opinions. I think the Mayor of Boston took specific offense to the idea that Chick Fil A was planning on opening a restaurant on the Freedom trail, a stone's throw away from the very courthouse where gay marriage was first legalized in the United States. That indicates that cultural sensitivity might be the biggest issue here in terms of their choice in location. He may just not want them period, though.

Does anyone have a definitive (set of) source(s)?"

Can't stop your natural inclination for insulting other can you??

Anyways, did the implementation of the FTA and the GST help the Liberal government(s) much more than it did the PC government.
- Doppleganger

Well, I suspect, given that the rate didn’t change, I’d imagine it’s pretty hard to argue that roughly the same amount of money helped either government more or less than the other. I’d say that, the evidence would say that given the same amount of additional money, one government didn’t manage to improve the debt/defecit situation, and the other did. So, did it help either government more? No, not really. I think you could say one successfully used the additional money to the country’s advantage, while the other pissed it away. That would probably be a much more accurate argument to make, don’t you think?

I mean, if both of us are given 20 bucks, we each got the same amount of help. If you burn it, while I buy a watch, did either of us get more or less help? No. I just used the help that I got to my advantage better than you.

Well, I suspect, given that the rate didn’t change, I’d imagine it’s pretty hard to argue that roughly the same amount of money helped either government more or less than the other. I’d say that, the evidence would say that given the same amount of additional money, one government didn’t manage to improve the debt/defecit situation, and the other did. So, did it help either government more? No, not really. I think you could say one successfully used the additional money to the country’s advantage, while the other pissed it away. That would probably be a much more accurate argument to make, don’t you think?

I mean, if both of us are given 20 bucks, we each got the same amount of help. If you burn it, while I buy a watch, did either of us get more or less help? No. I just used the help that I got to my advantage better than you.
- prock

Well if one Government had the benefits of both the FTA and the GST for roughly two years, and the next Government had those same benefits for more than 10 years, I would think that the Liberal Government(s) that followed the PC's in 1993 got their hands on a lot more revenue.

Well if one Government had the benefits of both the FTA and the GST for roughly two years, and the next Government had those same benefits for more than 10 years, I would think that the Liberal Government(s) that followed the PC's in 1993 got their hands on a lot more revenue.
- Doppleganger

I’m not sure if you noticed, but when people talk about deficits, they generally talk about them in periods of one year. So, essentially, they would be comparing performance from year to year.

I’m not sure if you noticed, but when people talk about deficits, they generally talk about them in periods of one year. So, essentially, they would be comparing performance from year to year.
- prock

I’m not sure if you noticed, but the question I asked you was, did the implementation of the FTA and the GST help the Liberal government(s) much more than it did the PC government?

I’m not sure if you noticed, but the question I asked you was, did the implementation of the FTA and the GST help the Liberal government(s) much more than it did the PC government?
- Doppleganger

In terms of the defecit, which is what we were discussing, the answer is no.

I agree.

Some people just don't respect the first amendment of the Constitution of the Unites States of America.

There is no way I'm going to convince them that individuals have these protected rights in the USA, and that if you attack one person for exercising his or her rights of free speech and religion, you are attacking everyone's rights to them.

They have their agenda to push, and see no problem in trampling someones Constitutional rights to advance their cause..............even distorting or lying about what he actually said.

We all have to protect the freedom of speech, whether you agree or disagree with what is being said, and that's what I've been doing.

But I've been attacked, insulted and mocked by those who want to drag me into their "issue' of gay marriage vs Religious freedom & free speech................even though I've not supported one side of the "issue" or the other.

They clearly don't want individuals to have the right to free speech, only unless it supports their POV, and will do anything to shut those people up who don't fall into lock step with them.

If people are afraid of a backlash from those who don't agree with their POV, decide to self censor themselves, or be forced intro political correctness and not address issues that may offend a group(s) of people or simply not speak out on a issue they believe in, then in effect freedom of speech is being stifled, weakened and slowly being taken away.


“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell

“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.”
― Oscar Wilde

“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
― George Washington

“Because if you don't stand up for the stuff you don't like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you've already lost.”
― Neil Gaiman

“My own opinion is enough for me, and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time. And anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.”
― Christopher Hitchens

“People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they never use.”
― Søren Kierkegaard
- Doppleganger

You go on about Cathy's freedom of speech but is it not freedom speech for the gay community to bash him for his idiotic statements?

You go on about Cathy's freedom of speech but is it not freedom speech for the gay community to bash him for his idiotic statements?
- jordan456789

Depends on what you mean by "bash".

He is not calling anyone else insulting names, like you do, and you're entitled to do so, but it does little to help whatever cause you may be championing.

He is labelling any group "idiots" becasue they don't agree with his POV.

Why do left wing progressives always find it necessary to hurl insults and profanities whenever someone does not agree with their progressive agenda?



It's just like bruinsbeer said earlier in this thread (with a little editing)

Conservative:fact fact fact fact fact

Progressive leftists: emotional opinion, false statement, you're a liar and a idiot

Conservative: more fact fact fact fact

Progressive leftists: indoctrinated upbringing, baseless opinion, it's what they meant, not what they said

Conservative: fact with a reference

Progressive leftists: I've never heard of that or, look at the source, it was not covered that way on the CBC

I posted this a few pages back... you might have missed it. I'd love a clarification if you have it.

"There are three separate mayors that have beef with Chik Fil A, so I might be getting things a little confused, but has the mayor of Boston actually banned them yet? I wasn't aware that he had. I thought he, like the mayor of SF, wrote in a letter that he found Cathy's opinions insulting, and that they shouldn't try to open a restaurant because it will be empty (that the people of Boston wouldn't stand for it). That's decidedly different from banning them. I believe the representatives from Chicago said that Chik Fil A will run into difficulties there only insofar as they are in league with anti-gay organizations, lending creedence to the idea that it isn't entirely to do with Cathy's singular opinions. I think the Mayor of Boston took specific offense to the idea that Chick Fil A was planning on opening a restaurant on the Freedom trail, a stone's throw away from the very courthouse where gay marriage was first legalized in the United States. That indicates that cultural sensitivity might be the biggest issue here in terms of their choice in location. He may just not want them period, though.

Does anyone have a definitive (set of) source(s)?"
- Morris

This directly goes against what he says, and yes, you are correct. Therefore, he won't respond.

Depends on what you mean by "bash".

He is not calling anyone else insulting names, like you do, and you're entitled to do so, but it does little to help whatever cause you may be championing.

He is labelling any group "idiots" becasue they don't agree with his POV.

Why do left wing progressives always find it necessary to hurl insults and profanities whenever someone does not agree with their progressive agenda?



It's just like bruinsbeer said earlier in this thread (with a little editing)

Conservative:fact fact fact fact fact

Progressive leftists: emotional opinion, false statement, you're a liar and a idiot

Conservative: more fact fact fact fact

Progressive leftists: indoctrinated upbringing, baseless opinion, it's what they meant, not what they said

Conservative: fact with a reference

Progressive leftists: I've never heard of that or, look at the source, it was not covered that way on the CBC
- Doppleganger

You say my words are insults but many would consider his view point on gays insulting. People hurl insults when others judge people and want to restrict what others are doing while they are not being restricted at all. Perhaps the fact that there is not equality is enough to get people riled up and hurl insults.

This directly goes against what he says, and yes, you are correct. Therefore, he won't respond.
- mfreedman

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1769597113001

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1769597113001
- Doppleganger

Did you listen to the report?

They havent been banned. It was a question of if they were banned, would it be unconstitutional.

Did you listen to the report?

They havent been banned. It was a question of if they were banned, would it be unconstitutional.
- mfreedman

Yes, I knew it is unconstitutional, and said so a few pages ago. Most of these mayors are now backtracking, and last week there was a report suggesting that one of them may be charged but have heard nothing more on that.