starbucks wont send our troops coffee????

billybob420

Well-Known Member
I'm not trying to stick up for the guy. I have never heard anyone call the SPLC a hate group before, so I investigated.

Was just reporting back my findings.
 

beenthere

New Member
So not end of story. In debate you cannot just fold your arms and declare yourself the Winner. Show that Starbucks is funding a guerrilla campaign to physically harm others. Put up or ... you get it. cn
One more time, my point is, Chic-Fil-A does absolutely nothing different than Starbucks!

What part of this are you unclear on, my original claim was in the context that NEITHER Starbucks or Chic-Fil-A engages in any campaign that directly harms those they oppose.

Now, if you could please provide a post where you demonstrated the same passion defending Chic-Fil-A on the those very accusations, I won't label you a hypocrite!

And please, don't accuse me of saying things I have not said!
Nowhere did I claim Starbucks was funding anyone that was physically harming others.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
One more time, my point is, Chic-Fil-A does absolutely nothing different than Starbucks!

What part of this are you unclear on, my original claim was in the context that NEITHER Starbucks or Chic-Fil-A engages in any campaign that directly harms those they oppose.

Now, if you could please provide a post where you demonstrated the same passion defending Chic-Fil-A on the those very accusations, I won't label you a hypocrite!
The claim that induced me to respond was that Starbucks was anti-Christian. You are not backing that up. That is the extent of my interest: to either see you back it up, or to expose it as hyperbole. I'll ignore your moving the goalposts in mid-debate; no sale.

Chick-Fil-A via its captive WinShape foundation has been shown to actively support groups preaching violence unto the gays. That's much more than claiming they "support traditional marriage".
I want to know what Starbucks has done or been doing to actually assail Christians. Normal ones and not the dominionist fringe.
No; let's liberalize that If you can show that Starbucks has funded violence against the fundies and dominionists, I'll pay attention to that as well. cn
 

beenthere

New Member
The claim that induced me to respond was that Starbucks was anti-Christian. You are not backing that up. That is the extent of my interest: to either see you back it up, or to expose it as hyperbole. I'll ignore your moving the goalposts in mid-debate; no sale.

Chick-Fil-A via its captive WinShape foundation has been shown to actively support groups preaching violence unto the gays. That's much more than claiming they "support traditional marriage".
I want to know what Starbucks has done or been doing to actually assail Christians. Normal ones and not the dominionist fringe.
No; let's liberalize that If you can show that Starbucks has funded violence against the fundies and dominionists, I'll pay attention to that as well. cn


My claim that Starbucks has funded organizations that are pro gay rights the same way Chick-Fil-A funds organizations that a pro traditional family rights, stands.

There's been many posts from far left websites that make accusations, but so far no proof.
I can say the same, I want to know what Chic-Fil-A has done or been doing to actually assail Gays?

You seem unwilling to admit, what's good for the goose is good for the gander!
 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
The claim that induced me to respond was that Starbucks was anti-Christian. You are not backing that up. That is the extent of my interest: to either see you back it up, or to expose it as hyperbole. I'll ignore your moving the goalposts in mid-debate; no sale.

Chick-Fil-A via its captive WinShape foundation has been shown to actively support groups preaching violence unto the gays. That's much more than claiming they "support traditional marriage".
I want to know what Starbucks has done or been doing to actually assail Christians. Normal ones and not the dominionist fringe.
No; let's liberalize that If you can show that Starbucks has funded violence against the fundies and dominionists, I'll pay attention to that as well. cn
He wont back up nothing
And dont expect him to look at facts no matter where they come from
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
My claim that Starbucks has funded organizations that are pro gay rights the same way Chick-Fil-A funds organizations that a pro traditional family rights, stands.

There's been many posts from far left websites that make accusations, but so far no proof.
I can say the same, I want to know what Chic-Fil-A has done or been doing to actually assail Gays?

You seem unwilling to admit, what's good for the goose is good for the gander!
But you've inverted the premise, moved the goalposts. Your stance that fished me in was "anti-Christian" as Chick-Fil-A is demonstrably anti-gay.
Now you've moderated it to "pro-this" vs. "pro-that". It's an undeclared retraction, but effectively a concession. I don't think you have anything in re Starbucks being anti-Christian. They're merely tolerant of gays. But Chick isn't merely tolerant of Christians ... they've sent real money to real groups that have a real agenda of real harm to real humans. Ironically, that ain't very Christian. cn
 

beenthere

New Member
But you've inverted the premise, moved the goalposts. Your stance that fished me in was "anti-Christian" as Chick-Fil-A is demonstrably anti-gay.
Now you've moderated it to "pro-this" vs. "pro-that". It's an undeclared retraction, but effectively a concession. I don't think you have anything in re Starbucks being anti-Christian. They're merely tolerant of gays. But Chick isn't merely tolerant of Christians ... they've sent real money to real groups that have a real agenda of real harm to real humans. Ironically, that ain't very Christian. cn
I've moved the goal posts! LOL
Your whole argument is built on conjecture, where are your facts that the Eagle Forum and Family Research Counsel have inflicted physical harm on any gay or lesbians, where is it?

Is it propaganda from far left organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center?

Total FAIL.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I've moved the goal posts! LOL
Your whole argument is built on conjecture, where are your facts that the Eagle Forum and Family Research Counsel have inflicted physical harm on any gay or lesbians, where is it?

Is it propaganda from far left organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center?

Total FAIL.
All you've brought is propaganda from dominionist hatesites. At worst, mirror fail. But (points) YOU started it! ~giggle~ cn
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
That's my point, that list is full of left wing propaganda, where is the real proof?
But is it incorrect left-wing propaganda? You haven't established that. After my experiences with dominionists, it's not just plausibly correct but likely. Jmo. cn
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
It does not say by whom SPLC was Officially declared a hate group. A curious omission. The organization I saw mentioned was a Stone the Queers with the Book! group. cn
Put me down for officially calling them a "hate group".

The best thing any of us can do is to spend our money wherever the fuck we want. If chick filet offends you, then don't shop there. If you don't give a shit what a company's owner thinks and you like their product then buy it. Same with Starbucks, Walmart, RJ Reynolds, Paypal, etc.
 

beenthere

New Member
But is it incorrect left-wing propaganda? You haven't established that. After my experiences with dominionists, it's not just plausibly correct but likely. Jmo. cn
Well isn't propaganda called propaganda because it's misleading information?

Wouldn't "correct propaganda" be considered an oxymoron? LOL
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Well isn't propaganda called propaganda because it's misleading information?

Wouldn't "correct propaganda" be considered an oxymoron? LOL
I also think there is a "from the opponent's camp" component. Somehow I doubt you'd call that stuff from dominionist websites propaganda, while I would. It's a polar thing. cn
 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
http://www.campuspride.org/chickfila.asp

“The real issue at hand is not freedom of speech, but Chick-fil-A’s secretive funding of documented anti-gay hate groups. There is no justification for such a business operating on our nation’s campuses,” said Shane Windmeyer, executive director of Campus Pride. “While Chick-fil-A’s leadership has every right to its views, beliefs and voice, students and administrators alike need to know that revenues going to Chick-fil-A drive funding for groups that are almost certainly in conflict with campus non-discrimination policies,” he said.
Campus Pride released the following “5 Simple Facts About Chick-fil-A” for student leaders and campus newspapers to share:
1. Chick-fil-A profits fund documented hate groups that aggressively work against LGBT people, advocating for their criminalization, psychological abuse or death.
2. Chick-fil-A profits support the radical-right-wing group Eagle Forum, which supports LGBT people being considered criminals.
3. Chick-fil-A profits support Exodus International, which claims to “cure homosexuality” through psychological coercion of LGBT people. It says LGBT people are “perverse.”
4. Chick-fil-A profits support Focus on the Family (FOF) and its off-shoot group, Family Research Council (FRC), which has been designated as a hate group by Southern Poverty Law Center. FOF aggressively defames LGBT people as a threat to children and FRC spent $25,000 to stop the US Congress from condemning Uganda’s “Kill the Gays” policy that would execute all gay people.
5. Chick-fil-A profits come from YOU. When you choose Chick-fil-A, you help fund hate groups.
 

beenthere

New Member
I also think there is a "from the opponent's camp" component. Somehow I doubt you'd call that stuff from dominionist websites propaganda, while I would. It's a polar thing. cn
And that is where you a wrong. I do consider it propaganda, on both sides.
Can you say the same?
 

beenthere

New Member
Chesus, haven't you figured out that very, very few on this forum take you or you copy and paste campaign seriously? LOL

To me you're nothing more than the forum nuisance I get to beat up on regularly.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
And that is where you a wrong. I do consider it propaganda, on both sides.
Can you say the same?
OK ... I'll try ...
"you are wrong".
Easy. cn

seriously, if you consider it to be propaganda (i.e. disinformation) on both sides, why present yours as truer?
 
Top