›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

McDonald's Gay Agenda

HungryJoeHungryJoe
edited July 2008 in Everything Else
The American Family Association is boycotting McDonald's for being gay and stuff.

If Ronald were really gay, he wouldn't be seen dead in that outfit.
«1

Comments

  • chaosof99chaosof99
    edited July 2008
    There is a plethora of reasons to boycott McDonald's, but this is the stupidest one of them all.
    Homophobes and Conspiracy Theorists rolled into one, sounds like a winning combination to me.... not.
    Post edited by chaosof99 on
  • YoshoKatanaYoshoKatana
    Wait...they're boycotting McDonald's for "refusing to condemn Vice President of Communications Richard Ellis’s decision to serve on the Board of Directors of the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC)."

    So they don't like corporations letting their employees do what they want on their own time?
    We treat our employees and our customers with respect and dignity, regardless of their ethnicity, religious beliefs, sexual orientation or other factors. We support our employees’ personal involvement in organizations of their choice.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    So they don't like corporations letting their employeesdo what they want on their own time?
    That's conservatives for you - they're all about freedom.
  • VigaViga
    *facepalm*
  • ninjarabbininjarabbi
    edited July 2008
    Wouldn't that be one of the few reasons not to boycott Mcdonalds? On a side note, Ronald does seem kind of Michael Jackson-ish.
    Post edited by ninjarabbi on
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    *facepalm*
    You mean this? Quite.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    AFA has a long history of silly, offensive boycotts against, among others, Wal-Mart (for selling “Brokeback Mountain” DVDs), Ford Motor Company (for advertising in gay-friendly publications), and the American Girl dolls (because the maker contributed to a youth organization that was pro-choice and supported the acceptance of lesbians). In 2005, it called off its unsuccessful nine-year boycott of Disney (for its “embrace of the homosexual lifestyle“).
    So a bunch of kooks want to boycott Mcdonalds.

    From their about page:
    AFA believes that the entertainment industry, through its various products, has played a major role in the decline of those values on which our country was founded and which keep a society and its families strong and healthy. For example, over the last 25 years we have seen the entertainment industry "normalize" and glorify premarital sex. During that time we have suffered a dramatic increase in teen pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS and abortion as a means of birth control.
    Yeah, because premarital sex and teen pregnancy are all new inventions from the last 30 years! These people are not Conservative they are so far to the right they have become a quasi-fascist group.

    Have these people forgotten their own past? A past where if you were not married by the age of twenty people figured there must be something wrong with you!
  • lackofcheeselackofcheese
    Incidentally, since the actual store is called McDonald's, what is the proper English to use for something belonging to McDonald's? I would say there probably isn't any.
    I guess McDonald's could work, but it doesn't seem right.
    McDonald's' would be really weird, but perhaps correct.
  • rhinocerorhinocero
    Finally! A reason to eat at McDonald's.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited July 2008
    These people are not Conservative they are so far to the right they have become a quasi-fascist group.
    I looked at their home page. They like Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh a lot, they're really concerned about religion, they want an amendment making all marriage except between a man and a woman illegal . . . sounds pretty conservative to me.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    These people are not Conservative they are so far to the right they have become a quasi-fascist group.
    I looked at their home page. They like Newt Gingrich and RUsh Limbaugh a lot, they're really concerned about religion, they want an amendment making all marriage except between a man and a woman illegal . . . sounds pretty conservative to me.
    I could say the same thing about the far-left group PETA being a liberal or progressive group. Yet a sane person would realize they are so far left that they meet up with this AFA group and share many of the same methods to achieve their goals.

    Lots of crazy groups say they like certain people on the left or right but that does not mean the feeling is mutual. By the same reasoning a group may claim to belong to a particular ideology but they in fact belong to something more towards the fringe than what they claim. They do this to make themselves appear more legitimate or rational than they really are.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe

    Lots of crazy groups say they like certain people on the left or right but that does not mean the feeling is mutual. By the same reasoning a group may claim to belong to a particular ideology but they in fact belong to something more towards the fringe than what they claim. They do this to make themselves appear more legitimate or rational than they really are.
    No, these are Conservatives. They're not the fringe. They're your base.

    Anyone who would think Newt or Rush would make tjem appear more rational must have something wrong with them. Thus: the Republican base!
  • GreatTeacherMacRossGreatTeacherMacRoss
    image
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    If FAF are the base than we are doooooomed!!!!!
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    edited July 2008
    Alright, so I have a plan. Let me know what you think of my plan.

    We take all these sorts of people, from every political party (no need to discriminate here; I'll take PETA along with the FAF), and all the pseudo-science wackos, and conspiracy theory nuts, and we have them form the Wingnut political party. Then, during an election, we'll have a Wingnut candidate. All the Wingnuts will go to vote for their Wingnut Leader.

    Once they've cast their vote, we summarily execute them, until the problem goes away.

    Who's with me?
    Post edited by TheWhaleShark on
  • GreatTeacherMacRossGreatTeacherMacRoss
    If FAF are the base than we are doooooomed!!!!!
    Finally you see that your political party has doomed itself. (This is MRS. MacRoss, I just didn't feel like signing out and back in).
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    If FAF are the base than we are doooooomed!!!!!
    Finally you see that your political party has doomed itself. (This is MRS. MacRoss, I just didn't feel like signing out and back in).
    There are plenty enough wackos on both sides of the political aisle to go around.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    Who's with me?
    I am. No, seriously. Count me in.
    There are plenty enough wackos on both sides of the political aisle to go around.
    Ummmmm, no. All of the Bible thumpers are on your side.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    Ummmmm, no. All of the Bible thumpers are on your side.
    I was speaking about wacky religious folks. The right has the bible thumpers and the left has the Scientologists.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited July 2008
    Ummmmm, no. All of the Bible thumpers are on your side.
    I was speaking about wacky religious folks. The right has the bible thumpers and the left has the Scientologists.
    Steve. Read this carefully. Democratic politicians do not pander to their crazies like Republicans do. You won't see Obama talking to Scientologists, but you WILL see McCain talking to Baptist fundamentalists.

    Read that carefully. That's all I have to say about it. The AFA is your base. There may be Scientologists on the left, but they are not our base. The conservative Christians are your base. Read that one more time, you stupid fuck. Try and get it through your head.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    edited July 2008
    Democrats also have the environmentalists in their base. They listen to them. They are the equivalent of the bible thumpers on the right. They are extremely intolerant and vocal. They see environmentalism as their religion and they love to thump their equivalent of the bible.

    These are the people who want to see oil hit $200 a barrel. They want to control what sort of car you drive. They want to see the suburbs go away and have everyone live in easy to control urban areas.

    I'm all for the government informing the people about the dangers of smoking. I'm not for the government coming in and telling you that you can't smoke on your own property. You want to ban smoking on public property, fine. Banning it on private property is an invasion of a person's rights. Same with the environmentalists. If I can afford to drive a big SUV I'm going to drive one. As long as I don't drive like a maniac what difference does it make to you (Democrats) what I drive?

    Didn't Michael Moore get a seat next to President Carter at the last Democratic National Convention?
    Post edited by HMTKSteve on
  • CorbinCorbin
    Read that one more time, you stupid fuck.
    Was there really a need for that, I understand that you are passionate and apparently frustrated about this but insults... really?
  • thaneofcawdorthaneofcawdor
    Read that one more time, you stupid fuck.
    Was there really a need for that, I understand that you are passionate and apparently frustrated about this but insults... really?
    Agreed. HungryJoe, I'm with you on almost every argument you have with Steve, but lowering yourself to the level of outright insults is weak, and does not help your arguments or win people over to your side. Seriously, chill the fuck out. Or, just stop feeding the troll.
  • jccjcc
    Eh, thread was done when TheWhaleShark brought up eugenics. :) No worries, it's only McDonald's. On the Internet, even.
  • JasonJason
    edited July 2008
    Bonzai!!111!1!one!1

    Because it must be done.
    Post edited by Jason on
  • Victor FrostVictor Frost
    *sigh* Fuckin AFA. Can't we destroy them?
  • AndrewAndrew
    *sigh* Fuckin AFA. Can't we destroy them?
    Yeah! Fucking AFA...
  • GreatTeacherMacRossGreatTeacherMacRoss
    Democrats also have the environmentalists in their base. They listen to them. They are the equivalent of the bible thumpers on the right.
    No, see, one of these groups uses fact.
  • lackofcheeselackofcheese
    edited July 2008
    Yeah, Mr. MacRoss has a point.
    By definition at least, "environmentalist" has no direct implication of irrational belief, unlike a religion.

    While there are environmentalists who start with beliefs of their own and try to twist facts to justify them (not naming any names, *cough*PETA*cough* (Though many would refuse to call them environmentalists, and we will probably have to discuss semantics, as we so often do)), it is in no way an essential part of what they are.

    However, there does indeed exist a form of environmentalism that could basically be classed as a religion.

    So, Steve, you must do more than say environmentalists influence the Democrats; we know this already, and it's a good thing... You must demonstrate the influence of "religious environmentalistm" on the Democrats.
    Post edited by lackofcheese on
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    Eh, thread was done when TheWhaleShark brought up eugenics. :) No worries, it's only McDonald's. On the Internet, even.
    I'm not talking about eugenics, I'm talking about dispute settling. Forceful dispute settling.
Sign In or Register to comment.