Comments on: Why the Chick-fil-A Boycott is Really about Jesus

By: Episode #8: I Break for Chick Fil-A | Growing in Christ Podcast

Episode #8: I Break for Chick Fil-A | Growing in Christ Podcast — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:05:51 +0000

[...] Why the Chick-fil-A Boycott is Really about Jesus by TREVIN WAX [...]

By: Charity Campbell

Charity Campbell — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 05:37:12 +0000

I agree with the people commenting saying you’re taking this too far, and I think you’re missing the point of the boycotting – it’s not simply that the owner is against gay marriage but rather that he’s bragging about being against it. Also sure, there are many people now in the US practicing Islam, but it’s not getting the heat as badly because it’s not being promoted in our government nor are there as as many of them trying to “witness” to non-believers.

By: Bruce Reeves

Bruce Reeves — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 16:41:20 +0000

It always amazes me that when people start talking about homosexuality others start throwing Jesus into the mix. Jesus said NOTHING – ZERO – NADA about homosexuality.

You do NOT get to redefine what I’m boycotting and why. I am boycotting Chick-Fil-A because of their stance on homosexuality and specifically same-sex marriage.

Fifty years ago you saw Christians all a fluster about integration, inter-racial marriage, and the like …. You would have truly thought those people were evil. The world did not come to an end then, nor is it likely to today.

My husband and I love each other as much (or more) than most heterosexual people in marriages to.

Get a life. The chick-fil-a boycott is about their stance on homosexuals and specifically same sex marriage. To attempt to say it is not, it pure poppy cock.

By: DanlBoone

DanlBoone — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 13:48:59 +0000

I’m outta here tho–

I’m not much for posting to a thread that requires my posts to be moderated–

be well, He is risen!

By: DanlBoone

DanlBoone — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 13:47:10 +0000

@Dan – It would be easy to say that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all share those kinds of barbaric rules (because those rules all come from largely the same source).

__
it would also be a patently absurd thing to say..

but surely, you won’t be dissuaded

By: Billie

Billie — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 03:39:19 +0000

” cmon…”Christophobia”? Why is it that homophobia is “the hatred or fear of homosexuals – that is, lesbians and gay men – sometimes leading to acts of violence and expressions of hostility.” but Christophobia is “anti-Christian sentiment expressed as opposition to Christians, the Christian religion, or the practice of Christianity.”
Exactly! Shouldn’t Christophobia be the hatred of Christians, sometimes leading to acts of violence and expressions of hostility? This article displays many flagrant fallacies of logic, but this uneven defining is just laughable. There are enough real things to write about, you don’t have to make things up just to write an article.

By: Melinda

Melinda — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 14:54:35 +0000

Well said, Ray. I’ve been a Christian for many years and I completely agree with you.

By: M.L.

M.L. — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 12:50:00 +0000

There absolutely IS a demonstrable double standard and several examples are available; indeed one was mentioned in the original post/article above: Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam is unequivocally opposed to gay marriage (as well as interracial marriage and in fact is virulently and openly racist and antisemitic) yet Farrkhan is generally either ignored or pandered to by the left (the NY Times calls him a “luminary).

The left basically has a calclus of victimization where who they side with or what they decide to criticize is based not on any consistent principal but the degree of percieved “victim cred” the group in question has. If a white Christian criticizes homosexuality, it’s a no brainer – charge homophobia. When Farrakhan or Al Sharpton say something anti-gay (MSNBC host has numerous times), crickets.

I also disagree with the assumption that he fear of offending Muslims is based on fear of terrorism. It’s really based on fear of being called a racist (which is absurd because Islam isn’t a face and in fact Middle Easterners and North Africans are actually considered caucasian, but I digress).

Mind you, I’m not even a Cathy supporter. I think the obsession with homosexuality is really weird as are Cathy’s remark about the judgement of God. Look, gays are 1-2 perecent of the population and only a fraction of them want to get ‘married’. This ‘gay marriage’ doesn’t involve forcing Churches to marry gays as some seem to think. If this is a potentially ‘fatal threat’ to marriage as an institution than the institution is in serious trouble dor ither reasons. The whole hubbub is just silly.

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 02:03:24 +0000

Gays are searching for acceptance. They know very little about the bible or even what it’s about. They are using it as a gate way(door) for as to why they need to marry the same sex. The bible can’t be clearer that it’s wrong. So then the gays use the same verse the evolutionist use by saying eating shellfish is a sin. It was in the old testament. But being gay was wrong in the od and new testament.

By: Phil

Phil — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 00:22:25 +0000

Ah, I see it is a hypothetical standard. If this one other thing were to happen, which you think probably would happen, then there would be a double standard. So it is ok to point out the double standard, that you made up.

You do realize that I can make up “hypothetical” double standards all day long too?