Chick-fil-A and Tolerance

So this last week I learned that my gay friends are not as tolerant as I thought they were. See, Dan Cathy, owner of the Chick-fil-A franchise, came out last week in support of the Biblical definition of marriage. Gasp! Needless to say, liberals were beside themselves with the agony of having to endure anyone who followed Biblical standards. Besides, Cathy somehow managed to insult gays or something, so Cathy is obviously a jerk.

Democrats respond to perceived intolerance with real intolerance. This is, in a nutshell, the difference between liberals and Conservatives. I don't know one Conservative who appreciates, say, Westboro Baptist Church, but we don't go around demanding that they made to be quiet. We all really wish Westboro would go back to wherever they came from and just stay there, and protesting funerals is a new kind of low, but we understand that if we take away Westboro's rights to be a group of jackwagons, then what will stop anyone from taking our rights to freedom of speech? Everyone has the right to say to what they want, within reasonable limits, and being a Conservative you learn early on that all you can do is deal with it.

But liberals don't see it that way. There is only one way of thinking and it's their way. No dissent allowed.

So Cathy was flagellated in the media for having an opinion and not being afraid to say it. Liberal liberal mayors banned Chick-fil-A from their city only to have the ACLU of all groups pipe up and say that the mayors weren't allowed to ban Chick-fil-A. According to CBN:

[T]he ACLU "strongly supports" same-sex marriage, but explained that "if a government can exclude a business for being against same-sex marriage, it can also exclude a business for being in support of same-sex marriage."

Even the ACLU understands. (Incidentally, I haven't any reports of pigs flying - yet.) If the ACLU gets it, I would certainly like to know what's holding other liberals back.

And then there was the support day on the fist of August, which was a smashing success, and then there was the kiss-in response, which was a flop.

But the day after the Chick-fil-A support day, one of my friends on Facebook posting a picture to his wall that said they hoped that when someone who ate Chick-fil-A started choking on thier food, that the only person who knew CPR wasn't gay.

Now, I also support the traditional view of marriage, that is, the Biblical one. Since I learned my friend was gay, however, I have toned down my rhetoric and don't discuss my opinion as much. I haven't backed down from my beliefs, but I try to be considerate of other people. As long as they are not attacking me or my beliefs, there is no point in attacking them.

To be brutally honest, I don't care who you sleep with or why. I don't want to hear about it, regardless. I absolutely condemn homosexuality, but I don't generally condemn those who practice it. You have to attack my beliefs first, before I get riled up. But I have never discussed my views with this friend.

And I was very insulted to see that picture on his wall. Thank you for wishing that I would choke when I eat at Chick-fil-A.

I always thought he was a very tolerant person. It was a quite a shock to discover that I, who hold to beliefs so tightly and see the world very much in black and white, was far tolerant of his beliefs then he was of mine.

I understand that it happens, but is still a mystery to me: why is it that the people who are always talking about tolerance are the most intolerant of all?

Selling Lemonade is Not a Crime!...At least, it Wasn't Back when Bush was President...

So I was out cruising the blogosphere this morning, in the Conservative Blog Ads that Gateway Pundit has in his sidebars, I found a link about the Lemonade stand shut down brouhaha. The "War on Lemonade Stands," it was called. That link led to another blog that was advertising a Lemonade Freedom Event. And that got me thinking.

Around here, it's common that one day a year kids set up stands and sell lemonade. Some of you may have heard of Lemonade Day. Around here, every spring, it's a big thing. Kids set up stands, and make lemonade, enter lemonade contests. Some kids even go beyond the lemonade and sell hot dogs and cookies.

So I was thinking and wondering, 'how long before some loony government official tries to put a stop to Lemonade Day?' and then it hit me like a ton of bricks.

Maybe some one has already said this, so I apologize if I'm plagiarizing. With Lemonade Day, kids are learning to be entrepreneurs. As I've pointed out, some kids around where I live sell more than just lemonade. I've heard it said that this teaches kids about profit margins and other SMALL BUSINESS things like that: How many hot dogs do you have to sell for what price before you've made a profit? And don't forget competition - if the customer thinks that the price for your lemonade is too high, then they can always go try another stand. (Interestingly, more often then not, I see lemonade sell for $0.50 a glass around here. I haven't figured out yet if this is due to inflation or if these kids are trying for exuberant profit margins.)

But anyway, sure, the lemonade stand shutdown is about money. The local governments want their money. (Greedy little buggers, aren't they?) But beyond that, what are lemonade stands teaching kids to do? They're teaching kids to about business; profit margin, expanding into other products, things like that.

What if that's what the government is trying to quash? Our president does not appreciate the private sector and his policy always give small businesses the short end of the stick. I don't have too difficult of a time imagining that he would love to see this Lemonade Day and all these Lemonade Stands go away.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it is just about money, and not about squashing small businesses. Maybe these are too many assumptions, and it's just greed that motivated the war on lemonade.

But what if I'm right?

I Can't Wait to See This

I made a Valentine's Banner... I don't know if I like it or not. It's so...pink. And...bright. And my blog is a lot more subdued. And the hearts are just weird. And random.

Okay. I went back and tried to redo the banner. Hopefully it looks a little bit better now. (It's still so pink. So...pink. not that I have anything against, pink, but there's so much of it in my new banner!) Oh well. It's until after Valentine's Day, and then I think we're going back to black.

Also, happy 100th birthday to Ronald Reagan, one of the greatest presidents who ever lived. We could really use another Reagan right about now.

Critterpalooza winners, Stupid Twilight Books, and so on

I apologize for the long delay. It's the week before finals at college, and i don't expect things to get any less hectic until finals are done.

So first things first - the Critterpalooza winners are in!!! And I won a prize! Oh, wow. This is so cool. ^^ Click here for the full scoop on the giveaway from the Bookshlef Muse.

Now let's talk about Twilight. But if we're gonna talk about Twilight, then we have to get the Emo Vampire Song first.




Good. Click here to get the lyrics.

Now, I've blasted Twilight before on this blog, because I think the book is shallow and vapid. It's kind of funny actually. I picked it and several other books up at the library the other day, and one of the other books was a book about the Civil War. So on the one hand, I had Breaking Dawn, a book that makes me look like a teenage ditz, and a book on the Civil War, which makes me look like a somewhat intelligent young woman. But I digress.


So I have Breaking Dawn, the last book, and I can't help but wonder why people like this series so much. Edward and Bella and angsty martyrs and Mary Sues to boot.


A Mary sue is a character with far too few flaws to be believable. Mary sues are also known by their ability to get their hands on things that no one else can have. Like that car Edward bought Bella that several other characters whispered to each other about "That thing's not even out yet!" That firmly cements Edward's status as a sue. For more on Mary Sues, Google is full of info.


Alright, enough complaining about Breaking Dawn. I'm off to go do other things, and I don't have many plans to be posting until finals are over. Wish me luck.

Liberals are Smarter than the Average Box of Rocks

I don't care if the title seems mean, I don' t know how I'm gonna get through I'm gonna handle the rest of Obummer's term. Sheesh.

At least if I post something new on this blog, I won't have to keep staring at Hillary Clinton's face every time I come over to use the song list. I don't want to have to keep looking at her.

Since I'm already tired of staring at Clinton's face, I won't even cross-post the video of Helen Thomas. She went out and said that the Jews should go back to Germany and Poland and then had to resign in disgrace. Fitting, I think. Then Rosie O'Donnell came out and said that Helen Thomas was right. Hmm, I think I fell a song lyric coming on: "... the blind leading the lied too." That, by the way, is from Switchfoot's song "Dirty Second Hands."

My pro-Israel banner will stay up for awhile longer. It would be nice if people realized that Israel was trying to protect itself.

The Religion of Peace is at it again: Read and be sick: Taliban executes 7 year old child for spying
The peaceful left is also at it again: Leftist thug beat Tea Party Protester

This is crazy.

The U.S. was ranked #85 in the list of most peaceful nations. If Iran made any number higher than 85, I'm crying foul. There's already something fishy going on, since Rwanda is higher on the list. What the crap?:

Many Americans may be suspicious of any peace index that has their country behind Nicaragua and Rwanda, McConaghy acknowledges.

Yes, it's good that you acknowledge it. Too bad something else is fishy about this. Let's get that list and have a look.

What? What is Israel doing as number 144? Now I'm mad. Why are they lower than Iran?Someone explain this BS to me.

America being were it is reminds me of the quote I added to this blog the other day:

"This country has shed more blood for the freedom of other people than all the other nations in the history of the world combined, and I’m tired of people feeling like they’ve got to apologize for America."

That is accredited to Fred Thompson, and it's so true.

Moving on.

Here's fun poster that we should all keep in mind between now and November.

And here's a fun story on how Rueters is doctoring their having their photos of the Middle East doctored. From Are You Freaking Stupid?, who got it from FOX News:

The British-based Reuters news agency has been stung for the second time by charges that it edited politically sensitive photos in a way that casts Israel in a bad light. But this time Reuters claims it wasn’t at fault.

The news agency reacted to questions raised by an American blogger who showed that Reuters' photo service edited out knives and blood traces from pictures taken aboard the activist ship Mavi Marmara during a clash with Israeli commandos last week. Nine people were killed and scores were injured in the clash.

The pictures of the fight were released by IHH, the Turkish-based group that sponsored the six-ship fleet that tried to break Israel's blockade of Gaza.

In one photo, an Israeli commando is shown lying on the deck of the ship, surrounded by activists. The uncut photo released by IHH shows the hand of an unidentified activist holding a knife. But in the Reuters photo, the hand is visible but the knife has been edited out.

You got it from some Turkish organization and you didn't wonder the pictures had been edited? Seriously? I'd like to say you're not at fault, but I don't know what British law is. The Constitution protects the right to be stupid, though. (Unfortunate though it may be.)

Speaking of the Constitution, here's a guaranteed blood boiler for you patriots out there. This warning was published on copies of the U.S. Constitution put out by A & D publishing/ Wilder Publications:

"This book is a product of it's time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it was written today."

No it doesn't, thank heaven, because if it did we would be bowing to Mecca to please our Muslim overlords while having everything from our healthcare to food rationed in a socialist utopia. But I digress:

"Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work."

I wonder if I can coherently express myself without expletives. The Constitution is more than just a classic work. It's also the document that protects your freedom, including your right to be an idiot, fortunately for Wilder Publishing. From the Fox News article:

Walter Olson, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, says the company may be trying to ensure that oversensitive people don't pull its works off bookstore or library shelves.

"Any idea that’s 100 years old will probably offend someone or other," Olson told FoxNews.com. "…But if there’s anything that you ought to be able to take at a first gulp for yourself and then ask your parents if you're wondering about this or that strange thing, it should be the founding documents of American history."

If you're so oversensitive that a copy of the Constitution is offensive, do the whole country a favor: get out.

The warning seems to be offending more people than the documents themselves.

There's an understatement for ya.

Amazon.com’s customer reviews of Wilder’s copy of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation show an overwhelming number of people speaking out against the disclaimer, describing it as “insulting,” “sickening” and “frankly, horrifying.”

Another review for Wilder’s edition of the Federalist Papers calls for an all-out boycott of the publisher, sarcastically pointing out the "dangerous ideas" it’s trying to protect children from: "limited government, checks and balances, constrained judicial review, dual sovereignty of states and federal government, and deliberative democracy."

The publisher could not be reached for comment on this story. How convenient.

Why are liberals so bent on destroying this country? I will never understand their mindsets.


Seriously.