Leaderboard

No, you didn't. But you did compare it to the Second Amendment, which is in the Bill of Rights. The two are not related. Gay marriage is not a right, especially in a state where it is not even legal according to the State Constitution. The "Pursuit of Happiness" is not valid if it isn't in conjunction with the law. You can't marry a goat just because it makes you happy. To clarify, I'm not looking at this from a Biblical perspective. My personal opinion is that I couldn't care less who gets married to who. Just don't push it down my throat and don't make it an issue if I don't jump up and down and celebrate a lifestyle that I don't share.

I must take exception to the above statement. I've followed the Chick-fil-a reporting for several days now, and have yet to identify the "bigot who infringes on others rights" in this story. I do celebrate and support Mr. Cathy's exercise of religious freedom, and free expression of same. I condemn the facists in government who seek to deny his business based on his personal beliefs. If that's bigotry - if you have specific evidence of bigotry in this case - or can show where TGO members celebrate and support such - then by all means, bring it up for discussion. Otherwise, check your mirror... BTW, Chick-fil-a's support around the country is overwhelming, to say the least.

I find your post ironic. Unlike gun owner's rights, the "right" to gay marriage shows up nowhere in the Bill of Rights. In fact, taking rights out of it all together, gay marriage is not even legal in Tennessee. Also not quite sure how his beliefs "infringe" on anyone else's rights. He doesn't refuse to serve gays, doesn't refuse to hire them, doesn't refuse them anything. Apparently in the liberal gay community, anything short of boisterous support for their lifestyle is categorized as intolerance and bigotry.

Time to seriously look at doing something similar here. I can't put it any more simply than this, prohibition does not work. It never has, and it never will.

This isn’t about legalizing pot. It’s about cocaine, heroin and pot. It isn’t about telling people they can’t have drugs, it’s about protecting ourselves and our families from those that would do anything to get their next fix. If some think that a person killing themselves is natural selection at work, I doubt they will feel that way when the next generation of crack heads kills their wife or kid in a robbery to support their drug habit. You can legalize all the drugs you want, but employers will still do drug screening and fire those that test positive. They aren’t going to accept drugs in the workplace. It would just be another blow to our manufacturing base. I hope all those that have a job are ready for their taxes to skyrocket to pay for all the new prisons we will need for all our new entries into the drug culture. Its time to repeal Posse Comitias and use our military to secure our borders. Either that or we are going to have to pay a bunch more money for more cops and Border Patrol.

It translates loosely to "Oh my! Friends, it appears as if the caucasian gentleman we are accosting has a firearm with which to defend himself!"

Although this is partly a free-speech issue, if the subject wasn't gay marriage, almost no one would be showing this kind of support. If the CEO of C-F-A said that he believed Chevy was better than Ford and pissed off the Ford lovers, no one would be waiting in line to show support for his 1A right. Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

It is also about bullying. Tired of getting shoved around for having traditional beliefs. Oh yeah. At least two customers carried weapons inside of Chik-Fil-A today, and nothing happened.

You're taking me out of context. I brought up Bill of Rights because the comparison was made between 2nd Amendment and gay marriage. As I said before, "Right to Happiness" is not in the Constitution nor does it outweigh the law. The law in TN says gay marriage is not legal. It doesn't matter how much you or anyone else wants gay marriage to be a right, it isn't. As I stated before, I don't particularly give a damn who gets married. I just don't want your beliefs shoved down my throat anymore than you want mine.

Yes, this is the part that does peeve me. While Chicago is coming apart at the seams, Rahm is worried about a fast food chain. No government should have the power to ban or block a business based on some political topic like this if they otherwise qualify for a business license in that jurisdiction. Or a mosque, but I digress...

The Bill of Rights is not an all-inclusive list of rights. It is a list of rights that were especially important to the anti-Federalists who demanded that certain rights be specifically included in the Constitution. Our nation is founded on the concept of Natural Rights, which assumes that we are all born with "certain inalienable rights" including "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." It's kind of hard for people to enjoy life, liberty, and pursue happiness when people are saying they can't marry because people have a particular interpretation of a couple of select verses in the Christian Bible. I don't care how people choose to live their lives and who they want to marry or have sex with. As long as they are consenting adults, what business is it of mine? I have known many homosexual couples in my life and there are a few same-sex couples who attend my church. They have never hurt me. Why should I judge them because they sin differently than I do? We have a lot more serious problems in this country than this diversion. If people are worried about the sanctity of marriage, it seems they need to focus on their own relationships because our divorce rate and problem of domestic violence is certainly no testament to the Christian definition of marriage (incidentally, Jesus never said a word about homosexuality, but did specifically speak against divorce and adultery). As a Christian libertarian, I'm not boycotting Chick-fil-A, nor did I eat there today because there's no way I'm standing in line for an hour to get a fast food chicken sandwich. I went to Bojangles and was in and out in less than 5 minutes.

I've never seen such a huge crowd at the Hermitage Chik-Filet. This was at 6pm, people were lined up in cars and parking at Home Depot and walking over. If this is any sign of the disgust with the liberal agenda, the silent majority will be putting Romney in the WH.

You'd probably be like me, If I didn't have her, I wouldn't know wether to scratch my watch or wind my butt. I open jars, earn the bread and squash spiders. She sees I'm fed, medicated and the bills are payed. Despite some peoples delusions, love is not the nucleus of a good marriage. It's trust and need. A symbiotic relationship where the two parts contribute even portions to a functioning whole. I do love her though

I agree with this. People bitch and moan about their marriage all the time, but I don't know what I would do without my wife.

Doesn't really give me more concern in making sure I have my carry gun with me, I always do anyway. My thoughts: Trust your sixth sense. Carry an extra magazine. Keep your family close.

So, let me get this straight, Mexico keeps calling for us to tighten our gun control because guns are bad, but they now think it is OK to legalize their own drugs. OoooKayyy

I graduated high school in 1985. No cell phones back then. I am just wondering what we did when we had an emergency. I guess there were no emergencies before cell phones were invented. I also think they should not be allowed at work unless you are using for work related calls. Nothing that I have seen in the last 25 years has led to more unproductivity and lack of respect for the workplace than cell phone usage and texting.

Don't forget to drop by in support today. Here is the text from the Chick-fil-a Apperciation Day Facebook page, http://www.facebook.com/events/266281243473841/

Legalize them and be done with it. What we are doing isn't working. I think it's time to try something else. It's a war that can't be won. Better to try and regulate it.

Morristown store swamped - cop directing traffic, parking lot slammed with pedestrians, drive-thru line through the adjoining grocery store parking and into the main road. Got nothing to do with homosexuals getting married. Has everything to do with the 1st Amendment, and as a bonus telling Rahm to take a long walk on a short pier.

We don’t have a bunch of people in prison for minor drug charges. The popular thing to say is that you are/were in prison because of drugs. It sounds a lot better than you shot a store clerk to death while trying to get money for your next fix, or that you raped and beat a woman to death because you were so high you didn’t know what was going on. All the arguments about legalizing drugs in this country are moot; it isn’t going to happen. You might see pot decriminalized someday, but that doesn’t mean anything will change for those that work for companies that have drug testing policies in place. It’ll just put more people in the unemployment lines, with those of us that work for a living and don’t use drugs, and American companies that still do business here paying the bills. This is about securing our borders…. Period. The Border Patrol can’t do it now, let alone when Mexico throws in the towel and gives free rein to the cartels. This BS of not being able to use our military to protect our country is crazy. They are already on the payroll…. Let’s use them.

I didn’t say it was exhaustive but there is still, at the moment, noting in it about narcotics use being a right. Yuup....that's what it says...did this thread turn into a State’s rights issue and I missed it? I thought we were just discussing the overall concept of whether drug use should or shouldn't be legal/regulated, not the specifics of who has/should/has the right to issue regulations. We are wrong to have most regulations on arms; that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have regulations on narcotics. Alcohol abuse and addiction is pretty damn bad. On the other hand, I haven’t found any stats to show that we have a lot of alcoholics victimizing innocent people to support their habit. In 2002 in the U.S. about a quarter of convicted property offenders in local jails had committed their crimes to get money for drugs…among State prisoners in 2004 the pattern was similar, with property (30%) offenders committing their crimes for drug money. In Federal prisons property offenders (11%) were less than half as likely as drug offenders (25%) to report drug money as a motive in their offenses. In 2004, 17% of U.S. State prisoners and 18% of Federal inmates said they committed their current offense to obtain money for drugs. There is little that is similar about occasional long-term use of liquor and long-term use of narcotics because it is possible and most people do drink alcohol and aren't alcoholics. While I don't have time to look up the stats, if memory serves, narcotic users are fare more likely to become addicted and addiction is where most of the problems really begin. The part about the free market coming into play is nice but all conjecture...I could just as easily say that wilder availability of narcotics will lead to fare more addicts...addicts have a difficult time keeping a job and tend to not have a lot of money so even if drugs become less expensive it doesn't mena they'll have the money to pay for them which means they'll find other ways to get it...other ways that usually hurt other people. Yes there is, one is a protected right; the other isn't. if it is always and only "private" they don't...the infringement happens when it doesn't stay "private" and it happens enough that for the benefit of society I believe narcotics must and shoudl be illegal whether it's the Stat or the Fed or both who does it.My freedom is impacted when drug users commit more crime to get money to feed their habit...or because they can't hold a job and take my taxes in the form of welfare or cause my health insurance rates to go up because they need more medical care and can't pay for it or because my taxes have to go to pay for the prisons that house them after they've committed their crimes to obtain money for their drugs.

I used to think it was a little pricey and it is, but you know what? It's like trading with a local business or any other business that supports the ideals you hold dear. Sometimes the money means nothing. I know I've eaten there a lot more than I did a few years ago.

What ever happend to " dont judge lest you want to be judged? Either way.. I dont care what they think of gays. Was never fond of their food anyway.

I use to help train reserve officers at a former department so I'll say what I would tell them. Get your law books (traffic & criminal codes) read one front to back then read the other front to back and repeat. Learn all you can about search and seizure and ask questions from experienced officers. Try to be safe and not get sued.

I think the only difference though is that the 2nd Amendment is from the Bill of Rights, I see nothing about marriage in there. Frankly though I don't care one way from the other on the Chick-Fil-A issue to start. If they want to spend their money that way, that's their right.

I support his free speech, and if a private company wants to incorporate religious ideals in their philosophy, go ahead. You still can't get around the bigotry of the statement, and in our modern free society, they run the risk of alienating potential customers. I don't think it will hurt them as every Chick Fil A I see is completely packed at lunch time.

I don't agree with the owner's opinion on the role of government in gay marriage, but I'm appalled at the media attacks and the attitude that one is a bigot just because they have a religious objection to gay marriage. Chick-Fil-A is laughing all the way to the bank on this one.

I'd opt for 9mm instead of .40 anyway. it's more pleasant in a smaller package with negligible difference in performance. <----PM9 owner. Love it. I got mine before the CM9 came out otherwise I'd probably decided to save about 200 bucks.

I enjoyed a liberal free breakfast there this morning. I can give the libs a list of other places to boycott as well. They won't be exposed to seeing a weapon, and I won't be exposed to their stench.

Except they can and do. If you make your living off of other people choosing to spend money with you over your competition, then saying controversial things can have major effects on your business. Sometimes positive, sometimes negative. Just ask the Dixie Chicks.

I had an iPhone 3GS for sale on CL. After 5 or 6 ridiculous lowball offers I told a particularly annoying guy I'd think about his $75 offer. Next time he pestered me I told him I just sold it for $80 a few minutes ago. He was mad as hell, 'I'd have given you $80 for it, jeez'. So, I said, 'I wish you would've offered me that, the other guy was a real jerk'.

I could care less about how corrupt Mexico is or how they intend to control it. Legalizing the activity of the cartels may lower violence in Mexico towards citizens and government, but it will not slow the violence between the cartels. It will also speed up trafficking over our borders and increase violence on our side when state and federal law enforcement interdict the traffickers. This just shows that Mexico will not be cooperating with us the way they have in the past to target the traffickers. Drug trafficking doesn't cause violence in Mexico because of the drug trade in Mexico; it is because of the drug trade in the US. Even if Mexico legalized all narcs and weed tomorrow it wouldn't have an impact on the border violence. Even if private industry moved in to handle shipments from S. America, refinement and growing of marijuana there would still be the traffickers fighting over who gets what shipping lanes to bring it over the border. By legalizing it the industry on the border will grow, causing more violence on both sides making it very dangerous for our LE to target traffickers, and it will lower the street value of drugs as the market is flooded. No, I don't think this will have any positive impact at all on either side of the border. It wouldn't be such a problem if we used our available assets to close the border off and to engage traffickers on sight. Since that will not happen at least we can enjoy a drop in weed prices.

I don't like to answer the door unarmed, even if I know damn well it's the pizza guy.

Turned off is acceptable to me. But if a teacher sees it in use, the teacher should now own it.

No

It has been my experience that "Dick's" is properly named.

The difference? One has a strong background in business and one has a background in community organizing.... whatever that is. There is nothing more important than our economy in this election. That includes the threat of an AWB ban. I believe one candidate is more qualified to be the CEO of this country at a time when we need economic/fiscal reforms that put us back on track, or at least get us in the right direction. Another thing that is different, one candidate has nothing to lose if elected, whereas the other still has to worry about being elected in 2016.

My. .45 is only two numbers. So is my 12 gauge.

Very nice

I would love to have a Kimber, but I'm going back to school this fall so funds are limited.

any of you that think there is not a coming ammo shortage just come by on monday when i call my suppliers.pistol ammo is still fairly easy to get but 223,308 is very hard to find even tula is in short supply .the larger wholsalers are starting to limit you to 5 cases of 223 .i dont sell much ammo so i dont have a dog in the fight.i deal with the 2 largest winchester jobbers in the country and they are telling me that there will be one more spurt of ammo next month then it will be hard to get .i dont know why i am not trying to sell anything just telling you what i am hearing

I agree with that 100%. Didn't judge you, but I am surprised many could stand by and watch such an attack, and do nothing. I will also add that this situation is totally different from robbery, etc. especially if it's not my stuff, where for the most part, it is either money or property that is stolen. No big deal, no bodily harm, maybe a little bruising of the ego, etc. and in such a case, my weapon stays holstered.

To borrow from clint eastwood.... when I see a guy chasing a woman with a butcher knife and a hard-on, I shoot the bastard. So I guess my vote is to shoot the guy. That is the assumption that he has already stabbed her once, mind you, as the text you gave indicates. Also, in the case of already stabbed, he gets no warnings, no commands to stop. Back of the head, I don't really care. If the woman is unharmed, 911 is your friend.

This is why I carry. Stop the threat and a possible murder in progress. Speaking for me only, I couldn't live with myself knowing I could have made a difference. Hopefully someone is with me and can dial 911 or another bystander can dial.