Gays, stop BULLYING the Chick-Fil-A dude!

 

Here we go again with the Nazi-gays, pitch forks and torches in hand, once again going after Dan Cathy, CEO of Chic-Fil-A!  Last I checked he has the RIGHT to his stance on gay marriage. Mr. Cathy’s view is shared by millions and it is faith based for many.

Why are people constantly being asked to forgo their religious beliefs over so called gay marriage? This seems to be an all or nothing issue for Nazi-gays? Why? Why is there no consideration for a person wanting to be faithful to the word of God?

Given our current economic climate, are these Nazi-gays really calling for a boycott? Really? Over a CEO’s personal view on gay marriage? That’s pretty immature. I’m sure at least one gay person (probably more) works for Chic-Fil-A; so, calling for a boycott is a GREAT way to secure his/her job (written with sarcasm, of course).

Until gay people realize that acceptance, tolerance and such can NOT be legislated, or forced upon others, we will never have our kumbaya moment. Many of us simply refuse to allow ourselves to be TERRORIZED or BULLYIED into a non heart felt, for the sake of political correctness agreement so that a select few can be appeased.  Hell, some gay people don’t even believe in “gay marriage”.

The gay community is always screaming about tolerance, but are mute when when it comes time for them to extend the same courtesy.  Going on  “terror tantrums” and calling people hateful names really does not help the gay cause (whatever that is). 

And for the record, opposing gay marriage DOES…. NOT…. EQUAL…..HATE!  Gay people can call their union whatever they like, but they need to accept that they do not have the right to decide that others must use the same definition.

Quite frankly, these little terror tantrums are getting old and boring. The majority of people are basically being asked to go against their faith.  And even in the absence of faith, no one group of people should have the right to dictate to others how marriage is defined.  The liberal political pets are always such a self centered group of beings; it’s unbelievable. Soon more and more people will tire of this selfish nonsense.

The moment a person says something that gays don’t like, they are labeled as homophobic. When Barack Obama publicly stated that he opposed gay marriage, why didn’t the Nazi-gays go after him? The answer: because the Nazi-gays are the real haters and a bunch of hypocrites and wimps!

The real insult came from Obama when he changed his stance on gay marriage from opposing it to accepting it.  It was a blatant political move to shore up the gay vote. That was the real insult!   That act by Obama proved that he doesn’t care about the ‘gay cause”, or any other cause for that matter. He’s simply  playing a game of political chess.

Do not be fooled for one minute that liberals are so concerned over gay marriage.  This issue is so beyond gay marriage that even Ray Charles can see what’s really up (and he’s blind and dead).   The gay marriage issue is a front to continue the war on Christianity. This is why Christians are constantly being asked to “ignore” their beliefs.  And as usual, liberals are using gays the way they use all of their other political pets.

I hope that  Mr. Cathy continues to state his beliefs, very loudly and very clearly.  I certainly will.  Marriage is between a man and a woman so says the word of God, and no one can make me view it differently…and I WILL NOT allow ANYONE to define me as hateful because of my beliefs.

By the way, those Chick-Fil-A waffle fries are to die for! They will make you wanna slap yo’ Momma!

Technorati Tags: vanessa anderson,conservative blogger,gay marriage,chic-fil-a,faith,christianity,bullying

The Washington Post has “Trayvon Martined” a Romney story.

A very silly story was reported about the likely GOP presidential nominee, Mitt Romney by The Washington Post a few days ago.  Reportedly, Romney bullied a gay classmate by cutting off his hair as other classmates held him down.  This happened in 1965;  forty-seven whole, long years ago.  Is this a clue as to how desperate liberals really are to cast shadows of doubt over Romney?  And is it a sign to show just how liberal media entities will go to help Barack Obama get elected?
There are many problems with this article; the first is that it was actually written, but also, after reading the article, it was never reported that Romney made any comments about the alleged victim’s sexuality.  The story only reported that Romney commented about the alleged victim’s “style” or manner of dress…his looks.  
It’s becoming clear that The Washington Post “Trayvon Martined” this story; meaning they created hype, exaggerated details, or totally  manufactured the story.  Breitbart News has already begun to dismantle the shanty “details” pulled together by the Washington Post.
Automobile Magazine also interviewed some of the same characters that were interviewed by The Washington Post; however, the portrait of Romney emerges a bit differently.  And even The Washington Post’s story actually compliments Romney:

It was at Cranbrook where he first lived on his own, found his future wife and made his own decisions. One can see the institution’s influence on his demeanor and actions during those years, but also how it helped form the clubbiness and earnestness, the sense of leadership and enthusiasm, apparent in his careers as a businessman and a politician. “He strongly bought in to community service,” said Richard Moon, a schoolmate at the time. “That hard work was its own reward.” What is less visible today is what was most apparent to his prep-school peers: his jocularity.

So, Romney was a prankster who showed a sense of leadership and enthusiasm even back then?
Any credibility that this story had for the first ten seconds of being published is dissipating quite quickly and anything from the Washington Post should be viewed with a side glance from now on.
John Lauber died in 20044, so there is no possibility of getting his side of the story, but ABC News is reporting outrage from Lauber’s family over this seemingly fabricated story. Betsy Lauber stated:

“The family of John Lauber is releasing a statement saying the portrayal of John is factually incorrect and we are aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda. There will be no more comments from the family.”

Another sister, Christine Lauber also spoke out and made this comment: 

“Even if it did happen, John probably wouldn’t have said anything.  If he were still alive today, he would be furious [about the story], she said with tears in her eyes.”

How far is too far to go back into someone’s life for “vetting purposes”? While it is extremely important to know as much information about a potential President of the United States as possible, is it really necessary to go back to their high school days? Especially in the absence of a pattern of behavior? If any stage in one’s life is fair game for digging into, then I’m sure we’ll be reading about how Romney crapped in his diaper when he was an infant because it is certainly looking as if  the Left is just that desperate.

Technorati Tags: vanessa anderson,conservative blogger,trayvon-martined,biased media,liberal media,barack obama,mitt romney,presidential election,media double standard,politics