he conservatives and the religious self-righteous need to realize that negative reaction to free speech IS free speech.
Just as with a magician doing a trick or a ventriloquist attempting a word that has a bunch B’s or F’s in it, misdirection is the politicians' way to take people's attention away from what is really going on.
A religious conservative donates money to an organization that is a recognized hate group, as well as to organizations who attempt to disenfranchise American citizens and gain support for this by spreading lies and employing scare tactics, and the trageted group’s objections to this are mischaracterized as an un-American assault on the First Amendment and “religious freedom”.
The end result is that the offender becomes the offended, the victimizer the victim, and people get to express their bigotry and have it celebrated by conservative radio and such unbiased outlets as the 700 Club. I even read locally that those who objected to this man’s admission to holding to a highly edited Biblical definition of marriage by calling for a boycott were like the Nazis who boycotted Jewish businesses in 1930’s Germany.
Such a leap in logic would have garnered an Olympic gold medal if logic leaping were an event. I pulled a hamstring just reading that analogy.
But those who like to persecute and then assume the mantle of the persecuted when their actions backfire, then began to act as if their rights were the ones being attacked. It would be like me hitting someone with a baseball bat and then complaining they had put a dent in it.
The goddess of the right had to chime in, of course. Sara Palin was not going to let an opportunity go by without a comment. She needs to protect her position as the darling of the tea party, and sadly they listen without question. They are the ones in the ventriloquist’s audience who actually believe the dummy is speaking.
“Calling for the boycott [of Chick Fil A] has a real chilling affect on our First Amendment rights”.
And, of course, she is supported by those who would never suggest, support, or take part in a boycott. After all one shouldn't assume they have a right to hold to their beliefs, and where they see it appropriate, act on those beliefs, like Dan Cathy, the victim, did.
This would all have a little credibility if those who condemn boycotts, as Ms Palin does, were not presently suggesting, supporting, and taking part in boycotts against companies who have expressed their support for treating Gay people as equal citizens in this country, including their right to enter into legal marriages that have nothing to do with any denomination’s belief, but with secular, civil benefits, many of which are supported by the tax dollars they pay.
Remember, churches do not pay taxes, but they seem to want a say about everyone who does.
Who are they boycotting, and who should those who respect the citizenship of all Americans make sure they support?
1) Oreo, 2) Betty Crocker, 3) Levi’s, 4) General Mills, 5) American Apparel, 6) Starbucks, 7) Tide, 8) Microsoft, 9) Home Depot, 10) Pampers, 11) Pepsi, 12) Crest, 13) Safeway, 14) Old Navy, 15) Girl Scouts, 16) Macy’s, 17) Target, 18) JC Penny, 19) Pillsbury, 20) Gap, and 21) Green Giant.
For people who find boycotts such a threat to the First Amendment, religious expression, and America itself, they certainly are involved in a number of boycotts,
And here some people think they are serious when they object to them.