Chick Fil A caves to LGBTQ coercion

Ransom said:
Smellin Coffee said:
Legally, there is no right or autonomy for an unborn child.

And in 1862, there were no rights or autonomy for black slaves in the South. What's your point?

As living humans, there is autonomy to every born individual. They had personal autonomy although not given the rights thereof which is what makes human trafficking such as slavery, illegal.

Are you suggesting you would be for slavery if the law declared black slaves as non-autonomous beings?
 
Smellin Coffee said:
As living humans, there is autonomy to every born individual.

Which is true of fetuses?

a) They're not living
b) They're not humans
 
voicecrying said:
This article sums up how I'm feeling about the whole story (especially the last paragraph):

https://relevantmagazine.com/current/heres-whats-actually-going-on-with-the-chick-fil-a-charitable-giving-controversy/?fbclid=IwAR3cUtOspP7VF8YBzEJ27HtereFJFa0lxLXbcrHYh4-MGH-ZteTkUJKbJ78

I meant to get to this yesterday but forgot to come back to it. 

I don't disagree with his take on their motive, and time will tell if they are distancing themselves from their Christian identity (relating to the LGBTQ issues).  I also don't think that is the case, but it was a bit concerning that they shut down their new business which opened in Britain recently due to pressure from the LGBTQ hate-mongers.  Their coercive tactics are having a significant factor on Christian businesses, as we've seen with the cake-baker example.  Their attempt to shape culture by making Christians out to be bigots is gaining traction with an increasingly secularized American culture. :-X
 
Smellin Coffee said:
As living humans, there is autonomy to every born individual.

Why do you have to qualify the statement with "born"?
 
Top