The bible also sanctions slavery. In Colossians it called for slaves to obey their masters, a passage used by "Christians" to sanction the African Slave Trade. So glad some of you weren't around to support those good Christians and their freedom of speech during the Civil War.

Self hate is truly the worst kind of hate there is.

Thats why deep down I hope she has no clue what CFA gives their money to and what the anti gay groups that get CFA's money actually do to GLBT community. I really dont think she is anti-gay.

However, at the same time, its not like Melissa cannot research it.

The sad fact is I know some people have tweeted her this evidence or tried to but she blocked a lot of folks. So Im afraid she may never see it.

I know from tweets I follow she has gay friends who work BTS at Days who have supported her, so maybe, just maybe they will inform her of what CFA truly supports and what the issue is here and Freedom of Speech it is not.

I don't research every fast food chain that I eat at either. And I'm not going to. Neither should she have to. And she shouldn't have to take heat like this because she agreed with the sentiments, or simply the freedom of speech, of Cathy. I doubt that she's done extensive research into the chain.

People asking what Melissa's views are, she is OPENLY Conservative Christian.

Also, I'm really tired of individuals making something as clear cut as saying they're against gay marriage, gay families and think homosexuality is perverted and a sin, a simply "disagreement" of opinions. It's not a disagreement and it's not an opinion. If you hold these BELIEFS, you are anti-gay. Anti-gays love to soften their bigotry to make themselves look more palatable to society at large, but at the end of the day, a pig is a pig.

Melissa is not dumb enough to not know what's going on. Let's get real. The woman has PROTECTED her tweets, has DELETED friends on her twitter, and BLOCKED tweets that were questioning her anti-gay stance.

She is anti-gay and a hypocrite, proclaiming she's for free speech, yet shutting down speech that she doesn't like. Completely reprehensible, but no surprise.

@David Robertson: She has received death threats. And nothing you said is fact about her being anti-gay. That is your spin on. Unless you can produce facts that she is indeed anti-gay then you are helping to spread the slander.

“Everyone loves a witch hunt as long as it's someone else's witch being hunted.” - Walter Kirn

Also, I'm really tired of individuals making something as clear cut as saying they're against gay marriage, gay families and think homosexuality is perverted and a sin, a simply "disagreement" of opinions. It's not a disagreement and it's not an opinion. If you hold these BELIEFS, you are anti-gay. Anti-gays love to soften their bigotry to make themselves look more palatable to society at large, but at the end of the day, a pig is a pig.

Look I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. I also believe that marriage is a religious institution and that the state should have no part in it so anyone that is not religious should be seeking a civil union that allows them to make medical decisions for their partner, have death benefits, etc. I think this should be standard whether you're straight or gay. I am not anti-gay. You can believe that if you chose but my friends that are gay, who know my position, would most likely disagree with you. As far as it being a sin I don't know. The Bible talks about it as a sin but guess what. I'm not God. I'm just not. So I can't really decide what is sin and what isn't. I'll leave that up to him. But people like you that just think they're right and anyone that doesn't think just like you are wrong make your side of the argument look just as intolerant as the side you're fighting against. You don't know Melissa Reeves, so perhaps you shouldn't judge her.

She is anti-gay and a hypocrite, proclaiming she's for free speech, yet shutting down speech that she doesn't like. Completely reprehensible, but no surprise.

Why should she have to be mistreated on HER twitter. If I say something on my Facebook or my Twitter that you don't like and you come down on me like you have some kind of moral right for "judging people" then damn right I'm going to block your delete you. She's friends with her children on Twitter. Should they really have to see her being mistreated because you want the right to call her a bigot?

Melissa is not the only one who feels the way she does - that was very apparent with the long lines of support for Chick-Fil-A on August 1. It was a peaceful demonstration by many American's supporting their beliefs on free speech.

I didn't see that on August 3rd when the LGBT community protested the company - I saw people vandalizing stores with graffiti and people basically loitering where they didn't even want to be. How is that helping any of the argument?

I don't think calling MR names or bringing up her past is right, but people do have a right to disagree with her.

As far as CFA is concerned, the CEO has right to his Southern Baptist beliefs, but he is stepping over a line, IMO, if he is spending money to influence laws to force the tenets of his particular denomination on everyone else. There is separation of church and state in this country for a reason, because not everyone believes the same things. (Not all Christians even agree on what books should be in the Bible or what is the right age to baptize their kids or if you should have wine with Communion.) I'm a Lutheran Christian, ELCA Synod. Not every ELCA congregation supports gay marriage, but quite a few do. I also have friends who are Episcopalian Christians who are totally in favor or gay marriage. I would never force another church to perform a wedding ceremony they didn't believe in, but why do some churches feel they have a right to interfere with my Pastor performing a gay wedding ceremony he does believe in?

This issue isn't about being pro or anti Christian, it is about someone trying to force the beliefs of his particular denomination on everyone else.
That is totally un-American IMO.

Oh right Aremid I saw it all over the news, it was rioting in the streets, gays smashing waffle fries into buildings, DUH! Im sure you were in that line as well on Chik Fil A appreciation day. Did you ever hear of the Stonewall Riots? If the gays were protesting it was because they have been persecuted for so long that they have had enough. The days of gays being pushed around are over. Gays are the last minority in this country to receive equal rights and its time that everyone is treated equally no matter what the over the top religious right wing nuts think.

Based on the reports from gay employees of CFA and straight folk who work at CFA but are for gay rights, actually, it was basically a gay hate convention. Not peaceful at all. It was people coming together to basically bond in being anti-gay and defend anti-gay beliefs.

I will agree on one point, though----vandalism isn't the answer. With that being said, the vandalism is a reaction to homophobia.

The people who defend CFA out of free-speech are by and large anti-gay and feel homophobia is not at all wrong, and that those condemning homophobia should be silenced. Let's keep it real. These people say they are for freedom of speech, yet they're the ones crying when Ellen was hired by J.C. Penney. They're the ones crying when families leave the Boy Scouts who choose to be anti-gay in their policies. These people do NOT want freedom of speech and they are twisting the facts to paint themselves as victims. It will not work.

So she talks about freedom of speech yet actually goes out of her way to block that freedom of speech because she doesn't like it. That is what being a hypocrite is all about, do as I say, not as I do. Now, I agree with you, she shouldn't have to be friends and associate with people on twitter she doesn't want to, and I would block people who were attacking me on my twitter. But the sympathy card is rejected when she went out of her way to make an attention-seeking tweet and now it's like, she doesn't want the attention. If she doesn't want the attention, why make the tweet in the first place?

She knew what she was doing. She is just pulling a charade right now, and it's actually sad of her. Especially given she is friends with her children, and her husband is on twitter too. Why would she subject them to any potential hate because she wants to create drama?

What she did was severely ill-advised at the very least.

That's true, I'll agree, maybe she's not anti-gay. Is she pro-gay? No, because clearly not only does she support CFA, but she supports conservatives/fundamentalists politically, who are by and large anti-gay, and she has blocked all dissent on her twitter. So it's pretty clear where she stands, but she may be one of those "I disagree but I don't hate" wishy-washy types. But that's neither here nor there. The death threats, whether that has been VERIFIED or not I'm not sure, if that is true, then I can see why she would privatize her twitter, I don't have a problem with her doing that, but it still is HYPOCRITICAL to say I'm for freedom of speech and then block freedom of speech. Which is what she has done.

And forcing the LGBT agenda on us all is not going to work either. Not everyone in this country is a lemming and goes along with what the media, other liberal people think. Some of us still have our own minds and beliefs that we stand up for no matter what anyone says.

Calling people homophobic over a matter of chicken is just plain preposterous. I have gay friends, family members - I don't just shun them because my beliefs are different from theirs. People with different ideologies have survived together in this country since its founding and I really doubt this issue is going to change that.

What gets me is the constant backlash me and others receive just for having an opinion that's contrary to everyone else's. I don't appreciate being called a Nazi just because I eat there.

You generalize. I believe that CFA should be able to say what they want, as well as Melissa Reeves. However I believe that CFA's donation, if it was a company based donation on behalf of CFA and not from Mr. Cathy's personal funds, should have been addressed before now. Where the money goes is an issue. While I may not support gay marriage, mainly because I don't believe that modern society understands the sanctity of marriage and therefore should be like the gay community and have civil unions, I do believe that gay people have the right to be treated with dignity and respect, THAT is the basic human right. Anyone that is not treating them with that needs to go ahead and rip the badge of Christian off their chest. Not to get all religious but there's a scripture that reads "We've all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." As I mentioned in another post I can't really specify whether homosexuality is a sin or not since I'm not God. But the one thing that I can say with absolute certainty is that I AM a sinner and so I have no authority to judge anyone else. People are first and foremost people. Sexuality is just a part of it. There's not a gay person that I know, and I know quite a few, that is solely their sexual preference. Those people that picket because a gay person might be a spokesperson for an ad campaign because it might teach children that homosexuality is alright need to re-examine their own selves and ask themselves if they're teaching their children what Jesus was saying. Jesus ate with the tax collectors, he pardoned the thief on the cross, and he will do no less for me who struggles with anger (which is a sin) and bitterness. Because whether a person is gay or not they're still a sinner. We all are. That's why we can't judge each other. Because not one of us is qualified to.

Sorry for my rant. Hopefully no one will be offended by my bringing God into it but people keep talking about Christians as though every single Christian out there is picketing funerals and being hateful. They're the exception, not the rule.

@David46208 - Isn't funny though she hasn't tried to clarify what she meant? Don't even say she shouldn't have to do it. You can shove that where the sun don't shine. Anybody that is in the public eye and gets that much attention for a comment would clarify it if she meant something else. You are correct that she didn't say that she was against gays, but she definately inferred it. Is it a gray area comment? Yes. Just as much as you can say she didn't infer that, others can say she did. Honestly, the silence from her speaks volumes.
As for CFA, anyone certainly has the right tell others what they do with their money. You can agree or disagree. This is America. I will however yell it from a mountain top that Dan Cathy gives his money to organizations that promote killing gays in other countries and here in the U.S. to organizations that are very anti-gay. Why the heck whould anyone gay or that supports gays want to give their money to his company if they know what he does with it?
Remember "EAT MORE BEEF"

You can have gay friends and be anti-gay. Not saying you are, but that doesn't justify nor defend anti-gay behavior. Now, being against same-sex couples marrying is an anti-gay position, no doubt about it. It is what it is. Being anti-gay is defined as being against the orientation and "lifestyle" (which includes relationships, marriage, sex life, gay culture) associated with the orientation. You can have gay friends yet not accept their gayness as OK. The way I see it, if a person was truly OK with being gay, they'd have zero reservations not only seeing marriage equality legalized, but actually supporting it. There are a lot of people like you sort of on the fence, but only maybe 35%-38% of people who are legitimate supporters. Those are the people in my mind who are truly accept being gay as OK.

I'm not judging Melissa, but I am very much questioning why she did what she did. And making an assessment based on her actions. I haven't come to a complete determination of her motives for why she's doing what she's doing with the CFA tweet, and everything else afterward. As for her beliefs and others who believe in an anti-gay viewpoint, it is wrong, and I don't and won't accept people who think it's OK to be in any way anti-gay, because it's not.

P.S. Marriage has never been a religious institution. It's much more a civil/social/personal bond than religious. We need less religious control and not more.

Lets get one thing understood folks:

Gay=Not a belief nor choice.

Anti-gay=Belief and a choice.

Religion=Belief, either a choice and/or indoctrination.

So these things are not in the same category. People need to stop putting being naturally gay and choosing to be anti-gay on the same plane, as if they are equal of legitimacy, or both are equally free from criticism. Some people have this idea that if being gay should be something not criticized, the same should be done for the choice of being anti-gay. Nope.

David Robertson you are awesome.

This is a total issue altogether. I don't think anyone's ever disproven or proven this fact. I could state my belief on the matter, but whatever it is, it's probably going to be ridiculed no matter what the stance is.

It's very sad that a board like this where people can express their beliefs on issues is not exactly where one can truly do that. Let us all just bond over the fact that we all watch the soaps (although that fact may not be existent in a few years).

Aremid96----Forcing the LGBT agenda on you? Oh, I don't think so. I'm not seeing anyone forcing you to be gay, forcing you to enter a same-sex partnership, forcing you to accept same-sex marriage, forcing you to support only pro-gay politicians. Not happening. Being critical of people who willingly chose to be anti-gay is not forcing an agenda. Demanding equality is not forcing an agenda. It's called standing up for what is right and what is rightfully ours. Our place in the world, and our legal rights.

Calling people homophobic for intentionally supporting a company that is intending to spend further more millions after already spending millions in supporting and promoting anti-gay hate groups is HOMOPHOBIA and NO-ONE with a gay friend would do such a thing and be able to look that gay friend in the eye. You are no friend of the gay community at all. Surviving together is different than supporting something as abhorrent as homophobia. A true friend stands up and speaks out, and truly supports their friends. Especially something as black and white as this, something as HUMAN as this. We're talking about basic human rights, and if you're against that, then you're against what we as a community stand for.

If you don't appreciate the backlash that is finally coming in being anti-gay, then don't be anti-gay. I don't appreciate being called a perverted sinner and having people attempt to defend their anti-gay attitudes every day. There are a lot of things I don't appreciate that people do daily but I don't tell those people to do things differently and I don't whine about it, like almost EVERY SINGLE anti-gay person does. You people have the nerve to condemn the gay community and legitimately feel we shouldn't get married and then literally whine when you're not given a pat on the back and actually expect gays/pro-gay straights to simply tolerate you and your views and act like it's all good? Completely insulting. Hopefully for you and others, you've gotten a reality check.

P.S. Marriage has never been a religious institution. It's much more a civil/social/personal bond than religious. We need less religious control and not more.

I don't believe in marriage as a whole. Not for gay, not for straight people. I believe there should be a separate union, apart from government control, that is a religious union set aside for people who want follow the religious doctrine of marriage. Biblically people couldn't get divorced unless one spouse cheated on the other. If they did get divorced they were still married in the eyes of God and society and any other unions they had, married or not, were adulterous. Now don't misunderstand what I'm saying as women should be stoned if they don't obey, etc. My definition of what I believe a religious marriage is is a man and a woman who have never been with other people, because pre-marital sex is adultery, saying that no matter what comes the man is the head of the household and the wife is his equal in all matters. And the only option to get out is death. I don't believe in this "I'm not happy so I'm going to get a divorce" crap. I believe that when something is broken or cracking you fix it, you don't throw it away. I have a very limited view of what marriage is and 99% of gay and straight relationships don't meet the criteria. But I do believe that the government needs to get out of religion. Because trust me. As much as you think that religion is affecting government, government is affecting religion too.

david46208, it's one thing for you to support Melissa Reeves, but by playing dumb, you make yourself look as stupid as she made herself look with that ridiculous and unnecessary tweet. One need not know the woman to understand EXACTLY what she was getting at, and if you would take off your blinders and read what Jamey wrote, you would see that is the point he was making.

Melissa Reeves made a clear choice by making a simple Tweet. Her tweet says that she supports a company that supports many anti-gay groups...PERIOD. This is where she stands, and she should have the right to support Chick Fil A if she chooses.

While I NEVER equate being Gay with being Black, I will say that we absolutely have a responsibility to make sure that no group in society is subject to undeserved violence or harm, and can enjoy the same basic human and American rights and dignity as anyone else, because if the bigots or the vocal majority can go after the gays, they can go after us (insert race) again. On a personal note for me, What's to stop White people from trying to enact slavery again? From rolling back voter rights for Black people (they are already doing it in states like Florida and Texas)? The only thing stopping them is that we have to fight.

So yeah, if we don't stand up for marginalized groups in society, who is going to stand up when it happens to us? We should have the right to fight these forces that try to destroy us. Just as Missy Reeves should have the right to support those same forces. I think it's good that she took a side, because it's easier when you know what your enemy looks like. It's out in the open and easier to combat.

To quote Greenlee from All My Children

"At least with your enemies, you know where you stand..."

No, I am speaking on behalf of what gay/pro-gay CFA employees have said went down during Appreciation Day at CFA on Wednesday, and also interviews with people who went to CFA on Wednesday. These people are ANTI-GAY, reports of people spitting in the food of people perceived as gay, people making statements that they wish gays go hungry, people making statements that they wish America were gay free. This is no longer a free speech issue and it has become a gay community vs conservative/fundamentalist/anti-gay social war.

Good points here, I can't disagree with anything you said bar the not supporting same-sex marriage bit. I'm most glad that you understand that the financial decisions Dan Cathy has made are clearly an issue that should have been addressed long ago. This entire drama could have been settled then, but Dan Cathy had been playing both sides of the social war, trying to hide his anti-gay donations, yet also promoting his Christian views. It's backfired on him badly.

So much truth. This is what being a real Christian is about.

Like I always say, Christianists are not Christians. But they have taken over the Christian platform. Real Christians have to do a better job at taking back their platform and redirecting the message from a hateful and exclusionary one to a message of love, forgiveness and respect. It's just sad how things have turned.

I'm not offended by you're bringing God into the mix, because God is in the mix, for better or worse, regarding the drama surrounding all things gay in our society. It is what it is. All I will say is, as you pointed out, the anti-religion comments primarily extend as a reaction to the actions of so-called religious folk, not solely because they are religious.

Tell it Jamey! Thank you Jamey and David Robertson! You guys are about love and equality. Wish everyone could be like that.

Thank you Tom! And you're awesome yourself. Keep up the great posts!

Government is affection religion, but marriage isn't a government institution, it's a civil institution. And I don't think government nor religion has a place in defining that same-sex couples cannot marry legally. As for your definition in marriage, I respect your all-out non-hypocritical commitment to your religious beliefs, but I think that your definition of marriage is limited to your religious sect and nothing more. Not everyone believes as you do and that means not everyone should be forced to adhere to those beliefs, and when you make marriage a religious union, that's what's happening. You're disregarding atheists and you're disregarding agnostics. You're putting pressure on same-sex couples to find gay-affirming churches. It means a couples' marriage in one place may be recognized, and not recognized elsewhere. It simply wouldn't work.