Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Chicago Chick-fil-A Kiss-In protesters “chalk” homeless street preacher

Chicago Chick-fil-A Kiss-In protesters “chalk” homeless street preacher

I attended Friday night’s “Kiss-in” protest outside the only Chick-fil-A location in Chicago. The small group of between twenty to thirty protesters gathered outside the restaurant around 7pm. A few same-sex couples took the opportunity to kiss in public, as the protest organizers encouraged attendees to do on their facebook page.

I asked many of the protesters whether they agreed with Alderman Moreno’s actions; the reactions were mixed. Some agreed — one woman told me she took a “European view” of our Constitutional Rights — while others felt he was in the wrong despite agreeing with him in a general sense.

While there, a group formed around an elderly African-American homeless man, who was reading his bible while seated along a fence rail off to the side of the protest. Some in the group confronted the man, who was reading the bible aloud, and engaged him in theological debates. A few others took the opportunity to mock the man, which I captured on video:

Nearing the end of the protest, someone from the group wrote on the sidewalk in front of the homeless man, “He’s Really Gay Deep Down,” with an arrow pointed to where he was seated.

Update 8-5-2012 8:40 p.m.Occupy Chicago activist claims to be person taunting homeless man at Chick-fil-A protest

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:

Comments

Interesting story, Anne.

Did any of these “enlightened ones” buy any food for the man they accosted?

What a bunch of hateful, racist/bigoted trolls. I hope they keep this up. More people will see who the real haters are.

    theduchessofkitty in reply to caambers. | August 4, 2012 at 10:12 pm

    Yes. What was done to that poor man was wrong. Just wrong.

    As I said before, someone’s brand is being damaged here, and it’s not Chick-fil-A’s.

    When will they stand up like this to a homophobic Muslim cleric?

    ohiochili in reply to caambers. | August 5, 2012 at 9:36 am

    This analogy has probably been overused, but the first thing I thought of when I watched this was light on an infestation of cockroaches.
    They’re just like the mouth-breathers who think it’s fun to beat up gays. I’m sure these brave defenders of homosexuals everywhere thought what they did to this man was ok ’cause they didn’t use baseball bats or fists.
    Great job, Anne.

I’ll be sending this around to my email buddies for sure. Especially my liberal friends. Great story, Ann. This needs to get out.

Wow. Intolerant. Mean. Hateful. Wow. Imagine that were Christ, sitting there, needful and absorbing all that hate.

I posted on it, twittered it.

Who knew that rainbow flag was a flag of hate, eh?

Thanks Anne

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to darleenclick. | August 4, 2012 at 7:50 pm

    The Left likes to play the Hitler card. Remember, he was gay, too. Ernst Rohm was one of Hitler’s oldest and closest friends. Rohm was his, Larry Sinclair, so to speak.

      I doubt that Hitler was gay – he had a mistress Eva Braun – but a number of Nazis were gay. Ernst Rohm, the leader of the S.A. (Sturmabteilung) or the Brownshirts – was both gay and enormously popular. Rohm’s homosexuality was well known in Nazi circles, and while Hitler and others professed queasiness over it they still considered Rohm useful to their cause.

      After taking power Hitler and his inner circle (especially Goebbels, Himmler and Goring) began to fear that Rohm would use that popularity to make himself Germany’s supreme leader. After much waffling by Hitler, Rohm and his SA staffers were eventually arrested and executed for treason, not because Rohm was gay.

      For a fascinating account of Hitler’s rise to power, check out William Shirer’s Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

        TrooperJohnSmith in reply to rec_lutheran. | August 4, 2012 at 9:58 pm

        One of my acquaintances, who publishes quite extensively in German academia concerning the Nazi-era, says that in Germany it’s pretty much an accepted fact that if Hitler was not gay, he sure had some homosexual tendencies. In fact, he’s surprised that we Americans don’t also accept this as fact. In his mind, too many people in the UK and Americas still have this weird reverence for the man, whereas Germans do not.

        I largely disagree, and my initial reaction was that this German mythos about Hitler’s homosexuality was part of the German deconstruction of the man, but he assures me that Adolf was indeed homosexual.

        If he wasn’t he was surely something bizarre. Hitler’s niece, Geli Raubaul, with whom he was in love, killed herself over her Unkie Adolph’s sexual preferences. Rohm was one of the boys who cleaned up after him.

        As for Eva Braun, she was his mistress pretty much in name only. Anja Klaubunda describes the weird relationship between Hitler, Braun and Magda Goebbels in her great biography of the latter.

      Ragspierre in reply to TrooperJohnSmith. | August 4, 2012 at 11:34 pm

      The “gay” Nazis were some of the most deadly, hard-hearted and barbarous of all.

      They were so dangerous, they were largely eliminated when the Nazi party was more “normalized” and mainstreamed.

I fail to see how asserting that someone who disagrees with one view is somehow inherently made irrelevant by saying that they truly hold the opposite view.

The whole protest (done in this fashion)seems silly. There’s no way to logistically get the numbers to rival the other side. Not enough gays, in relationships, with both members willing to kiss in public (with cameras around).

A sit in would have been better. Woulda gotten more single gays/lesbians.

No one wants to go stag to a kiss in.

And why wasn’t the numbers at the ground zero Chicago CFA not higher? Was the red line down between there and Boystown?

You know what gets me? There were millions of people who turned up at ChickFilA last Wednesday – and it was all happy, joyous, chatting. Not one “hate” video of some person chomping down on a sandwich while screaming rants against gays.

Now, we have pics of vandalism and videos of harassment from the much smaller group of anti-ChickFilA protesters.

Just who are the “haters” and was Wed or Fri the “National Day of Intolerance”?

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to darleenclick. | August 4, 2012 at 7:57 pm

    In the worldview of The Loopey, Looney Left® , when the gay kissing protesters showed up, the Christians would’ve descended on them in a tide of hate. Instead, they were met with a massive yawn and an overwhelming tide of ignore.

    So, the Ghey Americans had to avail themselves of a homeless Christian to browbeat.

    Want tolerance? Show tolerance.

    P.S.: The guy in the ‘Texas’ shirt is a Rangers fan from, you know, up there, near Ft. Worth. 😆

      They don’t want “tolerance” … they want BLIND ACCEPTANCE. And not a few are willing to express hatred to get it.

      What you see, in chalk and in paint, here is what you will get if marriage is re-defined as they want … anyone who dissents after that will be subject to a GLBT version of Kristallnacht, and just like OWS, they will get a pass on it.

      The most strident activists are becoming, what they decry.

Juba Doobai! | August 4, 2012 at 7:44 pm

This vid shows, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that homosexuals have a huge problem with God. The have, like all of us do, a sin problem. They have chosen to revel in sin and to mock God and His Word. The problem for them and all of us is that God didn’t create sin because He does not and can not sin. Instead, God condemns sin and levies a huge punishment for it. Death. Our current culture has taken steps to rid us of guilt, to alter us from whom the Bible says we are so we each do what is right in our own eyes. This vid indicates that that effort has not succeeded, all protestations to the contrary, for if it had the Bible-reading man would have been left alone and the anti-God diatribe unspoken. What the vid reveals is that the corollary to the homosexual agenda must be an oppressive, atheistic society. Our foundation must be dispensed with so that a small group of us guilty of a particular sin can feel good about itself.

    Where I think a lot of the motivation for choosing the gay lifestyle comes from, is from the need to prove to oneself, that one is “free-thinking”, by rejecting “traditional” norms of behavior — and yes, some of this sinks to the equivalent of giving the Almighty the finger.

    This is a powerful motivation that has led to simplistic litmus tests in other areas of human endeavor to prove the same thing …

    … from faith in extrapolations of Darwin’s observations into a comprehensive theory of origins that is proclaimed as fact when it is rife with assumptions (and dissenters are denigrated as “ignorant” …

    … to faith in the idea that a relative few Best and Brightest are inherently wiser and more noble than 315 million Americans, so much so that they should be trusted to make so many of our individual decisions FOR us, right down to demanding that we render our resources for helping the less fortunate to Caesar, so that Caesar can cut checks for them on or behalf, because that is “better” than us doing that work ourselves.

    These simplistic tests, and others like them, have turned our society into one where the blind lead the blind … right into ditch after ditch … because they are based in faith … faith in a being with a well-documented record for error, mendacity – and an inability to see into the future.

    A faith far more blind, than yours or mine in God.

    As for the Kiss-In … while a lot of the behavior could be safely ignored, a few would (and have) pushed it into the level of a public nuisance as we see here … forgetting that, while our free speech is protected, we don’t get a pass on being an ass if it goes beyond that.

BannedbytheGuardian | August 4, 2012 at 7:45 pm

Those Chicago gays do not dress very well. They are letting the side down.

These guys were not good looking enough for me to click.

I have standards.

Why, this almost seems, well, racist

    OcTEApi in reply to WarEagle82. | August 4, 2012 at 8:19 pm

    Its a charge, its called ethnic intimidation.

    Although its not uncommon for these liberal bastids to be guilty of projecting their own depravity onto others.

What bravery! What courage. Those brave gay lads only outnumbered the one older homeless man by like, 8 to 1. They were speaking truth to power as they shouted at him. I’m sure they feel especially proud of the way they stood up to the Man.

Pathetic losers. They are bullies in the Adam Smith mold.
Why did you determine that he was homeless? Just curious.

VetHusbandFather | August 4, 2012 at 8:27 pm

It’s true… if you read anything in the media in the lead up to the ‘kiss-in’ the left all thought it was going to be a huge phone-camera-record-able scene. Those ‘bigots’ at CFA would have to either allow gay men kissing in their restaurants (gasp) or make a big scene and kick them out. I think all the Christians out there knew what the actual response would be… nothing, just their normal non-hateful business as usual. CFA employees have no reason to do anything but treat their guests with kindness just as they do every day. Mr. Cathy himself said that all people were welcome as guests and employees regardless of their sexual orientation. If anything it reaffirms what Christians have been saying along: The gay marriage debate is NOT about hatred, and Christians can oppose gay marriage and still love all of their neighbors, homosexuals included.

“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.”

this is what always gets me.
He’s Really Gay Deep Down
if we disagree we must be gay.

the whole argument actually pisses me off.

    Jay Jones in reply to dmacleo. | August 4, 2012 at 8:48 pm

    It’s the presumption that one side might find simply being grouped with the other side insulting that’s so off.

    “I think the Bible is pro life”

    “You’re secretly pro choice”

    Doesn’t make sense.

    This isn’t the only thing they are logically challenged with …

    Someone care to explain to me, if homosexuality is a natural trait, how does that square with the concept of natural selection?

    From what I see, the obvious impairment to reproduction would have led to that trait being bred out of the human species well before now.

    OTOH, if homosexuality is endowed by a Creator, then why does religion after religion look upon it with disdain – does anyone know of one belief system (outside of the Cult of Human Omniscience that many Progressives bitterly cling to) that embraces homosexuality as normal?

    And for that matter, if it is natural, then why do homosexuals have to go to the lengths they do, physically, to “make things fit” to consummate the act of sex? Not that straights don’t enjoy some of the same things, mind you … but that is more of a process of discovery, than inherent biology.

      Homosexual behavior, like left-handedness, has persistently shown up in the human population, despite whatever people think of it. Homosexual behavior shows up in all types of mammals, too. Traits that seem disadvantageous and yet are persistent in a population (like, for example, sickle-cell anemia) are often found to have some sort of evolutionary advantage.

      I have no idea why God would burden some of His children with such traits, but we all know that He has done it in many other instances. I, for one, think that there must be an evolutionary advantage to homosexuality, but I have no idea what that might be.

        ldwaddell in reply to Valerie. | August 4, 2012 at 11:05 pm

        Me thinks you have been reading some propaganda. Have a look at this information and see if perhaps the “Born this way” argument doesn’t get significantly weaker.

        an April 8, 2008 statement by the American College of Pediatricians stated bluntly, During the last 40 years the majority of SSA [same-sex attraction] studies have been conducted, reviewed and/or published by homosexuality affirming researchers, many of whom are also openly homosexual. Virtually all of the studies were touted by the media as proving that SSA is inborn. In reality, however, every one of them, from gene analysis, to brain structure, fingerprint styles, handedness, finger lengths, eye blinking, ear characteristics, verbal skills and prenatal hormones, have failed to be replicated, were criticized for research limitations, and/or were outright debunked.27

        Brown, Michael (2011-05-25). A Queer Thing Happened To America: And what a long, strange trip it’s been (Kindle Locations 4039-4045). BookMasters. Kindle Edition.

          Reticulator in reply to ldwaddell. | August 4, 2012 at 11:13 pm

          This is interesting, and maybe even significant. But all research is criticized for research limitations. We live in a world with limits all over the place.

          Reticulator in reply to ldwaddell. | August 4, 2012 at 11:15 pm

          You might even say that the only think that’s unlimited in our world is the supply of limits.

        tmavenger in reply to Valerie. | August 4, 2012 at 11:29 pm

        It’s possible that homosexuality has some hidden evolutionary advantage, but there are other plausible explanations for its occurrence. For example, mental and physical diseases such as schizophrenia and Down syndrome also occur throughout human society and history, but I doubt anyone would claim they have an evolutionary advantage.

        Unfortunately, it’s unlikely that we will be able to resolve the nature/nurture controversy in the current climate of rigid orthodoxy in scientific research. Those who descent are silenced or driven out. Perhaps this will change if men of moral courage stand up to those who do to scientists what the homosexuals in this clip did to the homeless man.

        Juba Doobai! in reply to Valerie. | August 5, 2012 at 12:50 am

        Have you heard of the Fall? Of Original Sin? In a fallen world, the brokenness of our separation from God is manifested in many ways: sickness and other pathologies that we consider intrinsic to human nature. We lie, steal, kill, are born with cancer or get cancer, are born blind or handicapped in some way, get strange and fierce diseases. All this not because God wanted it that way but because He ave man free will and man, already in the image and likeness of God, wanted to be like God knowing good and evil. So man fell and all creation fell with him. Who we are today and what we do stems from that. Some people, as part of that brokenness, are born homosexual, just as some others are born blind or palsied. Yet, no man chooses to become blind; some people do choose homosexuality, even as others are raped into it and made that way by monsters like Sandusky.

        NC Mountain Girl in reply to Valerie. | August 5, 2012 at 8:43 am

        In the animals I am familiar with the so called homosexual behaviors such as “mounting” are not sexual in nature. They how the animals establish which ones are dominant. My spayed 15 pound Jack Russell mounted my neutered 100 lb Akita-Shepherd when I first got him to show him who was top dog. He shrugged, she went flying across the room and the issue was settled.

[…] time to protest at a Chick-fil-A in an affluent neighborhood. Here’s one homeless man who is finding comfort in his Bible – and the response of the protesters? Intolerance. Hmmm. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe […]

After all the noise, I finally decided to track down the article that has so greatly offended some people. It’s worth reading, to know exactly what the gays are protesting against.

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=38271

So much vociferous hate and intolerance meted out to each and everyone perceived not lock-step with them and their homosexual agenda(s).

They’d sooner cut off their nose to spite their face than ‘reduce themselves’ to actually giving even a measure of that which they so highly and mightily demand from literally everyone else in existence.

Give what you’ve always given — Get what you’ve always gotten.

“He’s Really Gay Deep Down.”

Do they mean that as a criticism of the man? Or was it written to defend him from his critics?

Those love-in people are not very loving, aren’t they? Looks like a hate-fest of “people who don’t look like them”. Wonder where I heard that phrase said before?

Anne, thank you for your courage in filming the protestors’ hatred and bigotry.

I am a libertarian who is agnostic to the border of atheism.

Nevertheless, I would rather be governed by moonshine-drinkin’, sister-marryin’, snake-handlin’, NASCAR-lovin’ Bible thumpers than by over-educatedschooled postmodern multicultural elitist leftists of the Obama/Warren type.

Hopefully the two alternatives above will never be the only ones. If they are, I know which way I’ll jump.

    punfundit in reply to gs. | August 4, 2012 at 9:17 pm

    Amen.

    The question is, who is acting more out of blind faith?

    I don’t think it is the snake handlers, in this case.

    (Full disclosure: except for the reptiles, and perhaps NASCAR, you are describing my ancestry here …)

    Henry Hawkins in reply to gs. | August 4, 2012 at 9:22 pm

    What’s wrong with marrying one’s sister? I did, and for good reason too. When you marry your sister you don’t have any in-laws.

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to gs. | August 4, 2012 at 10:03 pm

    Cousin Earl? Is you ‘a usin’ the innernet now? Now, don’t be ‘a tellin’ it all on yer kinfolk, ya hear?

    😆

    ldwaddell in reply to gs. | August 4, 2012 at 11:26 pm

    Extreme skepticism with regard to knowledge is self-defeating and therefore false. The skeptic’s reasoning (“one cannot know”) backfires for surely he at least claims to know that he doesn’t know-an assertion which is self-referentially incoherent or absurd. Logical reflection reveals that at least some knowledge is both possible and, in fact, actual.

    Kenneth Richard Samples.

      Extreme skepticism with regard to knowledge is self-defeating and therefore false.

      So is blind acceptance of the ideas of others, merely because they possess appearances and/or credentials of “intellect” …

      … especially when these others combine their mere appearances and credentials with ignorance of Callahan’s Principle of Leadership: a man’s got to know his lmitiations

      … are so full of themselves they deign to have ordinary people outsource their decision-making authority, personal responsibility, and resources to this elite, to make our decisions FOR us …

      … and summarily dismiss any source of information that does not conform to their preconceptions of what “intellect” looks and sounds like.

      THIS is the far greater problem, today.

[…] Case in point. Category: Church of the Painful Truth  |  Comment (RSS) […]

[…] has morphed into a Chick-Fil-A protest to taunt and ‘chalk’ homeless people. Legal Insurrection (via Twitchy) posted a video of a bunch of leftist thugs chalking and taunting a homeless preacher. […]

LukeHandCool | August 4, 2012 at 9:33 pm

Seems like there’s an inverse relationship between the size of the crowds and the media coverage.

Yahoo News trumpeted “scores” of gays and lesbians turning out for the kiss-in.

That’s right … scores. Maybe even dozens!

9thDistrictNeighbor | August 4, 2012 at 9:35 pm

This weekend Cardinal George has an essay in the bulletins of the churches in the Archdiocese. A sample:

“Recent comments by those who administer our city seem to assume that the city government can decide for everyone what are the “values” that must be held by citizens of Chicago. I was born and raised here, and my understanding of being a Chicagoan never included submitting my value system to the government for approval. Must those whose personal values do not conform to those of the government of the day move from the city? Is the City Council going to set up a “Council Committee on Un-Chicagoan Activities” and call those of us who are suspect to appear before it? I would have argued a few days ago that I believe such a move is, if I can borrow a phrase, “un-Chicagoan.” ”

Whether or not you are Catholic, the essay is worth a read. http://www.archchicago.org/blog/print.aspx?postID=276

Henry Hawkins | August 4, 2012 at 9:38 pm

Devil’s advocacy alert:

If 2% of the population is in fact gay and Chicago is typical, there are about 54,000 gays among Chicago’s population of 2.7 million. Twenty to thirty showed up at this Chick-fil-A and acted badly. Does that necessarily say anything about gays in general? Would a small fraction of one percent of straights behave badly on a given event or cause?

Though I certainly deplore the behavior of these 20-30 gays, it would seem that the Chick-fil-A phenomenon hasn’t angered gays nearly as badly as media would have us believe, at least not to the point of actually demonstrating. National turnout for the ‘kiss-in’ was equally as dismal.

OK, start the dislike parade.

    In this case I am not sure all of the protestors were gay. Let me ask this question:

    What if a group of Tea Party protestors had mocked a black man reading the Bible? The shrieks of rage from the media would have been deafening. This incident would lead ever newscast at ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, etc for weeks, and all Tea Party members everywhere would have been smeared as bigots.

    I am not suggesting that turnabout is fair play, or that anything more than a tiny minority of people (gay or otherwise) are like the demonstrators on the video. But I do think that the media’s blatant dishonesty and double standard in reporting this story needs to be pointed out as often as possible. I think it is worth asking journalists the following: if the bad behavior of a few Tea Party patriots (or Christians, or Republicans, etc.) is sufficient grounds for the media demonizing and dehumanizing all of them, does the same principle apply to all homosexuals in this case?

      Browndog in reply to rec_lutheran. | August 4, 2012 at 10:28 pm

      Probably shouldn’t, but–what the heck-

      In this case I am not sure all of the protestors were gay.

      That’s all the linguistic gymnastics of a trial lawyer-

      Let me spell it out:

      Nobody loathes tey gays more than leftists. Their allegiance to the homosexual movement consist of nothing more than thumbing their nose at God, and undermining American tradition.

Why are we afraid to call it what it is?

EVIL

At some point, Anne felt it.

This is not an exercise in academics, logic, or jurisprudence.

What Anne witnessed tonight is not a debate topic–but, something all good men(women) must confront from deep inside their souls.

Just sayin’……what most are (understandably) too afraid to say.

The comment regarding “your God stones rape victims” doesn’t make sense. That exchange was so harsh.

    SeanInLI in reply to cocopop. | August 4, 2012 at 10:39 pm

    Yeah, Mr. “I can’t put my phone down, no way, no how” decided to criticize the Bible for what Muslim’s do based on what’s taught in the Koran.

    He’s one of them brainy gays, I take it.

    Funny, my God is famous for the phrase “Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone” with regards to a known adulteress, stopping her stoning.

    Methinks that if He is willing to show mercy to the guilty, He will protect the innocent from such expressions of flawed human judgment.

    OTOH, creating a “new normal” where GLBT couples get their own legally-enforced version of the Race Card sounds like a threat to the liberty of ordinary people to me.

    And the incident described above occurred 2000 years ago … when was the last time Jews or Christians stoned proven adulteresses, much less the victims of male sexual aggression?

    Yet the same people who will claim Christians stone the innocent, will seek to protect the radical Islamist who does so to this day from the “imperialist” people who seek to protect the life and liberty of those same innocent.

    Cognitive dissonance on parade.

[…] shouted “I do hate God.” All happened in Chicago with full Chicago values on display.  Legal Insurrection was on the scene (full story here). Photo credit: Legal Insurrection video. H/T American Power […]

Not evil per se. But probably just really juvenile group behavior.

A couple assumptions:

Gay kids probably get/got picked on more than the average kid.

Bullied kids often tend to keep the chip on their shoulder for years. And they’ll try to turn the tables when they can. That bully from HS will eventually run into someone he can’t push around and have to reexamine things.

A person is often cordial to deal with. A group of people, less so.

This wasn’t evil (at least from what I saw). It was a group of people in an emotionally charged (far more invested emotion then CFA appreciation day) who got the opportunity to belittle someone who couldn’t win.

It’s juvenile, like the Adam Smith vid. Just this time in a group. The homeless dude was trying to provoke (maybe was naive and inadvertently provocative), vice serving food. But that’s no excuse to go all pack of hyenas on him.

    SeanInLI in reply to Jay Jones. | August 4, 2012 at 10:48 pm

    “The homeless dude was trying to provoke …”

    Or maybe he honestly thought that reading them the bible would help save their souls?

    No, he went there to get accosted by a group. That’s what he set out to do that morning. So the next time I see anyone on the street preaching in some way, he or she is there to provoke atheists, or muslims, or jews, or whoever else disagrees with them?

    You should probably spend some time around people with faith before you criticize them.

      Jay Jones in reply to SeanInLI. | August 4, 2012 at 11:46 pm

      “maybe was naive and inadvertently provocative” his intentions (whatever they may have been) led to a strange action. Did he think that he was going to get Mars Hill treatment and they’d hear him out? What if he kicked of with “Thou shalt not lie with mankind..”? Would that be provocative? Yeah. Did he do that? We don’t know. Was that his intent? Still, we don’t know.

      I am in no way excusing the group’s (pack’s) behavior. The accusing him as being gay as an insult is silly.

    Reticulator in reply to Jay Jones. | August 4, 2012 at 11:00 pm

    ” Gay kids probably get/got picked on more than the average kid.

    Bullied kids often tend to keep the chip on their shoulder for years. And they’ll try to turn the tables when they can.”

    You accurately identified these as assumptions.

    sickoftalking in reply to Jay Jones. | August 5, 2012 at 2:02 am

    “Gay kids probably get/got picked on more than the average kid.”

    When I was in school (not long ago) in general nobody knew who was gay or straight because people didn’t broadcast all their sexual feelings one way or another. I’m straight, but nobody would know I was straight if I didn’t tell them, I wasn’t “out of the closet” about being straight. Most kids weren’t “out of the closet” for being straight so nobody was expected to be “out of the closet” for being gay. It was nobody’s business.

    The kids that were picked on were always picked on for reasons *other* than being gay. In fact, at one point, I was the most picked on kid in school. Not because I was gay, but because I was quiet and my mom dressed me funny.

    Instead of growing a chip on my shoulder, it made me resolve to never act towards others like others were acting to me; it made me a better person. It didn’t drive me closer to suicide either; instead, it made me more resigned to the belief that sh-t happens in life that you have to deal with, and that things doesn’t matter in the long run because in the end everyone dies.

    That’s why a lot of the “bullying” campaigns going around annoy me, because they just don’t ring true.

    I actually wouldn’t be that surprised if most people who bully as adults also bullied people back in school.

      NC Mountain Girl in reply to sickoftalking. | August 5, 2012 at 7:44 am

      I had a similar experience with being the target of bullies with similar results. It also helped give me the ability to stand up for what I believe no matter how badly I was outnumbered.

      I suspect the homeless man was a regular to the area but these self absorbed asshats assumed he was there to provoke them. That particular Chick-fil-A is in an odd location, on the fringe of Michagan Avenue’s Magnificent Mile up upscale shopping but also at the junction of public transportation routes into some very poor neighborhoods. The Lawson YMCA runs a gigantic single room occupancy hotel only a block west of the restaurant. I attended law school just around the corner from the incident and lived less than four blocks away for 20 years.

They obviously did not like the bible reading man. They wouldn’t compare him with someone they loved, e.g. the evolution complete Obama. But they accused the man they didn’t like as gay. Did it mean they didn’t like gay either?

After much soul searching, I would embrace my daughter were she to come out as gay. However, if I saw her participating in this disgraceful demoralization of a Christian man, I would cut her out of my will. And I mean that from the very fiber of my being.

[…] Legal Insurrection, there is video of “gay” protesters in Chicago harassing a homeless black Christian man at a Chick-Fil-A “kiss-in” protest. They wrote […]

Heb 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

HAd this man been the father of any of those ill-mannered, mightily disrespectful people, do you think he would have been treated like that? I am utterly ashamed for the behavior of people whom I don’t even know.

I find that video disturbing. Not so much for the homeless man, maybe he is just a down on his luck human. If so their taunts and derision have done him no lasting harm while affording him the opportunity to bear witness to the Grace of God.

But is possible that he’s is something else entirely. In which case I fear the souls of those misguided people are in grave peril.

Sigh. Ever long for the days when it was a love that dare not speak its name and mostly kept in the closet?

    punfundit in reply to SukieTawdry. | August 5, 2012 at 4:29 pm

    The Genie ain’t going back in the bottle (or closet in this case). We have to deal with the reality which confronts us.

The kid in the white shirt, I refuse to call these guys men a real man would never done such and act, showing signs of remorse. He wanted to stand up for the guy.

I hope Chicago’s mayor is proud of himself, I hope this comes back on him in election time.

[…] August 5, 2012 — NiceDeb TweetThe following video was captured by Professor Jacobson of Legal Insurrection, who ventured out to the sole Chick Fil A in Chicago on Friday for the gay kiss-in. While there, a […]

So the crowd that is angry because at some point in their life someone wrote fag on their school locker runs around writing fag on the lockers of people who disagree with them.

Perhaps more gays should go into PR, because they seem to be lacking in PR skills.

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to Andy. | August 5, 2012 at 8:53 am

    Many of them ARE in PR and marketing, which is why they have been way over represented on TV for some time now and why their cause is now accepted by most of those who mold the way they live their lives around what is currently fashionable in the media.

    “it is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for its welfare.” -Edmund Burke

Is there ANYONE on the cultural or political Left who is not filled with bile and hate? Anyone at all?

    Reticulator in reply to mhjhnsn. | August 5, 2012 at 2:12 am

    I have sometimes asked the same question, but I have found such people. They are rarer than I would like, but they exist. I’ve been trying to convince one such that he would make a much better Tea Party Liberal than Media Matters Fascist.

What a moron harassing this guy.

He hates this man’s God.

Does he hate Allah? If he did, I doubt he’d be so brave.

Such a loud-mouthed twerp.

Allah would cut off his head.

This makes me so sad.

I hope you bought the man a meal.

TrooperJohnSmith | August 5, 2012 at 6:34 am

In my humble opinion, these angry, mean, over-the-top gay people just plain… suck.

Okay, I went there. But it’s the truth.

    A supposedly stance against a corporations support for traditional marriage emerges in its essence as a bunch of gay bullies picking on the weakest of society … even a man with a simple book of truth must be brought down to their level by projecting their own sexual depravity upon him.

    Its disgusting, weak and pathetic.

Cheesecakecrush | August 5, 2012 at 9:43 am

I had read that the difference in the turnout for Chick-Fil-A appreciation day and for the “Kiss-in” is not between Christians and Gays so much as it is between the philosophies behind conservatism and liberalism. Conservatives have the “I’ll take care of it myself” vs liberalism’s “I’m going to talk about doing something then expect others to do it.”

So much hate from the Liberal side of the isle directed at people having lunch/dinner, yet couldn’t be bothered to show support for the gay people beyond some snarky, devilish text from behind their keyboards. Pitiful.

[…] Legal Insurrection shows leftists taunting and abusing a homeless black preacher […]

So we see, once again, a left-wing activist group perceives the Bible as a manual for hatred. Unfortunately, the Christian community has done little to dissuade this notion.

There are some metaphysical arguments one might make for ignoring the physical for the spiritual, including some Biblical arguments, but socially the fact is Christians are a socially persecuted group in this country and there hasn’t been (lately anyway) vigorous apologia for Christianity (just preaching, which is fine for worshippers). So here we see where a particularly militant sector collectively decided that they were strong enough to commit harassment against a citizen in public and on camera.

And what is their defense? They tell us that gays have been persecuted for centuries, markedly by Christians they say. And because of this long-suffering victim status they have taken upon themselves a “right” to social revenge. How often have we seen this pattern at work?

And I believe that this is the basis for the left’s definition of democracy. I suspect this borrows from Marx’s “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.” I believe the left believes that democracy is simply one group of people gaining power over another group of people, thus social revenge is permissible. Unfortunately this notion is wholly inconsistent with our Founders intent, which explains other problems.

Social censure is powerful, and I don’t believe anyone employs it well.

    punfundit in reply to punfundit. | August 5, 2012 at 10:31 am

    I can’t believe I wrote “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.” I meant “dictatorship of the proletariat.”

    Yup. I’m an idiot.

    tjic in reply to punfundit. | August 5, 2012 at 1:06 pm

    > Unfortunately, the Christian community has done little to dissuade this notion.

    Yeah, if only Christians had ended slavery, established hospitals, created soup-kitchens, created the rules of war, funded orphanages, etc., we’d know that they weren’t full of hate…but given that they’ve never done a single one of these things, I agree with you.

      punfundit in reply to tjic. | August 5, 2012 at 3:55 pm

      Fair points.

      What I mean is the contemporary Christian community spends its time in one of two ways: 1) playing the social justice game (“liberation” churches), or 2) preaching to the choir (“traditional” churches).

      Why are your valid points not heard in the pulpit? Yes, the Word should be heard in the pulpit, but the daily, relentless, harassment of Christian organizations threatens Christian liberty. At what point does it become too late? At what point does the Word become legally-recognized hate speech? Is this the time to “turn the other cheek” and “render unto Caesar,” or is it time to defend the faith?

      We can sit here and harrumph about how right we are, but we’re just preaching to the choir.

One thing that is lost on proponents of “gay” “marriage” (it is neither) is the fact that so many people chose to demonstrate their stance on this issue with actions, not words. A rational observer would take that as a rather ominous clue. If this is forced down the throats of these people, there will be a period of forced and seeming acceptance similar to that of any other tyranny. But when the preference cascade begins to shift, these people will demonstrate their dissatisfaction with that forced acceptance, not in speeches, but with actions. Big time.

“one woman told me she took a ‘European view’ of our Constitutional Rights”

Did she say enough to indicate whether she leaned fascist or communist?

spencerthayer | August 5, 2012 at 1:44 pm

The preacher was equating Gay people to pigs and Satan. He was being loud and rude while using his Bible to interupt the event with the intent of shaming peoples life styles. He has his right to free speech, just as I had every right to call him out on his bullshit. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that ass hat Christian’s can’t be called out for being dick heads by other dick heads.

Besides the video is biased and edits out the shit he was saying to make him look like a victim. This “preacher” was nothing but a bigot. I asked and he agreed that Deuteronomy 22:24, which states raped women who do not scream loud enough should be stone, should be followed. He also said “lazy sons” should be stoned to death as well.

Fuck that guy and fuck any of you who agree with him.

    Reticulator in reply to spencerthayer. | August 5, 2012 at 1:58 pm

    “The preacher was equating Gay people to pigs and Satan.”

    This bothers people to be called stuff like that?

    Wait until they find out about the internet.

    america in reply to spencerthayer. | August 5, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    you are tough, sister.

    The unedited video should be posted. Ultimately, the man has the right to speak whatever his views are, even if they are offensive to us. It is the same right that protects us when we protest, as our views can be seen as offensive to certain people.

    Ideally, we would be able to confront each other about our respective views respectfully, and not with insults and mockery as was done in the video.

    I’m sorry, you must have stumbled on this blog in error. We don’t talk like that here. Take your potty mouth elsewhere.

    punfundit in reply to spencerthayer. | August 5, 2012 at 4:00 pm

    Proof or it didn’t happen. Proof 1) that what you assert did happen, and 2) that you were there.

    Troll.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to spencerthayer. | August 5, 2012 at 4:01 pm

    Well, we only have your version of what this homeless man said. This is not cutting edge theology, it is a homeless guy being harassed by a gang.

    I tried to study ancient Biblical texts decades ago, and don’t believe the Bible is “God-breathed”, but there is a lot of good stuff in there, if you understand the context.

    You mis-characterize that verse … it says “because she was in the city and did not scream”, has nothing to do with “loud enough”. She did not resist, is the point, it would seem.

    But the bigger context, it was the people that demanded God give them a law. God’s law was love God and love your neighbor as yourself. So when they demanded a law, he gave them a very difficult one.

    Having left my Aramaic or Greek studies behind decades ago, I would still argue that God’s point was … if you can’t think for yourself on how to love, I will give a law that will make all understand “there is none perfect, no not one”. Theologically, understanding human frailty paved the way for the hope of a coming perfect one, that would redeem man from his imperfections.

    But this probably misguided homeless man was met with derision and hate and harassment. My guess is, if that homeless man had preached in favor of more open gay sex, the “support Chick-fil-A free speech” crowd would have given him a sandwich, not screamed in his face.

      Midwest Rhino in reply to Midwest Rhino. | August 5, 2012 at 4:18 pm

      I guess I should clarify … “in the city”. If the woman was in the country, there was perhaps no recourse. In those times, people in cities were not in well insulated homes with MTV blaring (does anyone still watch MTV?). If there was a rapist and she screamed, 20 men would come running to protect their neighbor, whom they had shared much of their life with. There was no 911 … it was not NYC where everyone might watch a crime, and no one would want to get involved. And the men would not fear trial lawyers as they meted out the local version of justice.

      I doubt this Spencer guy is the jerk in the video, but the verse deserves a response. It seems it is not the gayness that is the issue in societies, it is the radical notion that all social norms need to be broken down … burn it all and start over … mentality that seems to accompany the more radical side of the “gay rights” movement. They have to get in the face of Chick-fil-A, instead of appreciating the rights they already have here, as opposed to most parts of the world. Why do they need to disrupt the free commerce of Chic-fil-A?

      Midwest Rhino in reply to Midwest Rhino. | August 5, 2012 at 5:10 pm

      This thought (not deep or theological) made me laugh, so I thought I’d type it) …

      The law was God’s version of the old line “you want something to cry about? I’ll give you something to cry about” 🙂

    LordJiggy in reply to spencerthayer. | August 5, 2012 at 6:06 pm

    I just can’t get over the vast courage it took for you to shout at an elderly homeless man, especially when you were younger and outnumbered him about 8 to 1. It was so brave of you to speak Truth to Power that way, I got all choked up. Never have I been so proud not be a tolerant, loving, rights-respecting Liberal.

    Weirddave in reply to spencerthayer. | August 5, 2012 at 11:59 pm

    Bravo on your bravery, intimidating a frail older man (who actually didn’t seem that intimidated). I eagerly await the video of your courageous stand for gay rights in front of the nearest mosque. All hail Spencer, tower of courage!

    Spiny Norman in reply to spencerthayer. | August 6, 2012 at 3:59 am

    “Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that ass hat Christian’s can’t be called out for being dick heads by other dick heads.”

    Well, Spencer, at least you admit you’re a “dick head”. It’s the first step towards recovery. Perhaps, with a little help, you might progress enough to become a mature adult. Someday.

    jdkchem in reply to spencerthayer. | August 6, 2012 at 9:40 pm

    You’re a gutless scumbag. How much courage did it take for you to verbally assault an elderly homeless man with all your butt buddies backing you up? You have no excuse or justification. If that man would have got right back in your face you would have run crying like the cowardly scumbag you are.

[…] at 1:46 on August 5, 2012 by Jim Hoft Disgusting. A group of far left anti-Christian protesters harassed and “chalked” a homeless street preacher in Chicago this weekend. Chicago Values. […]

Looks like the racist Gay KK.

you can just look/listen to those twits standing around berating that man that if any one of them were confronting someone that would take a physical stand against them, they are nothing. They pretend they are so brave and tough in front of someone who would not lift a hand to them. Circle jerk.

They demand normalization and offer intolerance in return.

Their behavior has no redeeming value to either society or humanity. It is an exhibition of pure self-interest. Despite a concern to preserve individual dignity, and distinguish between the individual and their behavior, their insistence to promote a confrontation will surely cause people to withdraw even offers of tolerance.

Meanwhile, the contemporary relationship is characterized as “friends with benefits,” a large minority elect to terminate voluntarily conceived human life at a rate of 1 million annually, and progressive involuntary exploitation is, once again, en vogue. The “progress” we have enjoyed is increasingly qualified as negative or regressive.

In light of these revelations, normalizing yet another dysfunctional behavior seems to be the least of our concerns.

Henry Hawkins | August 5, 2012 at 5:58 pm

Rage-blinded by the black guy’s Bible reading, they didn’t care that he was homeless nor think about why that might be. The two primary causes of homelessness are mental illness and addiction. I mean, who argues with homeless people?

They showed up expecting counterprotesters, found none, realized that not even gay people were showing up, looked around for someone to take the brunt of their anger. “Oh look! A homeless guy! Get him!”

—-

I have predicted (and eagerly await) the day that one or more of the Dem/Lib client groups goes all Clint Eastwood on the asses of one or more of some other Dem/Lib client group. One of those groups will almost certainly be gays.

Imagine 20-30 gay white suburbanites going off on some poor homeless street preacher down in the hood. The brothers would make damn sure those who made it home at all went through the ER first.

    punfundit in reply to Henry Hawkins. | August 5, 2012 at 7:21 pm

    As I recall, gay activists blamed black Californians for the passage of Prop 8. The n-word was hurled all across activist blogs and outlets in all its myriad vile forms.

My tolerance for homosexuals is fading, and I’m starting to really actively dislike them.

    punfundit in reply to JohnK625. | August 6, 2012 at 12:29 am

    Rest assured not every gay person thinks like these people we’re seeing.

    We usually only see militant homosexual activists. But there are gay people across this country who prefer not to associate with these activists, and who like living private lives like anyone else. As such, we won’t usually hear from them.

    The gay community is not monolithic, despite the left’s agitprop to the contrary.

[…] VIDEO: Chick-fil-a protesters “chalk” homeless bible-reading black man. […]

Notice that Spencer, if indeed the guy posting here is the guy in the video, kept looking at the camera and smiling as if the fact that his mug was being filmed was validation that he was somehow in the right for harassing a homeless man. I wonder how smug Spencer might have been if he was not being filmed. His behavior makes his argument no more appealing than Adam Smith, the man who berated a Chick-Fil-A worker and then posted it on You Tube. Really? Do you really think that this sort of bullying makes you appear serious and sound, or does it just make a mockery of the gay community? These are the same tactics that are ascribed to the Tea Party by leftists, but without this kind of evidence to support the claim. Project we much?

By the way, Spencer, your parents must be oh so proud of their son who finds it so easy to harass an elderly black homeless man while surrounded by a gang of angry, white gay men, all while mugging for the camera. I bet you even have a “Mean People Suck” bumper sticker on your Chevy Volt.

[…] Chicago Chick-fil-A Kiss-In protesters “chalk” homeless street preacher […]

[…] anti- Chick-fil-A crowd can’t even see the hypocrisy of their own hate crimes. Share this:StumbleUponDiggRedditLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. Tags: Chick-fil-A, […]

And we know that everyone is in their own spiritual battle. Some are losing the battle in their minds and are being overcome by the demon of sexual perversion and immorality. Others are in a similar battle in their minds to confuse their understanding of what’s right and wrong by equating past persecution of a disenfranchised class with righteous indignation against sin – in effect to manipulate the mind to sympathize with sin by painting the sinner as a persecuted class. In doing so the mind loses the ability to see the sin because of a reluctance to equate a person as a sinner. When sin ceases being sin, by what measure does society judge evil. And if evil ceases being evil, the nature of man is to choose to accept it as good. When this happens, the total collapse of a society is inevitable. Sadly, I now see America in the beginning stages of this downward spiral.

[…] Indeed he seems a participant in demonstrations for a great many far left causes. Of course he he posted a comment to the original story claiming Legal Insurrection’s Anne Sorock edited her videos to make him look bad and that the […]

[…] Wednesday’s repeat performance Chick-fil-A protest by Chicago gay activists, picketers emulated last Friday’s taunting of an elderly black man reading the bible by screaming and pointing at a priest praying the rosary […]

[…] “hate chicken,” its employees were rudely confronted, and protesters outside its stores harassed and belittled those who disagreed.  Now Chick-fil-A is being banned from […]

[…] what was going through the minds of these gentlemen, when they thought it would be a brilliant idea to turn a homeless African-American man reading […]

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend