You shouldn't generalize like that. Sure there's hypocritical hate out there, but it goes both ways. Just don't give into extremism and you should be fine.

No rational liberal would do that, Thats how hipsters talk.

dude, that image just blew my mind and made me really sad because i didn't even realize it, i was sucked in.

*Looks over picture and comment* Congratulations you're both retarded and can't argue with a modicum of intelligence.

So instead of proving me wrong (you can't) that's what you come up with. Nice.

so wait, religious ideological preaching is on the same scale as struggle against intolerance?

i honestly can't see the link.

As far as the right to freely engage in commerce is concerned, yes. It is immoral and tyrannical to ban a company from engaging in commerce for political, social, or religious views. It doesn't matter what those views are, its called equal rights, not equal rights as long as you have political opinions the mayor deems to be appropriate. This refers to the attempt from Chicago and Boston to prevent Chick Fil A from opening up shop in their cities, not to social sanctions that are private initiatives. What Boston is doing is nothing short of discrimination.

The only place intolerance is coming from is the left.

Chic-Fil-A actually funded anti-gay organizations. So where with the oreo picture, that more of a situation where a company is expressing that it supports equal rights for gay people, where as Chic-Fil-A helps fund organizations which spread intolerance. I'm not saying they should boycott the restaurant, but they're not the same things.

Chic-Fil-A does not openly discriminate against people are homosexual/lesbian. It is not like they openly discriminating them from entering their establishing, refusing service to those that are homosexual/lesbian, or not hiring based on sexual orientation. So basically this entire Chic-Fil-A thing has been blown out of proportion, and now mayors, that have a different political views, are using the power of government to punish the free speech of a company's CEO. That is an direct affront to the Constitution.

so preaching a humanist value is somehow on the same political correctness level as preaching a religion?