You'll have to click through the link on this post.
But I would like to note that the sport seriously looks like they are practicing for a Chic-fil-A protest.
Oh, and stuff is happening in the Middle East, I'm sure.
UPDATE: The funny thing is, as Jonah Goldberg points out in his G-File, the original statement that has prompted the whole controversy is really more anti-divorce:
Speaking of first wives, I think it's interesting to note that Dan Cathy's original controversial statement is more pointed at the institution of divorce than at gay marriage. "We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that."
And yet it wasn't the divorced-American or the re-married-American community that rose up in outrage. It was the gay-rights community -- which apparently sees belief or rather vocal belief in "Biblical marriage" as a crime unto itself.
I think I'll go to Chic-fil-A and eat alone to protest Cathy's hurtful statement.
Chic-fil-A should simply offer anyone at the cash register who kisses the person they are with on the lips 10% off on their bill. Why should the girl-on-girl action get all the attention?
Actually, this comment on IowaHawk's Tweet is pretty funny:
@iowahawkblog @JoeQArm sad, really. Can't jump into a controversy without sexualizing. How small.
So the commenter is criticizing IowaHawk for sexualizing what the commenter thinks is a civil rights controversy?
I'm sorry, but who decided a kiss-in was the appropriate way to jump into the controversy?
The protest is stupid. The protesters have the right to be stupid, of course. But the rest of us have the right to have chuckle over the clucking controversy.
And we have the right to be upset over the real assault on civil rights as government officials claim the right to deny permits to legal companies who hold views on marriage that they don't like--views that President Obama held until quite recently, I should add.
