Days of Our Lives’ Melissa Reeves Shuts Down Twitter Account Following Chick-fil-A Drama!





Days of Our Lives' Melissa Reeves has decided to shut down her Twitter account. The actress caused a heated debate, among soap fans, fellow actors and the soap and mainstream press, when she tweeted support of Chick-fil-A Appriciation Day earlier this month. On deciding to close her account, Reeves tweeted:


 


Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day was orchestrated following the company's COO Dan Cathy coming under fire for quotes in a Christian magazine supporting "traditional marriage". It is a matter of public record that Cathy and Chick-fil-A have also donated funds to anti-gay rights organizations, such as Exodus International.

101 Responses

  1. Avatar of KDMASK
    KDMASK

    What can you say? she calls it “disagreeing” I call it hate. sorry she or her family got “Threats” (which I am dubious of) but you start talking bigotry, you are going to get it right back. I read her first gleeful tweet about eating Chick-Fil-A like it was a badge of honor. Gays are threatened every day for who they are. It’s people like Melissa that just DON’T GET IT. Stand behind your GOD and your bible quotes. Free speech seems to run one way. If you can’t take it, don’t tweet it.

  2. Avatar of mannym716
    mannym716

    I just posted below on MF On Air|Soaps and now by the looks of things the silence will continue…

    “Words and actions have consequences. I believe melissa’s twitter post was both cryptic and incendiary. If Melissa was comfortable voicing, what she believed was her support of freedom of speech, then Melissa should have the courage to speak on her own behalf in regards to her twitter post. Additionally, she should also explain why she chose to block followers, specifically those (i.e. Greg Rikaart amongst several) who respectfully questioned the meaning behind her tweet. Furthermore, since this fiasco she has also opted to privatize her twitter feed. This is not time for silence.”

    We’re never going to come to understand her initial intent because she has now chosen to utilize her victimization as a scapegoat.

    I do believe some individuals took her to task in an extremely disrespectful and immature manner. However, all this could have been avoided, had Melissa been courageous enough to explain herself, in her own words, immediately after her initial post. Land of the free home of the brave, right Melissa?

    If we have the freedom to speak, we need to do it in more than 140 characters, so that we can truly come to learn the heart of a person. Freedom of speech, right Melissa?

    I will take the time to reflect and pray that you have learned something from this, Melissa ;-)

  3. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @Jon: It is sad day for the Constitution. But this is what happens when people go on a Salem style Witch Hunt. This is what happens when our rights are handed over to “Herd Mentality” and “Group Thinking.”

    My words to Missy is not to give in to bullies!

  4. Avatar of Robbyrob
    Robbyrob

    I still don’t see any type of apology here. She still doesn’t get it. While I don’t like that she received threats, the backlash is deserved. I love how some of you are whining about political correctness gone wrong or what happened to freedom of speech…well, it goes both ways and she sent it out…we can respond. Days did great strides with the Will storyline and the show received deserved acclaim. Now, that seems to be forgotten…especially with Reeves’ silence. According to Chappell, she claims not knowing the full extent of her tweet but in this latest twitter shutdown she makes NO statement to that fact. She’d rather shut down her account then clarify her stance to the public? Even husband Scott is silent and he works for out boss’ at GH. Silence speaks volumes here and I don’t care if some of you are upset with the gays. I’m sick and tired of having my rights or whatever rights “they” allow me to have be trampled because you don’t like what I do in my own bedroom. I hate when religious people get so sanctimonious on me with these bible quotes. If your that into it, then by all means get ordained already.

  5. Avatar of nysuzyq87
    nysuzyq87

    she didn’t receive threats to her life. she just didn’t receive blind devotion and people falling to the ground agreeing with her. It’s not our fault that she’s a hypocrite who preaches the name of God yet acts like she never committed adultery.

  6. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @nysuzyq87: She did not make herself the victim. YOU (meaning people who attacked her looks, made death and violent threats as a response to an alleged slight) are the ones who did this. So those of you who know who you are have no one else to blame but yourself.

    It is like a person who destroys his own court case by acting out.

  7. Avatar of KDMASK
    KDMASK

    Hey, you spew hate, you get it right back @david I never attacked her–but I did question her intent and she blocked me. LOL..can’t take free speech? Shut up.

  8. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @Nysuzyq87: Let me educate you on something

    “yes because “equal rights for all” = a “herd mentality” — This right here is a loaded statement. It also has nothing to do with my original response. Look up the definition of a Loaded Question and then translate that into how it applies to your statement and get back to me.

  9. Avatar of dellygrim
    dellygrim

    maybe its time for me to get a twitter account. i guess anyone who has a message for missy should snailmail or email care of days/nbc/sony ans cc it to their own twitter.
    except of course anyone who was looking to threaten missy or her family. they should cram it up their pie hole. unless they are just threatening her rights with a campaign in the name of god, family and freedom.

  10. Avatar of nysuzyq87
    nysuzyq87

    what death threats did she receive? Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom of consequence, btw. She’s going to get backlash when she ostracizes a group of people for being born (and also account for a big amount of viewership). She did it to herself and wants to boo hoo that people didn’t praise her light.

  11. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @KDMASK: She never spewed hated. You have interpreted her tweet to be that. That is not fact. And see that is problem. When you create your own reality against the facts we end up in this position. You too engaged in a loaded statement. We must pull back from this.

  12. Avatar of GaryJr
    GaryJr

    @jon and @david46208 I guess this puts to rest your claims that she didn’t know ANYTHING about Chickfila’s position on gays. “Disagreeing” as she puts it clearly means she meant what she said and that she supports gay oppression, just like the two of you (if you’re cheering on her position).

    This has nothing to with free speech. I never asked her to stop talking I asked her to either explain herself or educate herself. Her comments have a direct reflection on society. But I’d rather know who my celebrity friends are than support an actor who spreads hate and well death upon people who’ve never been anything but supportive of her career.

    Also playing the victim, and trying to attach people who disagree with her to some lunatics who supposedly threatened her family isn’t going to invalidate/legitimize the argument at hand: she’s a bigot plain and simple I don’t need to throw a rock at her to get that point across nor would I. If Melissa would like to know what a true victim looks like she should Google “Gay suicide images”. You’ll find a slew of photos of young gay people who were so tormented by haters that they killed themselves.

  13. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @nysuzyq87: It is called terrorist threats. Do you know the law?

    A terroristic threat is a crime generally involving a threat to commit violence communicated with the intent to terrorize another, to cause evacuation of a building, or to cause serious public inconvenience, in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience. It may mean an offense against property or involving danger to another person that may include but is not limited to recklessly endangering another person, harassment, stalking, ethnic intimidation, and criminal mischief.

    The following is an example of a Texas statute dealing with terroristic threats:

    TERRORISTIC THREAT

    (a) A person commits an offense if he threatens to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property with intent to:

    cause a reaction of any type to his threat[s] by an official or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies;
    place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury;
    prevent or interrupt the occupation or use of a building; room; place of assembly; place to which the public has access; place of employment or occupation; aircraft, automobile, or other form of conveyance; or other public place;
    cause impairment or interruption of public communications, public transportation, public water, gas, or power supply or other public service;
    place the public or a substantial group of the public in fear of serious bodily injury; or
    influence the conduct or activities of a branch or agency of the federal government, the state, or a political subdivision of the state.
    ——–

    Education did not spoil many a plow-hand.

  14. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @KDMASK: Do you understand the history of the Salem Witch Trials and its impact on America? And how the term I used is appropriate? I’m just asking. Because you keep loading your response against anything that I am saying without even a shred of understanding. Or at least that is how it is coming out. Let’s put the emotion aside and use intelligence here.

  15. Avatar of GaryJr
    GaryJr

    @david46208

    I think it’s probably a good idea you if you remove Lorraine Broderick as your photo. She’s pro-gay & I doubt she’d like her image attached to all your hateful comments. She helped All My Children get their GLAAD award for Kendall’s coming out storyline.

  16. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @GaryJr: When did I become anti-Gay? See you are doing exactly what I was talking about. You have decided who and what I am without even a shred of evidence. I’m defending the facts not the speculation of her tweet. So please lets use intelligence here and not emotions.

  17. Avatar of TV Gord
    TV Gord

    It’s scary how easy it is to whip so many of you into this violent mentality. I’m sure a lot of you oppose bullying. You should check yourselves a little more honestly.

  18. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @nysuzyq87: Yes they do. People have been arrested for doing so. The government takes all forms of threats, even via social media seriously. Please educate yourself on the laws. This is no joke.

    When people “react” instead of using their heads, they can do more harm than good. Think about that. Just because one is upset (in this case by an alleged slight), does not give you the right to threaten anybody. No matter what their status is. It is against the law. And you don’t want the police coming after you. Because it won’t be pretty.

    See it is this type of thinking that gets people in trouble…Come on now! Come on!

  19. Avatar of TV Gord
    TV Gord

    [quote=Y2Jin99]Just proves how ridiculous gay and gay supporters are. OMG Melissa Reeves you are an abomination and your beliefs are wrong and you deserve to be villified and I am gonna threaten your family for not being pro gay! Get a fucking life douchebags.[/quote]

    And YOU’RE just as bad on the other side.

  20. Avatar of soapjunkie88
    soapjunkie88

    Melissa Reeves had like a million chances to speak out about it. Sit down and talk about what went wrong. But she doesn’t do it. Instead she continues to call this Chick-fil-A thing a disagreement. Well Missy, that’s not like some people see it.

    I don’t support that Mrs. Reeves and her family get threaten via Twitter. That’s disgusting.

    But then again, some people finally should realize about what they tweet and consider the consequences. Melissa Reeves messed up! Interpret her tweet like you want, in the end of all of that she didn’t handle the thing in a smart way. And that is a fact!

    I can understand that she now has decided to leave Twitter.

  21. Avatar of dellygrim
    dellygrim

    re david reply 25

    and david look how easy it is to say that you have been misunderstood.

    you didn’t even have to say you were’t antigay. you merely pointed out that your words had been twisted.

    missy opted not to express anything like that. she mentioned being threatened and disagreed with but not misunderstood. that choice gives weight to her supporters and detractors impression that she was expressing antigay sentiment. which she obviously has the right to though it appears she’d rather not exercise it now.

  22. Avatar of GaryJr
    GaryJr

    Anyone who is going to cheer on Melissa for supporting an organization that condones the murder of gay people is as guilty as she is. I don’t care if you’re gay. It’s not in the best interest of the gay community and it’s certainly NOT Christian. That includes you @david46208. This is just like politicians in the South claiming ‘states rights’ when debating the merits of allowing African Americans to marry, vote, end slavery etc. You can’t claim it’s about free speech because IN THE END these speeches and attitudes have a direct correlation to gay oppression, violence, suicide and murder.

  23. Avatar of rlshel1015
    rlshel1015

    sorry david, but she did make herself a victim when she chose to not make any follow up statements to what she said. if she is so concerned about the threats then she should come out and explain herself and not speak through her friends (CC). she can speak out about her support of CFA but can’t defend or explain why she feels she was right (or realize she was wrong)? it does trouble me that you sympathize with MR for being threatened but apparently have no problem with the threat that she posed to the LGBT community when she spoke out in support of chick fil a – a company that supports denying gays their rights and and killing gays. it’s good that she shut down her twitter account because she clearly tweets without thinking. i also think that it speaks VOLUMES that her husband has not even spoken out in her defense.

  24. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @dellygrim: Does she have to? And if she does not then you get assume the worst? Draw your own conclusions? Ask yourself this. If it won’t work in court then maybe one needs to use intelligence rather than formulating a bias view.

  25. Avatar of KDMASK
    KDMASK

    @david why yes, I know all about the witch trials..I thought you may be referring to the gay hunts that take place now, but I guess not. Calling Missy on her bigotry shrouded in “Family Values” and “Freedom of Speech” isn’t a witch hunt, it’s holding her accountable for her beliefs.
    I was ON TWITTER the morning she tweeted her gleefully stupid, ignorant statement so I know exactly what it said and HOW it was said. It was hateful. So was her follow up godly tweets. So are her words used to close her account.
    She can eat all the chicken sandwiches she wants. She can stand behind her god all she wants, doesn’t make her beliefs any less hateful or bigoted. (and I’m sure she doesn’t HATE THE PERSON but “hates the sin” or whatever christians say, but that too is convoluted BS).

  26. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @GaryJr: Everything you said was a loaded statement, built on emotion and not facts of the situation at hand. That is the point I am trying to get people to see. You’ve drawn your own bias conclusion and then forced that conclusion on everyone else.

    Do you see what you are and some others are doing? TV Gord has said it best. But sometimes people get caught up in their emotions and they start create reality that one must agree is the reality or else they too become part of their view of that reality.

    I implore you and others to think.

    Because the mentality being displayed here by some is no different than the one you are trying to fight against.

  27. Avatar of TV Gord
    TV Gord

    [quote=Y2Jin99]Guess my comment was deleted whatever TV Gord I am right. The people actually comparing her to Hitler are absurd.[/quote]

    I agree with that, but your insulting tone isn’t helping. That’s what made that comment as bad as the extreme comments on the other side.

  28. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @KDMASK: Now do you know what a “loaded question” is? And can you see how it applies again to your most recent comment as a “loaded statement?”

    Let’s just start there.

    Also you are again superimposing your idea of what Scott Reeves meant. Unless he quoted Leviticus 18.22 then him quoting the bible and saying he is proud of his wife does not translate into what you want it to be. See what I mean?

    If this were a court case it would not make it.

  29. Avatar of TheFloatingRib
    TheFloatingRib

    I feel Melissa’s righteous to quote the bible only when it suits her is hyprocitical. I wonder why does she not quote the bible on subjects of slavery and subjugation of women? Her original message of supporting ‘free speach’ appears incorrect as she then hides her own free speech by closing her twitter account? Shouldn’t she explain what she meant?
    I believe she made the Chick-fil-A comment to support her own views on gays which she uses the bible to support. Possibly I am wrong and she is just a supporter of free speech? If she does have anti-gay views because of the bible then maybe she also supports slavery and maybe she also submits 100% to her husband? I can pull quotes from the bigble to prove it is okay for us to own slaves and that it is okay to beath them to death (but only if they die 48 hours later after the severe beating) She is entitled to her opinion no matter how wrong I feel it is. And I am also entitled to stop watching DOOL because she is on it.

  30. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @everyone: I remember how people acted during the Duke Lacrosse case. If you supported the innocence of players then you were either racist, an Uncle Tom, Misogynistic if you were a heterosexual male or elsewhere wrong.

    And imagine the family of the accused expressing their support to their children. They got railed against.

    Just remember that that was one of the biggest cases of speculation and slander against a group of human beings in the last decade. And I myself never assumed that the men were guilty.

    People need to think and use intelligence before speculating on what you assume one means or believes without factual evidence of that belief. And that will hold up better than anything else.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gh8oGF4iXQ

  31. Avatar of Steph Foster
    Steph Foster

    [quote=J Bernard Jones]I guess those Chick-fil-A nuggets were harder to swallow than she thought.[/quote]

    This just in from Jason Brooks: “Believe me, she has no trouble swallowing.”

  32. Avatar of dellygrim
    dellygrim

    of course she doesn’t have to.

    many people came to the conclusion that she was supporting not just freedom of speech but also the anti gay views that freedom of speech protect. the actual issues that brought about chik fila day.

    it’s a fair interpretation.

    many who came to this conclusion agree with missy (or at least with what they think she was saying) its just how human communication works. we have to draw own conclusions and rely on each other to at least try to clear up any misunderstandings.

    i’ve seen no indication that missy feels shes been misunderstood which does suggest that she’s been properly interpreted, though certainly exaggerated beyond belief. she’s certainly been harshly judged but thats because her statement made a lot of people feel harshly judged.

    and imo to hold twitter statements to the same standard as court proceedings is absurd. legal language is dense and time consuming because it has to try to leave no room for misinterpretation. day to day language doesn’t work like that.

  33. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @J Bernard Jones: I need your thoughts. And I not only took a course in Comparative Ethics I was once on the road to law school before I changed my major. So express to me your point of view on why you obviously believe the two can’t be compared. And I’ll show you how I have come to my conclusion. And don’t have to just use that case. I have others also that fit the pattern of what has went down here. Your turn!

  34. Avatar of Jaydis09
    Jaydis09

    I disagree with her thoughts and beliefs 1000% but she shouldn’t have gotten death threats (if she actually did) and no one should’ve dragged her kids into it(if they were).

    That being said her marriage became open fodder when she decided to place judgement on anyone else’s marriage or potential marriage (which she didn’t do directly that I recall but it is very much implied at the very least).

    This was never a free speech issue much as other would like to claim it was. She and Chick-Fil-A both have the right to say/believe what they will. That does not however give them impunity from consequences or fallout from it, such as loss of fans or business.

    It’s time for her to put on her big girl panties and realize that when you enter the fray on something as meaningful as human equality, you open yourself up for comment back.

  35. Avatar of TV Gord
    TV Gord

    [quote=rlshel1015]i agree with j bernard – comparing duke lacrosse to melissa reeves is ridiculous. apples and oranges.[/quote]

    She’s being falsely accused of supporting the murder of gays. It’s not that big a stretch.

  36. Avatar of rlshel1015
    rlshel1015

    it’s not just an accusation. her own tweet boasted about how she was going to eat at CFA in support of them and CFA is known to donate some of their profits to anti gay groups and legislation in Uganda to make it legal to kill gays. now that’s not a big stetch. we are only using the words that she tweeted and since she will not come out and explain or defend herself then i am left with the tweet. i stand by what i said comparing MR to the Duke Lacrosse case is ridiculous. i truly want to hear what MR has to say about why she said what she said – that separates me from what happened with the Duke Lacrosse team, but she will only make statements that paint her as the victim in all of this.

  37. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @rlshel1015: If you understood the methodology I used when coming to my conclusion then you would get why it is a correct comparison. So i’ll wait for his response before I reveal the totality of how I came to this conclusion.

    I also tend to look at things from various angles and compare/contrast before formulating the parallels. I even place myself in the position of the opposing view to help clarify my position. This is something you learn when you are on the debate team.

    So the question that needs to answered by the respondent is an adapt understanding just how I came to my conclusion? What aspects of the Duke Lacrosse Case am I looking at? And how does that litter my paralleling of the incident with the current situation.

    You learn this in the Effective Debating course on my college campus.

  38. Avatar of rlshel1015
    rlshel1015

    david – the angle that i am looking at is that things get very messed up when you are left with reading people’s thoughts instead of actually talking to a person. your posts come across are pontificating and thinking that you are better than everyone, but that’s the way i read it and i could be wrong. i want to hear what MR has to say about what she did because right now all i see is that she supported a group that wants to see me as less of a person and dead and you are defending that. to me, that is the real issue – not talking down to people who are angry over an issue that they have every right to be upset about.

  39. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @Rishel1015: Her Tweet was in support of free speech. That is what it said. The rest is speculation as to what her support of free speech means. NO ONE. NOT EVEN THE BLOGGERS ON THIS SITE CAN DENY THAT.

    What we have dealt with in the aftermath is how people interpret that tweet and how people have responded based on their idea of what that means. That is also fact.

    Thus, people start acting like tabloid journalists looking for and twisting anything to support their view.

    Acting on intelligence and not emotion is what we must continue to do.

  40. Avatar of TV Gord
    TV Gord

    [quote=david46208]@Rishel1015: Her Tweet was in support of free speech. That is what it said. The rest is speculation as to what her support of free speech means.[/quote]

    That’s exactly right.

    Now, Barack Obama (whom I also support, despite being Canadian), was outwardly opposed to same-sex marriage until May of this year. In May 2008, he told MTV that he’s “not in favor of gay marriage” and that he believes marriage is “between a man and a woman”.

    What the President said was so much more definitive than Reeves’ tweet in support of free speech. Why was HE not the target of this kind of hate (until he changed his position a mere three months ago)?

    Again, I’m not defending Reeves’ beliefs. The reason I’m taking a stand here is because of the hate I am seeing from the people on my side. You all are not going to make me switch sides by any means, but I’m embarrassed as hell to be associated with you.

  41. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @rlshel1015: Well when people decide to create their own facts someone has to bring logic into the discussion. I’m actually not against Melissa Reeves responding if she so chooses to. That’s on her. That’s her freedom as an American.

    I would defend anyone against bias speculation on who or what they are when there is no fact to prove it. When it is only speculation.

    I don’t care if the NAACP picked up a claim of racism. Does that mean that you are in the right because they do so? No. It just may give one a bigger platform to be wrong on.

    And what happens in the long-run is that it can do critical damage to cause of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And this happens when we act on emotion.

    So if keeping a rational thought process is considered pontificating, then let be what is. Because it goes back to the point I have been making all slong.

    And just to lighten the mood A bit I feel like the male version of Tyra Banks:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53sOpQQWOOA

  42. Avatar of rlshel1015
    rlshel1015

    clearly you have not read a word that i have been saying. which goes back to my last statement when you read instead of hear. david – i have spent way too much time on you and am done. i have never spoken out against MRs right to speak her mind, but my problem comes in giving your money to a place that is actively trying to deny my rights – and that’s a fact, she said she went there and had dinner. i quote what TV Gord said – i am embarasseed to be associated with you. now if you’ll excuse me, i am going to leave you and continue expressing my opinion – something that is apparently okay for MR to do but not me …

  43. Avatar of CassadineSon
    CassadineSon

    Just because she supported C-F-A, doesn’t mean she HATES anyone!!!!!!!!

    People drive me crazy with this!

    If a couple has a 25 yr age difference and I don’t agree with couples dating that are 25 yrs apart, it doesn’t mean I HATE that couple. I would probably like them and just not agree with their lifestyle.

    But there are those that love to preach tolerance, acceptance and so forth, but are quick to be nothing but HATEFUL towards people just because they aren’t in exact agreement.

    Where is the tolerance and acceptance??

    Sometimes a disagreement is just that – a disagreement.

  44. Avatar of Jabot1991
    Jabot1991

    People are forgetting this is a not a freedom of speech issue, this is a human rights issue, but I guess the homophobic extreme bible-thumpers don’t see it that way.

    @David – are you David G on Facebook AKA ArchBishopGenX on twitter

  45. Avatar of J Bernard Jones
    J Bernard Jones

    David, no chair need be pulled up.
    I’ve said my peace on the matter. There will be no further reply from me on it.

    I am not for threats of violence against anyone including Ms. Reeves and her family, especially over a damn tweet. But if freedom of speech is the issue for one, then it must be at issue for all.

    At the end of the day, you either believe in Freedom of Speech or you don’t.
    End of [my side of the] discussion.

  46. Avatar of J Bernard Jones
    J Bernard Jones

    David: I guess since you pulled yours out, let me whip mine out, too: Comparative Ethics, dual major in Politics and Constitutional Interpretation, Legal Theory & Application, with the intent on going into journalism and/or career diplomatic service until I realized I might start a world war before it was all over, so jumped into various forms of media. Whew!

    Now, you don’t need to show me how you came to your conclusion because it is evident in what you wrote above. The obvious and fatal flaws with your arguments are as follows:

    By orders of magnitude, the “cases” do not compare. In fact, there is no “case” as far as Melissa Reeves is concerned. The Duke Lacrosse case was one where the accused (the players) were tried & convicted in the court of public opinion before all the facts were known. Once those facts (or enough of them) came to light, charges against the players were dropped or they were aquitted. As a consequence, many of the players and even some of the non-accused who were caught up in the scandal sued for damages (although I am not aware to the final disposition of those cases or if it is still ongoing).

    In the case of the Duke Lacrosse team, public reaction against Duke, the accused players, and their supporters was based on a set of facts not in evidence or information that was incomplete and/or misreported until the facts proved otherwise.

    Unlike the Duke Lacrosse scandal, there are no incomplete facts or misreported information about the off-again-on-again Days of Our Lives star:

    Melissa Reeves (a self-declared devout Christian) sent out a tweet HERSELF in support of Dan Cathy (a self-declared devout Christian) by happily patronizing Chick-fil-A (a self-declared Christian company) on a day designated by former Gov. of Arkansas Rev. Mike Huckabee (a self-declared Christian) as “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day,” so-called to show support for Dan Cathy’s position and Chick-fil-A’s charitable arm’s donation history and philosophy that homosexuality is wrong, gay marriage is wrong and ostensibly in support of “traditional marriage,” even if that means supporting politicians who support defeating anti-hate crime legislation and paying for direct lobbying in order for US legislators’ influence how a foreign country’s anti-homosexual law — which these lawmakers & lobbyists helped WRITE — would allow to stand in order for said country to put to death gays and lesbians for merely being so.

    There is no ambiguity here. There are no facts in dispute. By couching her words in support of Cathy’s freedom of speech and — more tellingly — actively participating in Chick-fil-A Apreciation Day, Reeves was playing “cute.” She knew exactly what she was doing at the time she did it.

    Since Miss Reeves was exercising her Constitutional right to freedom of speech and supporting Constitutional right to the freedom of speech of Chick-fil-A (because the Supreme Court has said that money equals speech (Citizens United)) with both her words (Twitter) and HER money (Chick-fil-A didn’t give it out for free, hence those record profits), those people who have disagreed with her have exercised THEIR freedom of speech. To that end, people who threatened her and her family were wrong and, if those threats were physical and credible, should be prosecuted where possible.

    But let’s not be so willfully naive or deliberately stupid to think of Reeves as a victim here. She is no dummy. Reeves has been an actress and in the public eye for the greater balance of her life. She knows what to say and when to say it and how to say it (hence, her carefully modulated but thinly veiled tweet). That she is now raw and upset and deleting her Twitter account at least hints at her hypocrisy. Many, many, many people have reported how they have respectfully approached her about her views via Twitter and been blocked, all lumped together with the same crazies who have been harassing her, which — if you were honest — is more of the kind of blind pre-judging done against the Lacrosse players than which has been shown to her, opinion which has been divided at best. Freedom of speech, however, might only work one way in Ms. Reeves world.

    This is not to say that Ms. Reeves & her family has not received any threats, but rather when she CONSCIOUSLY posted a tweet in support of Cathy & his company, she should have been pretty damn prepared for the heat since she was willing to step in Chick-fil-A’s kitchen. After all, she made herself perfectly clear both explicitly and implicitly.

    So, there is absolutely no comparison WHATSOEVER to the Duke Lacrosse case period. None. There are no facts in dispute. There is no question as to who did what, when and where.

    If you had just left your argument at “people should have been nicer and more respectful to Melissa Reeves” instead of trying to make some larger but ultimately specious point, you would have been on much safer ground ethically, morally, logically and grounded in a point of reality that we actually agree.

  47. Avatar of vannyishere
    vannyishere

    It’s interesting that someone mentioned President Obama. Why wasn’t he hated on as blatantly when he stated months back he only believed marriage was between a man and woman. Now he has since changed his stance but why we’re the same people hating on MR not hating on him then?

  48. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @J Bernard Jones: Here you go.

    So let me address your response statement by statement.

    First off thanks for your respectful time and due diligence when responding. It is much appreciated.

    Now it is obvious we are going to disagree here. So let me address each relevant statement you made:

    You said: Unlike the Duke Lacrosse scandal, there are no incomplete facts or misreported information about the off-again-on-again Days of Our Lives star:

    I say: Yes there are. But we’ll get to this below.

    You Said: Melissa Reeves (a self-declared devout Christian) sent out a tweet HERSELF in support of Dan Cathy (a self-declared devout Christian) by happily patronizing Chick-fil-A (a self-declared Christian company) on a day designated by former Gov. of Arkansas Rev. Mike Huckabee (a self-declared Christian) as “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day,” so-called to show support for Dan Cathy’s position and Chick-fil-A’s charitable arm’s donation history and philosophy that homosexuality is wrong, gay marriage is wrong and ostensibly in support of “traditional marriage,” even if that means supporting politicians who support defeating anti-hate crime legislation and paying for direct lobbying in order for US legislators influence how a foreign country’s anti-homosexual law — which these lawmakers & lobbyists helped WRITE — would allow said country to put to deathgays and lesbians for merely being so.

    I Say: First let’s define what a Devout Christian is. Here is a quote by Louis George on helium.com on the definition.

    “What is the difference between a Christian and a devout Christian? A Christian can be broadly defined to be any member of the Christian Church, whether they belong to Baptist, Catholic, Greek Orthodox, or any other Christian denomination. A devout Christian, however, is one who actually lives as a disciple of Jesus Christ. As the term devout suggests, the fundamental difference between a Christian and a devout Christian is simply the level of devotion to Christ.”

    So I would question and asked if when you mentioned that MR said that she was a devout Christian, if you were inferring or confusing that for being a bible thumper or some other often negative connotation of Christians? Or were you trying to tie her being Christian to having a particular view on homosexuality, thus making it that much easier for one to assumingly connect some dots?

    Thus based on the rest of what you wrote it easy to see that you tied her being a Devout Christian to taking a particular view and having full knowledge of the goings on behind-the-scenes at Chic-fil-A.

    How you draw all this from her tweet is purely speculation. You have to cede that.

    Yet to make matters worse and to drive your point home, you laid out all of your grievances with CFA, tying those grievances to MR known support of freedom of speech and being at the restaurant.

    And to sum it up, you make this flawed mathematical equation:

    Melissa Reeves is Devout Christian + Support of Freedom of Speech for Chic-Fil-A = Homophobic or support of homophobic company’s mission.

    In court one tries to lay out why they believe what they believe. It is called supporting evidence. Or what they view as supporting evidence. This here is speculation pure and simple and would be extracted from the case.

    But we have other things to address as you laid out more bias.

    You Said: There is no ambiguity here. There are no facts in dispute. By couching her words in support of Cathy’s freedom of speech and actively participating in Chick-fil-A Apreciation Day, Reeves was playing “cute.” She knew exactly what she was doing at the time she did it.

    I Say: Speculation. And the worst part of this is when you say she was “playing cute.” This would also be stricken from a case, as you are showing a bias here. How do you know she was “playing cute?” What evidence do you have to support that? In-fact you don’t even have evidence to show that she knows what Chic-fil-A is all about. You can think she does in your opinion, but unless you actually know, then it is as competent as a so-called witness (who was not at the scene of crime) claiming they know which guy stole the watch.

    You Say: Since Miss Reeves was exercising her Constitutional right to freedom of speech and supporting Constitutional right to the freedom of speech of Chick-fil-A (because the Supreme Court has said that money equals speech (Citizens United)) with both her words (Twitter) and HER money (Chick-fil-A didn’t give it out for free, hence those record profits), those people who have disagreed with her have exercised THEIR freedom of speech. To that end, people who threatened her and her family were wrong and, if those threats were physical and credible, should be prosecuted where possible.

    I Say: I am not against anyone using their freedom of speech so long as they don’t break any laws because of it (we agree on this). So it is quite okay to disagree with her right to support people’s freedom of speech. But it is another thing to then start posting as if you know exactly how MR feels or what she meant by the statement. I cannot drive that point home enough. That is where it goes from legitimate journalism to slander and tabloid style writing. You must cede that too. It is the text book definition. Or you can call it “spin.”

    And spin is defined as a form of propaganda, achieved through providing an interpretation of an event or campaign to persuade public opinion in favor or against a certain organization or public figure. Cede that one too when it comes MR!

    Now let’s move on.

    You Say: But let’s not be so willfully naive or deliberately stupid to think of Reeves as a victim here. She is no dummy. Reeves has been an actress and in the public eye for the greater balance of her life. She knows what to say and when to say it and how to say it (hence, her carefully modulated but thinly veiled tweet). That she is now raw and upset and deleting her Twitter account at least hints at her hypocrisy. Many, many, many people have reported how they have respectfully approached her about her views via Twitter and been blocked, all lumped together with the same crazies who have been harassing her, which — if you were honest — is more of the kind of blind pre-judging done against the Lacrosse players than which has been shown to her, opinion which has been divided at best. Freedom of speech, however, might only work one way in Ms. Reeves world.

    I Say: Again this is all speculation. Maybe she does know or maybe she doesn’t? You choose to assume that she does know. Did Gilbert Godfrey know that his jokes about the tragedy in Japan would get him fired as spokesperson from AFLAC? I don’t know and can’t assume he did or did not know either way. All I know is that he said some jokes that were not taken very well on twitter and he was fired.

    Just say what you know as fact. Not what you imply those facts to mean. One more ‘gain… Just say what you know as fact. Not what you imply those facts to mean. That is where things have fallen short here. And that is the flaw in your entire diatribe.

    You say: So, there is absolutely no comparison WHATSOEVER to the Duke Lacrosse case period. None. There are no facts in dispute. There is no question as to who did what, when and where.

    I Say: Yes there are facts that are being created aka spun out what we do know. And that is again where yours and others flaw starts.

    But let me add something else:

    Were the strippers at the Lacrosse Players house? Yes!

    Was Melissa at Chic-Fli-A? Yes!

    Were some Lacrosse Players then accused of rape? Yes!

    Was Melisa accused of supporting everything CFA stands for? Yes!

    In-fact that the e-mail that was used as part of the Duke case was supposed to support the fact that stripper was raped.

    Melissa Reeves tweet in support of Free Speech has been used in this case.

    So if you can’t see the parallels then we will have to agree to disagree because I can and so can many others. Some of those people being gay themselves. That does not make them wrong or you right.

    You Say: If you had just left your argument at “people should have been nicer and more respectful to Melissa Reeves” instead of trying to make some larger but ultimately specious point, you would have been on much safer ground ethically, morally, logically and reality.

    I Say: If you and others would stop speculating as to the meaning then I would not be making a larger argument. So the flaw here is not on my side.

    Also I don’t need to have said “people should have been more nicer and respectful to MR…” I’m just defending the facts as they are. Not as one wants them to be. And I will continue to defend what the flaw is here. So i’m on very safe and level ground. Thank you very much!

    Thanks for responds thought. It was “cute.”

    But I don’t want to assume or infer anything from that.

  49. Avatar of THEBEST
    THEBEST

    It’s sad that I felt 0 sympathy for Jennifer grieving over Jack today. Someone’s political/religious beliefs can really change your outlook on them.

  50. Avatar of Spins Vixenella
    Spins Vixenella

    THANK YOU JESUS & J. BENARD for your well-reasoned, logical response to the abject foolishness I was reading in these comments.

    I understand the narrow argument that in theory we cannot from the face of Melissa’s Tweet infer anything other than support for Free Speech; however, for those with cognitive reasoning skills, we can draw inferences from the totality of the circumstances, which if the almost lawyer in this thread had actually made it past the debate team and on to law school, they would know the ability to assimilate factual evidence and the circumstances surrounding those facts, coupled with the ability to draw logical inferences therefrom, is the very back-bone of our entire adversarial legal system.

    If Melissa ONLY wanted to support Free Speech, she could have simply tweeted those very words. “I support Free Speech.” If Melissa wanted to link the First Amendment to fast food, she could have tweeted “I love Fried Chicken & Free Speech.” That might have left some doubt. However, tweeting her love of Chick-fil-A on Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day when there was so much media controversy surrounding Chick-fil-A that they even had to have an “Appreciation” Day, implies much more than support for Free Speech. So, the narrowest possible interpretation confined to the face of her Tweet, & construing it to mean only support for Free Speech & nothing more, is simply not rational or reasonable given the totality of the circumstances. Feel free to look up “totality of circumstances,” it is a widely-applied legal construct.

    I disagree vehemently with any threats to Melissa or her family, and if that occurred as is alleged, I denounce it in the strongest possible terms, in favor of civilized discourse as many attempted to engage in with her and were blocked. If in fact, Melissa was simply supporting Free Speech, does she only support it for herself, or would she extend that First Amendment Right to others? For example, prior to fellow-soap star, Greg Rikkart’s Huffington Post editorial, he tried to engage in civil discourse and his own Free Speech with Melissa on Twitter and found himself blocked.

    I also find it perhaps telling in her departure from Twitter, Melissa quoted the Gospel of Mark:
    Mark 12:30-31 (KJV)
    30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

    HOWEVER, she conveniently left out the very next Verse 31 which is critically important, and in fact linked by most Christians and theologians.

    31And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

    In fact, in the Gospel of Luke, his chronicle of the same exchange Melissa quoted from the Gospel of Mark, is this:

    Luke 10:27-28 (KJV)
    27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

    I find it strange Melissa quoted a famous passage from the Bible, leaving out a seminal part, i.e. “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” I won’t “infer” anything from this omission, but I will say in these scripture passages I find no delination or distinction on the issue of whether one’s “neighbor” is gay or straight, just a blanket commandment that we should love them as we love ourselves.

  51. Avatar of alstonboy4315
    alstonboy4315

    God-honoring? Is she for real? Is supporting hate groups honoring God? Or boinking your co-star while married? Nope. Didn’t think so.

    Heffa, have a COUPLE of seats!!! Fake-assed Christians giving religion and God a bad name. Picking and choosing which of the commandments they choose to follow. She gets the “Ho, have a seat” award of the month.

    On an unrelated note, I hope she will get that equally-as-disgusting Candace Cameron Bure to delete her account too. They seem to talk a lot on Twitter. Besides, I always preferred Stephanie Tanner anyway! :D

  52. Avatar of hey mon
    hey mon

    There is so much I dont like about this discussion.

    So, I am a somewhat devout Catholic; but I believe that a gay person should be able to do pretty much what they want. Lets face it, once again, gay men spend a lot of time thinking and engaging in sex. This is contrary to traditional religious thought. Thats just the way that it is.

    Accepting this, however, I dont think people here should constantly be bashing religion. Who do you think would really run the homeless shelters, help immigrants, help poor families, if it werent for churches? No one. Dont say social workers, cause they dont usually answer the phone.

    So, can traditional religion and male gay rights exist in the same society? This is a really interesting question.

    If, for example, a gay gene were found, I would definitely be pro-life enough to want specific abortions ended, if that abortion was based on parents trying to eliminate their ‘gay gene’ child.

    I think that Jamey and The Gang should stop posting all of this stuff about Reeves, and dial the issue down.

  53. Avatar of aremid96
    aremid96

    And yet, Melissa still had twice as many followers as Greg R. does. People need to get a life and let people express their beliefs. We don’t live in some communist nation and yet when stuff like this happens I wonder. People upset about bullying should look in the mirror cause they’re probably doing the exact same thing.

    Missy, you rock! May God bless you and your family against all these haters!!

  54. Avatar of CassadineSon
    CassadineSon

    ANyone on this board that is trashing, cursing, foul mouthing, attacking Melissa, screaming about how intolerant and hatefilled she “MUST” be needs to check themselves.

    You either want tolerance and acceptance for diverse ideas or you don’t.

    Example: If I belong to political party A and support those ideas, do I harbor hate for all other parties? Nope. Do I have friends and love people of other parties? YES! We just don’t agree on some items.

    You either truly want tolerance or you don’t. You can’t demand tolerance and acceptance but preach HATE towards those who just don’t agree with you.

    Examine your own hearts, folks.

  55. Avatar of
    jezza

    The part of her exit message that bothers me most is the scripture quoted at the end. What does that even mean? And how is it relevant here? When people quote the bible in regular conversation, particularly at the end of a monologue, it just comes across as self-righteous and pretentious. What about loving and respecting others with all your heart, soul, mind and strength? That’s something about which TPTB at her beloved Chick-fil-A know absolutely nothing.

    And to the David guy who keeps contorting himself into all kinds of awkward positions in order to justify his pro-Melissa posts, I say this: Melissa’s silence up until now speaks volumes. If she meant something other than the clear implication of her initial post, she’s had weeks to clarify herself. Yes, Twitter doesn’t necessarily provide for an effective conversation about complicated issues, but there are other forums one can use on the Internet to explain oneself in more than 140 characters, or however many Twitter allows.

    We live in a world where the majority of communication is done between the lines. What’s unsaid is as important as what is said. I am sick of people hiding behind the First Amendment, but I’m even more thoroughly exhausted with people thinking that freedom of speech applies only to one-way monologues. If you are going to open your mouth to speak, be prepared for a response.

    The death threats and so forth are stupid, but that’s what some silly people do. As a journalist, I’ve gotten my share of the same when I’ve written things with which some people have taken issue. But I didn’t turn off my computer and hide under the covers. If you are going to make potentially inflammatory comments in public (and surely Melissa knew that hers were, or she would NOT have sent that tweet on a day meant to honor Chick-fil-A’s homophobic stance), then at least have the balls to stand up and defend yourself, not turn yourself into a victim while ignoring the ones (like Greg Rikaart) who are respectfully disagreeing with you just because some people are acting like idiots.

  56. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @jezza: Okay

    You said: The part of her exit message that bothers me most is the scripture quoted at the end. What does that even mean? And how is it relevant here? When people quote the bible in regular conversation, particularly at the end of a monologue, it just comes across as self-righteous and pretentious. What about loving and respecting others with all your heart, soul, mind and strength? That’s something about which TPTB at her beloved Chick-fil-A know absolutely nothing.

    I Say: That’s your opinion on her bible quote. You are entitled to it. I for one am I not going to speculate on what it means. But we have more to deal with here, so let’s get to it.

    You say: And to the David guy who keeps contorting himself into all kinds of awkward positions in order to justify his pro-Melissa posts, I say this: Melissa’s silence up until now speaks volumes. If she meant something other than the clear implication of her initial post, she’s had weeks to clarify herself. Yes, Twitter doesn’t necessarily provide for an effective conversation about complicated issues, but there are other forums one can use on the Internet to explain oneself in more than 140 characters, or however many Twitter allows.

    I Say: Contorting and Justifying his pro-Melissa Post? You see this is part of the problem again. You don’t even get anything I have been saying. It just has went right over your head. Sorry I just can’t keep repeating what others can’t seen to get. So i’m gonna just remember the Serenity Prayer. I’m as patient anyone. But I must realize everyone is not going to get it and leave it at that.

    You Say: We live in a world where the majority of communication is done between the lines. What’s unsaid is as important as what is said. I am sick of people hiding behind the First Amendment, but I’m even more thoroughly exhausted with people thinking that freedom of speech applies only to one-way monologues. If you are going to open your mouth to speak, be prepared for a response.

    I Say: You don’t know what is unsaid. You are again speculating or sharing your opinion on what you THINK the so-called “unsaid” means. The rest is just your opinion. I don’t care either way. We just should not get in the habit of putting words or meanings to anything that a person has not directly stated.

    You said: The death threats and so forth are stupid, but that’s what some silly people do. As a journalist, I’ve gotten my share of the same when I’ve written things with which some people have taken issue. But I didn’t turn off my computer and hide under the covers. If you are going to make potentially inflammatory comments in public (and surely Melissa knew that hers were, or she would NOT have sent that tweet on a day meant to honor Chick-fil-A’s homophobic stance), then at least have the balls to stand up and defend yourself, not turn yourself into a victim while ignoring the ones (like Greg Rikaart) who are respectfully disagreeing with you just because some people are acting like idiots.

    I Say: People have different temperaments and respond to things differently. As you can see here there are some people who respond to an alleged slight with vicious hostile behavior. Then there are others respond differently. So you can’t say that how you or I would react to the way other people receive whatever you have written has to be the way others would or assume that they would. It is like having siblings. Everyone responds differently to stimuli. That is a scientific fact. So with that you have to stop thinking that everyone must respond to things the way you would because YOU BELIEVE it is the right way to respond.

    Also, on the side of my job I run an online men’s lifestyle magazine. So when I am bringing on a new writer (during the interview process), my Editor and I (I’m the publisher and owner) weed out people would have a negative reaction to any criticism of their writing. So I understand the publishing/media world like the back of my hand. I also know the different temperaments and personalities you will come across. So I hire based on my expectations.

    Now my site is not a gossip site or meant to produce salacious controversial pieces for my mostly male readers (women like to read to men’s perspective too). I’m catering to professional gentleman. So we’ve been fortunate enough to never end up in a position where people and trolls feel the need to try and bash us. If there is any critique are disagreement it is done as eloquent as when my father and his friends would sit in the family room smoking cigars debating business, economics, politics and married life. FYI http://www.manofthehourmag.com

  57. Avatar of thecourt99
    thecourt99

    Why must a public statement or clarification be made? MR spoke and clarified herself to the people that she loved, her friends, and those whose opinions she values.

  58. Avatar of Cordelia Chase
    Cordelia Chase

    [quote=hey mon]Lets face it, once again, gay men spend a lot of time thinking and engaging in sex. This is contrary to traditional religious thought. Thats just the way that it is.[/quote]

    I disagree with everything you said, but I support your right to say it. See how that works?

    “Gay men spend a lot of time thinking and engaging in sex.”

    As opposed to gay women, or straight men and women? Are you arguing that gay men spend more time thinking about and engaging in sex than anyone else? I would appreciate it if you would cite the source for this because, as a gay man, it’s news to me. You are classifying and remonstrating an entire group of people according to how you perceive their sexual behavior. You have stated that you are a heterosexual person, so I would like to know how you reached this conclusion, given that it falls outside of your own knowledge.

    “This is contrary to traditional religious thought.”

    You mean it’s contrary to your religious thought, which is not the totality of religious dogma, as there are certainly religions older than yours as well as many religions which disagree with you and disavow Catholic doctrine.

    “Thats just the way that it is.”

    Again, according to whom? It would appear that it’s according to you, which makes it an opinion, not a fact.

    As for the Melissa Reeves situation, she stated an opinion, which is certainly her right per the United States Constitution. Was it a particularly enlightened or inclusive opinion? Of course not, but she had every right to say it. In this very narrow circumstance, it is indeed about free speech.

    As a gay man, I was bothered by her stance, but I wasn’t particularly troubled. She’s an admitted born-again Christian who believes in a strict interpretation of her religion’s tenets. Her tweet revealed nothing which I hadn’t already suspected. I was disappointed, but unsurprised. Do I think she’s hypocritical, given the fact that she engaged in an adulterous relationship? Yes, of course, but that doesn’t alter the fact that she’s entitled to believe and espouse anything she wants.

    Is her opinion dangerous? That depends on how much power you’re willing to give her. Granted, she’s a celebrity, but there are certainly more prominent celebrities who fully support marriage equality. Reeves has never struck me as particularly intelligent, nor as anything more than a marginally talented actress, so, at the end of the day, her opinion means very little to me on a personal level.

    You have to allow for degrees of discord, and however much some of you may disagree with the idea of “herd mentality,” it very much comes into play here. Whatever your stance on marriage equality, no matter how passionate, people must be free to express their opinions, no matter how noxious you might find them. I don’t doubt Reeves received death threats. They’re certainly common enough on Twitter, regardless of who you are.

    The moment you say someone else should “shut up” or qualify their answer or apologize for saying something in which they truly believe, is the moment when you open yourself up for the same admonishment. You should not be allowed to cherry-pick the Bill of Rights any more than a Christian should be allowed to cherry-pick the Bible.

    Honestly, I would have been more impressed with Reeves had she said, “This is my opinion. I believe in it and won’t change it to please other people.” Instead, she shut down her Twitter and slunk away with her tail tucked between her legs. This suggests to me that she doesn’t have the courage of her convictions, which I find far more shameful than a tweet about a fast-food restaurant which serves mediocre food.

  59. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @thecourt99: People don’t think anymore. They feel.

    “Oh i’m feeling…”

    “I don’t feel comfortable…”

    “Oh i’m so sorry we THE GROUP were feeling…”

    Do you know one the greatest problems of our age is that we are governed by people who care more about feelings then they about thoughts and ideas. Now thoughts and Ideas that interests me!

    We also live in a world where too many people think they are owed or entitled to something. People, nobody is entitled to anything. Nobody is owed anything. And as soon as we realize that then we can move forward with our lives.

    This is the direct reason people born post 1976 have been referred to as the Entitlement Generation.

    So if people want to speak, fine. But you are not entitled or owed a response for what think someone meant.

    Lets also remember that at the end of the day soaps are a female genre. They run the show. When female fans gather together as a whole to make a decision on what they do or don’t like to see on their screens or what they think is coming from an actor they will act accordingly. That’s just reality.

  60. Avatar of TheFloatingRib
    TheFloatingRib

    @david46208
    I am sure you have heard the saying ‘some people like the sound of their own voice’ and I think today after reading your posts I have learned a new one ‘some people just like to see their scattered thoughts in print’.

    I have read your items a few times but they are scattered. For the life of me I do not know what point you are making. Sometimes I think I get it but then later I am asking myself what in the world are they talking about. You appear to enjoy a debate but only to ‘debate’ anything. There is a comment for everything. It makes for a good laugh but we got your point (I guess) but driving your point, at least in my opinion, is just blah blah blah. Obviously if you have to continue to defend yourself then your point is lost and not respected in this group.

    This is a discussion about MR and her motives and not a lecture hosted by you.

  61. Avatar of Dariclone
    Dariclone

    It doesn’t really suprise me that Melissa shut down her twitter account, the way things were going she didn’t have much of a leg left to stand on. There’s no way she deserved death threats, but she should’ve known that the internet is full of people with strong opinions and when you state a strong opinion of your ownn you’re bound to get people upset.
    Cordeilia Chase, loved your post!

  62. Avatar of Ryan-Scott
    Ryan-Scott

    Actually David46208 alot of MEN run shows….Ron and Frank @ GH, Brad at B&B, and Ken, Chris, and Gary @ Days.

    I think though it would be to their advantage to have more women in charge and I don’t mean women like JFP either.

  63. Avatar of BETTYSUE113098
    BETTYSUE113098

    I JUST WANTED TO SAY IS THAT EVERYONE HAS A OPINION ABOUT THIS MATTER OF SOME SORT. I THINK EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO THINK AND BELIEVE THEY WANT. I TRY TO STAY NEUTRAL IN ANY AREAS SUCH ASTHIS, RELIGION, OR POLITICS CAUSE IT JUST RILES PPL TO ARGUE WITH ANOTHER AND THERES REALLY ENOUGH OF THAT SO I JUST TRY NOT TO GET REAL INVOLVED WITH IT ALL. WITH TALKING ON FACEBOOK, TWITTER OR ANY SOCIAL MEDIA IT REALLY SEEMS SILLY TO ARGUE WITH PPL YOU DONT EVEN KNOW. ITS ALL ABOUT WORDS OVER THE INTERNET AND NOT DEALING WITH TRUE HONEST PPL SUCH AS GOOD FRIENDS AND FAMILY. THE ONE THING I FIND SAD IN ALL OF IT IS THAT MELISSAS FAMILY WAS THREATENED. SEEMS SO NOT RIGHT WHEN IT COMES TO DOING THINGS LIKE THAT. I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHERS BY PPL READING OVER THE INTERNET THAT KNOW MELISSA AND OTHERS BETTER THAN I DO. IT JUST REALLY COMES DOWN TO WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN AND JUST VOICE YOUR OPINION AND MOVE ON. HOPE MELISSA FINDS PEACE IN WHATEVER SHE CHOOSES TO DO.

  64. Avatar of david46208
    david46208

    @Ryan-Scott: I’m not talking about jobs. I’m talking about viewers. Soap have always been geared toward women. They are the target viewer the main audience. Always have and always will be. I have no problem with that. So when I said what I said that was what I was talking about.

  65. Avatar of hey mon
    hey mon

    @Cordelia
    I disagree with everything you said, but I support your right to say it. See how that works?

    “Gay men spend a lot of time thinking and engaging in sex.”

    As opposed to gay women, or straight men and women? Are you arguing that gay men spend more time thinking about and engaging in sex than anyone else? I would appreciate it if you would cite the source for this because, as a gay man, it’s news to me. You are classifying and remonstrating an entire group of people according to how you perceive their sexual behavior. You have stated that you are a heterosexual person, so I would like to know how you reached this conclusion, given that it falls outside of your own knowledge.

    “This is contrary to traditional religious thought.”

    You mean it’s contrary to your religious thought, which is not the totality of religious dogma, as there are certainly religions older than yours as well as many religions which disagree with you and disavow Catholic doctrine.

    “Thats just the way that it is.”

    Again, according to whom? It would appear that it’s according to you, which makes it an opinion, not a fact.
    ——————————————————-
    C’mon Cordelia…

    There has to be some basic agreement, or we cant have a debate, can we? There have to be some basic understandings, or how can we have an honest debate. So here is my last attempt at an honest debate…

    I am a co-owner of a large real estate – title company brokerage, so I come into contact with alot of people. I live in a suburb of metro Detroit, with 4 kids, and a wife. I understand these things from my daily life, and my interactions with all kinds of people…

    Gay men think about sex with a multitude of men continually.

    Far more than straight men do, cause I am basing this upon myself, and my family, and who I work with.

    Lesbians are rarely ever sexual, at least around me.

    But the gay men I know. They talk about it, brag about it, and tend toward unhealthy (multiple partner, etc) behavior. A male who works for me, recently bragged to a female co-worker about how he spent the entire weekend with 2 other amles engaging in risky behavior. Sad for him, she told everybody and now the other workers gossip about him behind his back. He stated to the co-worker that he told this to, that he has no desire to settle down with one male, and why should he, “He is still young”.

    Second, in my neighborhood, the two ‘married men’ have what could only be called an ‘open marriage’. They make rude remarks to my twenty and teenage sons about the fact they ‘work out’. Imagine how I feel about that, two men in their 50s, commenting to me about my sons, in my expensive meighborhood. Other times, they have what they call a ’3rd wheel’ in their ‘marriage’. It is usually a different much-younger male who is hanging around.

    Now Cordelia, you asked me…

    Personally, I dont care about what other people do in their lives. But I am not going to put my ‘head in the sand’, either. 2 gay males ‘married’, is not at all what a male and female would be, truly married. But that deosnt mean that I am against gay and lesbian marriage — but I also dont believe that homosexual rights are a civil rights.

  66. Avatar of Dariclone
    Dariclone

    Hey mon: Since when are an agreement and a debate the same thing? Also, just because the gay men in your neigboorhood are terrible to you, doesn’t mean *all* gay men are terrible. Nor does it mean that all gay men have an open marriage that they conduct in such a way.

Leave a Reply