The head of restaurant chain Chick-Fil-A is against legally redefining marriage to include same sex couples. Evidently we’re supposed to care. Actually, not only care, but actively hate the President and founding family of the company and the company itself, bashing it, boycotting it and generally smearing it as a Klan run corporation because… it’s public stance is that of the majority of California’s and Floridas and Hawaii’s and Washingtons and America’s and Barack Obama’s [*up until 2 months ago].
This strategy is stupid, small minded and a total loser in the battle for gay tolerance.
I’m not religious and dont give 2 scissors about “tradition”, but im open minded enough to understand that good people can disagree on this issue. there are factions on both sides that do not believe that: a tiny percentage of homophobe jerks and an unfortunate majority percentage of gay activists. both smear the other side as being evil and not just wrong. that is wrong. please dont be that. change peoples minds with logic and openness and reason. dont assault their values and traditions – show them why they are misguided and lead by example. Then you will truly know who the jerks and haters are and who the honest-minded tolerant people who just believe in their religion or in the sociological family structure that has been in place in every religious and secular civilization since forever.
“We are very much supportive of the family—the biblical definition of the family unit,” Dan Cathy, President of the company told the Baptist Press.
*That* is what is so horrifically offensive to these people… Intolerant, much? Dude didn’t say that all homo sodomite scum should burn in the furies of hell for their repulsive sexual nature they chose to have – he said only that he favors keeping a special institution for male/female unions. Wtf is the big deal? Rhetorical question, cuz it isnt a big deal. Unless you’re actively looking for something to feel like a victim over in the most tolerant, free and accepting country in the history of the world.
If I were emperor I would immediately issue a Civil Union law nationwide that allows couples to enjoy legal privileges that married people enjoy through one easy form (such privileges are attainable now but depending on your state, it can be multi-stepped and annoying to go through). That takes care of what people erroneously call “rights”, so all that is left is the cultural aspect. Each state can then redefine marriage if they want or keep it the opposite-sex unit its been since the history of time – and with civil unions flourishing and tolerant pleasant gay couples utilizing them without trying to divide the country into another civil rights cold war – even the redneckiest counties in Mississippi would eventually give way to what *should* be the ultimate goal: Tolerance and acceptance. Currently – we’re on the opposite path: becoming more divisive and more hateful and less close to coming together on the issue and just accepting everyone as they are.
Tell me i’m wrong… tell me the “you’re worse than Hitler” approach to people who disagree with redefining marriage is working and then tell me where? Its voted down in every gay-friendly state thats allowed to vote on it (previously mentioned in this post). People who care about this issue need to open their eyes and start doing what will WORK instead of what just feels good.
And whether you care about it or not, you should stop being a jerk about it.
Polite disagreement about redefining a word while still treating those people you disagree with with love and tolerance is not “hate” and people who say so are vandalizing the gay rights movement just as these people vandalized this building. are we trying to change hearts and minds? or just whine and emote and bully everyone who doesnt see exactly eye to eye with us on governments role in gay issues?
The only thing this story is missing is bullying from elected officials… Oh good (Via Mark Steyn)…
Proco “Joe” Moreno is Alderman of the First Ward of Chicago, and last week, in a city with an Aurora-size body count every weekend, his priority was to take the municipal tire-iron to the owners of a chain of fast-food restaurants. “Because of this man’s ignorance,” said Alderman Moreno, “I will now be denying Chick-fil-A’s permit to open a restaurant in the First Ward.”
“This man’s ignorance”? You mean, of the City of Chicago permit process? Zoning regulations? Health and safety ordinances? No, Alderman Moreno means “this man’s ignorance” of the approved position on same-sex marriage. “This man” is Dan Cathy, president of Chick-fil-A, and a few days earlier he had remarked that “we are very much supportive of the family – the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives” – which last part suggests he is as antipathetic to no-fault divorce and other heterosexual assaults on matrimony as he is to more recent novelties such as gay marriage. But no matter. Alderman Moreno does not allege that Chick-fil-A discriminates in its hiring practices or in its customer service. Nor does he argue that business owners should not be entitled to hold opinions: The Muppets, for example, have reacted to Mr. Cathy’s observations by announcing that they’re severing all ties with Chick-fil-A. Did you know that the Muppet Corporation has a position on gay marriage? Well, they do. But Miss Piggy and the Swedish Chef would be permitted to open a business in the First Ward of Chicago because their opinion on gay marriage happens to coincide with Alderman Moreno’s.
Meanwhile, fellow mayor Tom Menino announced that Chick-fil-A would not be opening in his burg anytime soon. “If they need licenses in the city, it will be very difficult,” said His Honor. If you’ve just wandered in in the middle of the column, this guy Menino isn’t the mayor of Soviet Novosibirsk or Kampong Cham under the Khmer Rouge, but of Boston, Mass. Nevertheless, he shares the commissars’ view that in order to operate even a modest and politically inconsequential business it is necessary to demonstrate that one is in full ideological compliance with party orthodoxy. “There is no place for discrimination on Boston’s Freedom Trail,” Mayor Menino thundered in his letter to Mr. Cathy, “and no place for your company alongside it.” No, sir. On Boston’s Freedom Trail, you’re free to march in ideological lockstep with the city authorities – or else. Hard as it is to believe, there was a time when Massachusetts was a beacon of liberty: the shot heard round the world, and all that. Now it fires Bureau of Compliance permit-rejection letters round the world.
Mayor Menino subsequently backed down and claimed the severed rooster’s head left in Mr. Cathy’s bed was all just a misunderstanding. Yet, when it comes to fighting homophobia on Boston’s Freedom Trail, His Honor is highly selective. As the Boston Herald’s Michael Graham pointed out, Menino is happy to hand out municipal licenses to groups whose most prominent figures call for gays to be put to death. The mayor couldn’t have been more accommodating (including giving them $1.8 million of municipal land) of the new mosque of the Islamic Society of Boston, whose IRS returns listed as one of their seven trustees Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Like President Obama, Imam Qaradawi’s position on gays is in a state of “evolution”: He can’t decide whether to burn them or toss ‘em off a cliff. “Some say we should throw them from a high place,” he told Al-Jazeera. “Some say we should burn them, and so on. There is disagreement … . The important thing is to treat this act as a crime.” Unlike the deplorable Mr. Cathy, Imam Qaradawi is admirably open-minded: There are so many ways to kill homosexuals, why restrict yourself to just one? In Mayor Menino’s Boston, if you take the same view of marriage as President Obama did from 2009 to 2012, he’ll run your homophobic ass out of town. But, if you want to toss those godless sodomites off the John Hancock Tower, he’ll officiate at your ribbon-cutting ceremony.
This inconsistency is very telling. The forces of “tolerance” and “diversity” are ever more intolerant of anything less than total ideological homogeneity.