I have never eaten at a Chick-fil-A, mainly because, until recently, the restaurant chain did not have a location in my area. Now that they do, I intend to try it very soon. I would have done so today, Aug. 1 — dubbed "Chick-fil-A appreciation day" by former Gov. Mike Huckabee on his Fox TV show — but instead I am here slaving over a hot laptop, writing this column for you fine folks. Duty trumps chicken, at least for today.
Tomorrow, however, I intend to try the fowl fare at Chick-fil-A, not because I am a huge fan of fried chicken sandwiches but rather because I am a gigantic fan of free speech and traditional marriage, both of which are under assault from the Radical Left — a term once used to describe a far flung periphery of the political spectrum but which today connotes the Democrat Party. Don't think so? Google same-sex marriage and the Democrat Party platform. (Hint: They're for it.)
For those who may have been vacationing in Katmandu, Antarctica or on the lunar surface for the last two weeks, this whole brouhaha with Chick-fil-A started when their Chief Operating Officer Dan Cathy had the unmitigated gall to express his support for traditional marriage between a man and woman. Until recently, such a statement would have led the PC Gestapo on America's kook fringe, which now runs our big cities — Chicago, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, etc. — to simply whine, harrumph and stomp their feet about "discrimination" and "homophobia."
However, since President Barack Obama suddenly "evolved" into a supporter of same-sex marriage a few months ago, his now-emboldened supporters have come to believe that anyone expressing an opposing point of view should be punished. One who seems to believe such things is former Obama Chief of Staff and current Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who may have thought he was being bold and standing tall on behalf of civil rights or human rights or marriage rights or whatever other rights he thinks he's defending. However, Emanuel may well have taken on more than even his pugnacious personality can handle when he declared that "Chick-fil-A's values are not Chicago values."
Really, Mr. Mayor? Have you seen the line stretching around the block today at the existing Chick-fil-A locations in your city? I'm hearing reports of Chick-fil-A restaurants all across the country being inundated by supporters who seem to think that this company's values are America's values.
Even worse than Emanuel's bloviating are the statements coming out of the mouth of Chicago Alderman Proco (Joe) Moreno, who is attempting to use his office to block Chick-fil-A from opening more locations in the windy city. This man actually had the audacity to state that before he will consider allowing zoning rights to a Chick-fil-A restaurant in his ward, the company's corporate board must put in writing that they "won't support any groups with a political agenda, including those with an anti-gay marriage stance."
One wonders if the alderman has ever bothered to read the First Amendment.
To their credit, the Chicago Republican Party has filed a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights and Attorney General Lisa Madigan over this blatant discrimination by Alderman Moreno. They later expanded their complaint to include Mayor Emanuel's statements as well. The complaint states that the alderman and the mayor have broken civil rights laws pertaining to religious freedom and the First Amendment in denying Chick-fil-A a permit to operate its business in the City of Chicago.
"Chick-fil-A may have a pretty good case under the First Amendment if the city uses their religious or political beliefs as a basis for denying a business license or ability to do business in the city," said Hans von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department civil rights attorney, now a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
God bless America. She isn't finished yet. I don't know about you, but I know where I'm having lunch tomorrow.
Copyright 2012 by Doug Patton, who describes himself as a recovering political speechwriter who agrees with himself much more often than not. Astute supporters and inane detractors alike are encouraged to email him with their pithy comments at dpatton@cagle.com.
ArizonaGal posted at 7:46 am on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
I wasn't able to make it yesterday but I will be eating there today....I love Chick-Fil-A [beam]
Accuracy posted at 8:15 am on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
Doug Patton wrote: “I'm hearing reports of Chick-fil-A restaurants all across the country being inundated by supporters who seem to think that this company's values are America's values.”
You are right Doug Patton….. Wednesday was declared national Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day from Washington, D.C. to Texas, Arizona, and California. And it turned out to be a record-setting day for all of the restaurants due to the recent controversy over Chick-fil-A's support of traditional marriage.
Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy is the latest person to come under attack by the news media and several big city mayors (including Chicago's Rahm Emanuel) for stating his belief in biblical principles.
People are responding to the attacks, and Chick-fil-A has become the country's new symbol for support of freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
chatmandu002 posted at 8:59 am on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
I have eaten at Chic-fil-a once this week and will probably eat there again before the week is over. Politicians can say what they want but the law governs what they can do. I doubt that boisterous left wing politicians can back up legally their claims of denying permits to build and operate Chick-fil-a restaurants.
Engaged Voter posted at 9:38 am on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
Just watch, the neo-Nazi party will use this example as an excuse to promote their Holocaust denial tripe, all under the guise of "free speech".
Them or the Westboro Baptist Church...OH WAIT! They already DO this!
So you guys support them too? Are are ya just a bunch of hypocrites? ;)
Cerulean posted at 10:12 am on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
I agree that municipalities should not be deciding building permits based on religious dogma.
However,
Chick-fil-your gut vales are not my values!
That is freedom of speech. [beam]
Dale Whiting posted at 10:26 am on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
Doug,
You are correct on one and only one point. When Chief Operating Officer Dan Cathy choosed to exercise free speach on behalf of both himself and his company, he runs the risk of doing what others once routinely did, using inappropriate speach. The iist of inappropriate free speach includes using the "N" word as well as others. Such talk denogrates minority groups.
Now that Cathy has associated his company with such innappropriate free speach, politicians are free to castigate him and well they should. I'll be eating elsewhere. When I boycot a business it last for decades. On my list for at least the last 30 years are Sears and Toys R Us, that for poor service. Chick-fil-A joins with Lowes for doing dumb things regarding minorities.
Bingo6 posted at 11:45 am on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
So Doug now that you have outted yourself as another homophobe I hope you enjoy your greasy junk food.
Those of us who choose a more tolerant approach to recogonizing the inherent civil rights of all Americans, also, as Mr Cathy chooses his right to be intolerant and bigotted towards his fellow Americans, must also suffer the consequences of his intolerance and total disregard for a persons constitutional rights.
It is not surprising that you and the majority of the extremist right choose to hide your bigotry behind the guise of the first amendment and of course the extremist intolerance of the religious and fanatical evangelicals in what the name of a fast food joint, because you and your kind will always use whatever excuse you can to profit from the fear and ignorance of most of the uniformed.
My choice of not patronizing this chicken joint or any other business that would dare use my hard earned money for causes I don't believe in is my business and is a just and noble cause of free choice, free will, and a clear conscience.
As you enjoy your (political statement) fried chicken sandwhich I will not be swayed from my first amendment right either.
Vog posted at 12:08 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
This whole "reverse boycott" is ridiculous. To quote @cargoweasel on Twitter: "there is no better metaphor for america right now than obese, wheezing christians stuffing fried food into their maws out of rage and spite."
Mr. Patton, I'm amused that you think Chick-Fil-A's contributions to anti-gay groups are acceptable because of "free speech". As others have pointed out, the reverse trend does not happen. Regardless of the rhetoric pushed around these days, to be pro-gay is NOT to be anti-straight. You will find that no corporations donate to anti-straight groups, period.
There is no moral equality in lobbying to reducing one group's rights while that group lobbies for the same rights you have. Your rights are not diminished or diluted in any way, and the meaningless appeal to "tradition" and "sanctity" are not a valid defense. The stupidity of Boston's mayor aside, this is not about free speech. This is about denying other humans the same rights you enjoy as a human.
I say this as a white, straight native of North Carolina who has spent a year in Arizona and values fiscal responsibility. My home state leaned blue in the last election, but the state itself is very strongly conservative (you have the Baptists to thank for that). I understand and appreciate the conservative Republican perspective, but I do not understand the party's obsession with moral bankruptcy when it comes to this particular topic. In summary, I'm very disappointed in Mr. Patton's column.
A more eloquent post on the immoral stance of Chick-Fil-A sympathizers is located here: http://www.owldolatrous.com/?p=288.
Accuracy posted at 12:31 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
Sensationalized by the by the news media, gay activists have staged boycotts of the Chick-fil-A restaurant business.
Dan Cathy, and Chick-fil-A, has become the target of a Democrat-led campaign to punish and coerce them into submission on same-sex marriage.
Chick-fil-A is a family-owned business. “The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender,” a statement from the restaurant chain, said according to the Associated Press. “Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.”
Engaged Voter posted at 1:08 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
Accuracy is lying.
I know, I know, what a shocker!
This has nothing to do with their stance on marriage.
The issue is that Chick-Fil-A donates money to three known hate groups, one of which supports the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009, which calls for the MURDER OF INNOCENT PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE GAY.
That's not free speech. That's not upholding traditional values (unless you consider hatemongering and murder traditional values).
And why can't anyone answer the simple question of WHERE these "traditional" marriage values come from? It sure isn't in the Bible!
Engaged Voter posted at 1:10 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
“Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.”
So they are going to take back the five million dollars they donated to hate groups?
Or is this just another Chick-Fil-A-Hole lie (they already lied about the muppet toys)?
chuckles3 posted at 3:58 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
too much to comment on- but a couple hoots:
"inappropriate" free speech. Thats a good one.
"hate groups" Define "hate" for me. I imagine there are many liberal organizations that would fall under your definition. Like a group that advocates the genocide of (largely) minority unborn babies.
mmm, chicken.
Engaged Voter posted at 4:49 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
""inappropriate" free speech. Thats a good one."
Try yelling FIRE in a threater...remember to proclaim your free speech when doing so...let us know how that works out for you.
"Define "hate" for me."
Sure! A hate group is an organized group or movement that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or other designated sector of society. According to the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), hate groups' "primary purpose is to promote animosity, hostility, and malice against persons belonging to a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin which differs from that of the members of the organization.
Any other questions? And any chance of answering MY question (where does the idea of "traditional marraige" come from)?
Billsey posted at 4:57 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
http://tinyurl.com/billsey/ByTheGraceOfOurTwiceBornKing.pdf says it all for me. No group that tries to hold public sway through the use of intimidation, vilification, humiliation or slander will EVER gain my respect. If you truly desire my respect, then you need to act in a respectful manner. I was at one of those Chick-fil-A stores on the 1st. There was no hate going on, no slander, no anger, no intimidation, no humiliation, no vilification. There was only people enjoying each other's company, and enjoying chicken sandwiches. Believe it or not, some of the people who came to stores across the country in order to honor and show support for Chick-fil-A and Dan Cathy were themselves homosexual or supporters of homosexual marriage, but they are disgusted by the tactics of intimidation, humiliation, vilification, outright slander, and hatred being spewed out in order to shout down and silence an opposing opinion. You don't like what they stand for? Fine. Don't give them your money. We'll make up for it—and apparently in spades.
Masterrogue666 posted at 5:43 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
I recommend the spicy chicken with PepperJack cheese....
Engaged Voter posted at 6:01 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
"There was no hate going on, no slander, no anger, no intimidation, no humiliation, no vilification. "
No just the giving of money to a hate group that supports the execution of homosexuals in Uganda. By the way, MURDERING someone because of their sexual orientation does in fact cover those attributes you listed.
And to reply to your silly Scripture song, allow me to retort with Matthew 6:5 and 6:6:
And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites [are]: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and churches and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
Funny how that works. ;)
Mike McClellan posted at 6:29 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
This is a complete non-issue. I don''t care what a CEO does with his money -- it's his money, after all, and his opinion.
In fact, if we really start examining how money by corporations is spent, we'd find a bunch of them using their clout in a variety of ways.
So if you don't like what Chicken Guy believes to the extent some apparently do, don't eat there. But don't create the polite fiction that Chicken Guy is some kind of rarity.
mwd2525 posted at 7:35 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
Thank you,as usual,engaged voter for the voice of reason. I would only add this to the discussion. If the ceo of chik fil a wants to say he is against gay marriage......fine,as people are saying on here,he can have and say any opinion he wants. Then,dont complain when the mayor of Chicago uses his own free speech rites to voice his opinion. chik fil a opinion good.......Rahm Emanuel opinion bad......is that how it works? Only people with the same views as yours have the right to voice them? Not in America....sorry. Oh and " the PC Gestapo on America's kook fringe, which now runs our big cities ' I think if they were such a "kook fringe " as you say,they would not be running and the majority in the countries largest cities.We should probably be clear on who the kook fringe is.
Accuracy posted at 7:51 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
People wanting "Biblical marriage" base their belief on the Bible that defines marriage as one man and one woman.
The apostle Paul, who was dedicated to God's service, was realistic enough to know that most people, no matter how deep their faith, were better off married than facing the temptations of the single life: 1 Corinthians 7:2-3 – “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.”
A “traditional marriage” is marriage between a man and a woman. This is the most acceptable form of marriage in society. The traditional marriage conforms to the traditional culture and religion. Many religious people believe that a family unit consists of a mother a father and children. This is the image that many people have grown up recognizing. This is one of the reasons why many people are not open to the idea of other forms of marriage.
Senator Barrack Obama, as a candidates for president in 2008, was opposed to same-sex marriage and claimed to be a “traditionalist” concerning marriage and its customs and practices in a particular culture.
Obama stated, “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian, it is a sacred union, you know? God is in the mix.”
But, while President, Obama opposed the passage of Proposition 8 in California, and planned to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act. Obama announced in early May 2012 that his evolution on same-sex marriage is complete. He appeared on TV during an interview in which he said that he now favors allowing gay couples to marry.
geekette posted at 8:20 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
The CEO is free to say what he wants.
And I am free not to eat at his restaurants.
mnjcpa posted at 11:00 pm on Thu, Aug 2, 2012.
The gutter talk liberal left makes my stomach turn. If you don't share their views you invite the most despicable, hateful rhetoric possible. Good for Cathy for standing up for his beliefs. I bet his business triples.
Engaged Voter posted at 10:29 am on Fri, Aug 3, 2012.
LOL@Accuracy trying to use 1 Corinthains 7:2-3 to say the Bible supports monogamous marraige. Let's read the verse RIGHT BEFORE IT, shall we?
1 Corinthians 7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: IT IS GOOD FOR A MAN TO NOT TOUCH A WOMAN
"People wanting "Biblical marriage" base their belief on the Bible that defines marriage as one man and one woman."
It is a false belief. The Bible does not define marriage that way at all. The Bible implicitly condones group marriages, and even incest (read the story of Lot). AND NOWHERE DOES IT SAY THESE ARE BAD THINGS.
Be for "traditional" marriage, whatever that means. But stop pretending it is based on the Bible, because it is not.
Engaged Voter posted at 10:54 am on Fri, Aug 3, 2012.
Dear Mike McClellan,
The murder of innocent people simply because of their sexual orientation is never a non-issue. And shame on anyone who thinks so!
(and if you don't know what I'm talking about or how it relates to CFA, please educate yourself before replying. I'll even give you a clue - Exodus International)
JMJ posted at 11:13 am on Fri, Aug 3, 2012.
What Republicans seem to do is blindly follow whoever sets the anti-gay agenda for the day. "Jesus" Cathy has now caused a major, demonstrative daylong movement [fueled by Huckabee's declaration of 'National Chick-Fil-A Day"] to cite freedom of speech as their platform. Meanwhile, there are gay employees of Chick-Fil-A, probably mostly closeted and questioning teens, who were subjected to the anti-gay crowd all day long. These "Christians" brought their children in droves to prove that they are "right" and gays are "other". How many of their children might be gay? When we openly and "freely" marginalize a whole slice of our American population, on a national-hate-day kind of leve, what are we as a "Christian" nation teaching our children? Just what exactly was the Chick-Fil-A demonstration supporting? Free speech, or hatred of gays?
Keep your f r i c k -a-seed chicken, Cathy boy. Not at all surprised that an east valley column would support such a stance--this ain't about free speech. It's about hating gays and teaching our kids to do the same. Period.
Accuracy posted at 12:58 pm on Fri, Aug 3, 2012.
Engaged Voter posted: “Be for "traditional" marriage, whatever that means. But stop pretending it is based on the Bible, because it is not.”
--------------------------------------------
In 2007, Barack Obama stated clearly:
“I’m a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman.”
And during the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama was still pretty clear on his position in a conversation with Rick Warren:
“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian, it is a sacred union. You know, God is in the mix…. I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions.”
Was Obama ONLY PRETENDING, at that time, by saying and agreeing that “traditional marriage” is based on the Bible?
Engaged Voter posted at 1:06 pm on Fri, Aug 3, 2012.
Nice evasion, Accuracy. (actually pretty poor evasion, you didn't even TRY to address the subject)
Please show the quote where Obama said that "traditional marriage" was Bible based. Sorry, but given the number of false claims you've made on these forums, I cannot just take your word for it.
Now, if you're done with the cowardly evasion, how about answering the question?
wdgnas posted at 6:59 am on Sat, Aug 4, 2012.
Does traditional marriage include traditional divorce? If traditional marriage is so sacred, why is divorce allowed?
Engaged Voter posted at 4:59 pm on Sat, Aug 4, 2012.
Dang...nothing? Are all the Christian hypocrites really that spineless and cowardly?
Oh well. Once again, disappointed, but not really surprised.
wdgnas - I think you just hit upon the only REAL threat to marriage. ;)
VofReason posted at 12:36 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.
Now there are two great reasons to eat at Chik fil a: they have a good product and Dale will not be there as he is boycotting. Dale notes that Dan Cathy used inappropriate speech by saying he was in favor of marriage between a man and a woman. What part of that is inappropriate? This is the concept of marriage for human history- no?
VofReason posted at 12:46 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.
All of this reminds me that Liberalism is indeed a mental disorder. How does a guy saying it was his belief that he was in favor of traditional marriage translate into people thinking he is also then in favor of someone murdering homosexuals. That is nonsense. I too am in favor of traditional marriage. However, I also think that homosexuals are people- with rights- and should be treated similarly by the law like anyone else. A commenter above makes mention that Rahm Emanual was just stating his opinion too. Sadly someone needs point out that he is an elected official and when he comments, it carries a different weight. Don't miss the overwhelming support of Chik fila here and the specific connection of Emanual to Obama. It will impact November
Vog posted at 3:49 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.
"How does a guy saying it was his belief that he was in favor of traditional marriage translate into people thinking he is also then in favor of someone murdering homosexuals." - VofReason
These two things are separate occurrences. Cathy made his statement, which has been correctly identified as free speech. Bigoted speech, but it's fine.
What Chick-Fil-A has also done is donate millions of dollars to the WinShape Foundation. Between 2008 and 2010, it donated $28.4M to WinShape, as shown by that company's IRS filings (reported at http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/chick-fil-opponents-stage-sex-kiss/story?id=16917414).
You know what, I'll let Media Matters explain the rest: http://mediamatters.org/mobile/blog/2012/08/01/foxs-campaign-to-defend-chick-fil-a-from-its-an/189060
Again, I'm fine with Cathy saying whatever he wants. I'm also fine with choosing not to eat there. We live in a great country where you can believe in God, I can think your belief is ridiculous, and we can just agree to disagree. I have reality, you have conservative pundits. Everything's peachy...
...Until you throw in hate groups. Under no circumstances is it okay for one group to marginalize another based on identity. That goes against the spirit of the Bible, if not the letter (and I refuse to enter into quoting competitions with Biblethumpers), and it should be unacceptable to anyone with a shred of morality, empathy, or independent thought.
So to all sympathizers, please, go ahead and choke down your spite-burgers - along with whatever else your icons tell you to swallow.
samkat posted at 5:53 pm on Mon, Aug 6, 2012.
I have never eaten there and never plan to but I did shop at Lowes this morning and will continue to do so.
Engaged Voter posted at 3:36 pm on Tue, Aug 7, 2012.
"How does a guy saying it was his belief that he was in favor of traditional marriage translate into people thinking he is also then in favor of someone murdering homosexuals"
That's a really good question, VofReason...and since you are the only one trying to connect these two separate incidents, why don't you tell us?
"That is nonsense"
Indeed it is. So why did you post it?
" I too am in favor of traditional marriage."
Your ilk keeps saying this, but refuses to say where this great "tradition" comes from...a few mewlers tried to claim it was from the Bible, but the facts prove that is just not the case.
SO...out with it! Where does your "traditional" marriage come from?