15 February 2011

Your Favorite Chicken Is Not Anti-Gay

The gay rights agenda needs new PR.

They're behaving as if Chick-fil-A's traditional-family, faith-based views are new and scandalous. Yet, their over-reaction to this issue is not only typical of gay advocates (not typical of gays, just gay advocates) but is also conducted with the same bully mentality they claim is killing gay teens. Ultimately, the approach seems to be for gaining attention to themselves and provoking reactions from "pro-traditional family" and Christian outlets.

The Chick-fil-A controversy began when the LGBT blog Good as You (G.A.Y.) noticed Chick-fil-A's name on the Pennsylvania Family Institute’s Art of Marriage flier. G.A.Y. examined connections between Chick-fil-A, PFI, Ruth Institute’s Reel Challenge, Loveishere.com, the WinShape Foundation, and the National Organization for Marriage.

Meanwhile, Change.org editor Michael Jones created a petition demanding that Chick-fil-A pull sponsorship from "anti-gay" events. The petition has 25,777 signatures as February 15. Chick-fil-A's Facebook Page soon became a war zone of comments now over 10,000. Also, Student movements attempted to oust the chain from Indiana University and Florida Gulf Coast University.
 

Thus, those who preach tolerance, love, and pride are actually spewing the sort of rhetoric President Obama said should stop. Freedom of speech, religious liberty, and simple disagreement are being demonized.

Lake Lambert, author of Spirituality, Inc., told the Times regarding Chick-fil-A:
 
"They're going in a direction we haven't seen in faith-based businesses before. This is probably the next phase of evangelical Christianity's muscle flexing."

Really, Mr. Lambert? A Pennsylvania outlet - one store - provides some sandwiches for a traditional marriage seminar and it's "a direction" unseen before? Wow.

This article also mentions how this "outcry" has sparked similar boycotts and proposals from college students to remove the restaurant from campuses, and that these actions mimic the backlash Target received when it was discovered to be making contributions to "anti-gay politicians."


Michelle Malkin points out that the writer of the Times piece isn't an unbiased journalist:

Kim Severson is an openly gay advocate of same-sex marriage equality herself and the former vice-president of the identity politics-mongering National Gay and Lesbian Journalists Association.
In a biter op-ed on gay marriage laws not changing quickly enough, she asserted: "I don't want the crumbs. I want the whole cake." Severson has voiced complaints about her social and economic status status as an unwed lesbian with a partner and child in several media publications.
None of this was disclosed in Severson's advocacy journalism hit job on Chick-fil-A. But therein lies the unofficial motto of The Gray Lady: All the ideological conflicts of interest unfit to print.

An example of word-twisting is in this article on the advocacy website Change.org:

If an organization is anti-gay -- Focus on the Family, the National Organization for Marriage, the Pennsylvania Family Institute, Exodus International -- the chances that Chick-fil-A has either donated to them, or worked with them via Chick-fil-A's charitable branch is darn near 100 percent.

So, if an organization promotes traditional family or traditional marriage they are anti-gay. If that's true, what these advocacy groups are saying is that by promoting gay family and gay marriage they are anti-straight. So, is that acceptable? Is it permissible to be anti-heterosexual but not to be anti-gay?


I'd presume any gay advocacy group would deny they are against heteros. But they forget, pushing such extremes is a two-way street.


Instead of trying to have a discussion about the issue, the G.A.Y. blog would rather amass an archive of negative articles on Chick-fil-A and dissect statements from Dan Cathy, President and COO of Chick-fil-A, Inc.
When Cathy said that Chick-fil-A will not champion any political agendas on marriage and family, G.A.Y. concluded:


No, this political involvement claim is simply untrue. The annual marriage seminar is thoroughly tied to the political fight, even if couched under "strengthen/protect marriage" rhetoric.

Thus, G.A.Y. calls Cathy a liar because if one supports traditional family and marriage, one supports an anti-gay political agenda. Quite a stretch, G.A.Y.

Meanwhile, International pro-family group World Congress of Families defends Chick-fil-A in this article. The Congress’s managing director Larry Jacobs says of gay activists:

“They fear an open debate on their agenda and discussion of the importance of natural marriage, they invariably seek to silence dissenting voices," Jacobs said.
The pro-family leader maintains that Chick-fil-A’s strong support for heterosexual marriage is a worthwhile cause and should be not be controversial at all.
“I wish other corporations did half as much for the natural family, as Chick-fil-A, which promotes pro-family values through its WinShape Foundation, including helping orphans and sponsoring seminars that help people strengthen their marriages and become better parents," said Jacobs.
This Washington Times article points out, the Campus Ally Network, a pro-gay campus group, helped shut down the Chick-fil-A at Indian University last month. However, when Chancellor Una Mae Reck ordered a review, the suspension was terminated.

Yet, this article from NYU says Chick-fil-A financially supports bigotry and hate:

The restaurant itself has worked with Focus on the Family (a far-right Christian nonprofit) to distribute bible CDs in its children's meals; additionally, Chick-fil-A has even donated to Focus on the Family — an organization which publicly supports corporal punishment (that's right, let's hit our kids to make 'em learn) and opposes equal rights for women, as well as homosexuality, pornography, gambling and premarital sex. The far-right group also actively works to have creationism taught alongside evolution in science classrooms and has been publicly condemned by the Anti-Defamation League for comparing some of President Obama's policies to Nazism. 
Here's a slice of what liberal colleges can teach a young mind. Spankings are abuse. Far-right people think women should be in the kitchen having babies. Homosexuality, porn, gambling, and premarital sex are good without question. Creationism has no place in the classroom.

The writer of this opinion piece goes on to say:

I'm not calling for a boycott of Chick-fil-A, nor am I saying that they should be kicked off campus, which students at other universities are attempting to do. But at a university known for its social progressivism, students have the right to know where their dining money is going.

How convenient to claim Chick-fil-A is spreading bigotry and hate and demonize Focus on the Family but hide behind the statement that you're not calling for a boycott or booting of the chain.

What needs to happen is for people to quit wearing their emotions on their sleeves. To quit being so sensitive. This goes for both sides. Gays want everyone to justify their lifestyle and accept it by trying to force the issue. If you want respect, be respectable. Show the kind of love you want given to you, even if you don't receive it.

For those who disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, regardless of your faith, quit trying to force gays to change. Focus on trying to love them for who they are and where they are in life. Not what you want them to be, be doing, or not doing. Never underestimate the power of talking to someone. Words are powerful but they can mislead and confuse if used poorly.

The messages that should be clear:

Jesus loves you right now. No matter where you are. No matter what you're doing. No matter what you've done. No matter your choices. Jesus loves you. Following Him will always take you where you didn't plan or think is possible.

We as Christians should continue to promote love and love our neighbor as ourselves. Love the sinner and hate the sin takes maturity. It's easy to say but not to implement. Many Christians simply don't possess enough maturity to do this. Equally, many think their choices define who they are completely. One's choices are a mere slice of who they are. Disapproving of a sin or choice isn't hate. On the contrary, loving someone enough to care about their choices is just that - love. We can be such backwards little children sometimes.

Father, forgive us. For we know not what we do.


11 comments:

  1. As with all grassroots movements, the people behind them will always seize ANY opportunity to bring their cause into the conversation. Sure, this is a ridiculous and overblown reaction by gay rights advocates, but it is exactly what I'd expect from any grassroots movement. This is how they ALL operate. It's marketing. The point is to get free press for their cause.

    There was a similar uproar a few years ago when the National Down Syndrome Congress and the Special Olympics came out against the movie Tropic Thunder. In that case, those organizations were either too ignorant to see that the "retard" stereotype featured in the film was actually targeting the exploitative use of "retard" characters in movies to garner awards and such -OR- they chose to ignore that all together and simply use the film as a launching pad to get their cause into the press. In that case, as with the Chick-fil-A "anti-gay" controversy, I believe it to be the latter.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "So, if an organization promotes traditional family or traditional marriage they are anti-gay. If that's true, what these advocacy groups are saying is that by promoting gay family and gay marriage they are anti-straight. So, is that acceptable? Is it permissible to be anti-heterosexual but not to be anti-gay?"

    "Traditional family" and "Traditonal marriage" supporters are preventing Gay couples from getting married so it is anti-gay. While gay marriage does not stop straight people from getting married so it is NOT antt-straight. You are using some weird logic to justify your argument.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous, thanks for sharing your thoughts here. You're missing the point of my sound logic. You're specifically focused on gay marriage as the basis for some being anti-gay. Thus, if one disagrees with gay marriage, they must be anti-gay. That's foolish. When did it become the goal of every gay couple to get married? This isn't the goal of every hetero couple. Plus, I know gay couples who are friends and have no interest in being married.

    My references to anti-straight are directed at anyone who wishes to say that promoting traditional marriage is anti-gay. It's pro-traditional marriage. Your line of reasoning likely assumes that if one disagrees with another's choices, then they can't be friends or love one another. Wrong. Maturity is disagreeing with one or two things but still loving all the rest that makes up the person.

    ReplyDelete
  4. There is no sound logic, you are telling one group that they are not good enough to have everything you have because of something they do not choose. I did not state that it is goal of everyone to get married, the goal is to be allowed to if you so choose. We have already been shown that "Separate is not Equal" in Brown vs. the Board of Education. I am not assuming every gay person wants to get married, I sure don't plan on getting married any time soon. What I want is equality under the law. These pro-traditional marriage groups do not support equality or tollerance, they spread hate and lies about the LGBT community. I don't know how much you know about NOM or Focus on the Family, but they are anti-gay hate groups. They push for laws that discriminate against gays in the workplace, housing, and economics. Maturity is not only disagreeing with someone and still loving them, it is being able to understand that they themselves are not always right. It is the ability to take in the facts and make a sound conclution. History will show who is in the "right" here, hopefully in my lifetime.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "My references to anti-straight are directed at anyone who wishes to say that promoting traditional marriage is anti-gay."

    There are tons of straight people who don't promote traditional marriage as well. We are not anti-straight we are pro-equality, pro-facts, and anti-bigotry.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bryce, thanks for sharing your views. We've become a society that feels entitled to everything and anytime. So, my first thought is that no group is good enough to have everything. We don't deserve everything. Everyone shouldn't have a mansion, 2 cars, and a million dollars in the bank.

    I also disagree that homosexuality is a not a choice. While I'm attracted to women, I chose to date few women, chose not to have pre-marital sex, chose to get marriage, chose to be willing to be a parent and was blessed to become one, and choose to love my family daily. I could've chosen the opposite to all of these things.

    I understand what you want...freedom to get married whether you want to or not. That's not my definition of marriage and appears to not be how marriage is defined in the Bible. Could I and many others be misinterpreting the Scriptures? That's certainly possible. However, I've yet to see it. If one doesn't believe in God, Jesus Christ, or the Bible - there's bigger concerns than having the freedom to marry whom I choose.

    I disagree with your assessment of NOM and Focus on the Family. Admittedly, I'm more familiar with Focus and they are not a hate group. When a group is conducting verbal or physical violence against another, they deserve to be called a hate group. Westboro Baptist - that's a hate group.

    I agree with your comments on maturity. None of us will know everything about anything or anybody. We cannot, however, paint everything gray. Truth is black and white, yes or no, one or zero. Sometimes, however, we can cloud truth through our own perceptions.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wow there are so many errors in your statement, I'll have to address them one at a time.

    "We don't deserve everything"
    First off we are not asking for everything. We are asking for the same CIVIL rights as straight people you are comparing rights you already have to a mansion, 2 cars, and a million dollars. If you cannot see that civil rights and the things you stated are not equal then there is no point to this debate as you have a scewed view of the world.

    "I also disagree that homosexuality is a not a choice"
    Except that every major credited psychological and medical authority says otherwise. You do not choose who you are attracted to. At what point in your childhood did you choose to whom you are attracted? Studies have already shown that homosexuality is not a choice.

    I disagree with your assessment of NOM and Focus on the Family. Admittedly, I'm more familiar with Focus and they are not a hate group. When a group is conducting verbal or physical violence against another, they deserve to be called a hate group. Westboro Baptist - that's a hate group.

    Leaders of NOM and Focus on the Family have compared the gay community to pedophiles and criminals. They push laws that allow us to be fired for our sexual orientation and even get kicked out of places we rent. They push for school policies that ignore the existence of gay people and futher increase the hardships of LGBTQ teens. If anything the Phelps family church you speak of are less of a hate group because they don't activly seek legislation that discriminates a minority. They also arn't two faced, they say they hate us, while focus on the family and NOM say they love us while they push for legal discrimination. Telling someone you love them while you try and take away their civil rights is down right sick.

    I hope that one day you too can understand what the gay community goes through. To say that I choose to be gay, means that I choose to be discriminated against, that I choose to be bullied almost to the point of suicide by my peers, family, and church, that I choose to hide who I was until recently, that I choose to have no meaningful relationship up until now, that I choose to be afraid to walk in certain parts of town. If you cannot see the pain and suffering that groups like NOM and focus on the family inflict on my community, I hope that someday you will.

    -Bryce

    ReplyDelete
  8. I really enjoyed this article and the comments. Pain and suffering does cloud perception and when offended we can easily get carried away. Ppl can say racism doesn't exist anymore it does. The same for all the other isms that discriminate against a specific group.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous, thanks for your thoughts. I firmly believe that one's environment does condition their worldview. Plus, if one trusts in Christ, their worldview should align with His teachings. This can produce a battle over what's faith and what's flesh.

    Racism does exist. Birds of a feather tend to flock together. Always have and always will. The problem is when one flock chooses to think it's better than the other for whatever reason. This we must get beyond. Slowly but surely.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rick,

    I acknowledge that the fallout of the Chick-Fil-A created a lot of rhetoric and angry words. Ignoring this (inevitable) fallout for a moment though, the choice to support or help Traditional Marriage is a statement against gay marriage.

    Being against gay marriage within a church is one thing. Being against gay marriage as a state is a whole 'nother can of worms. Enacting laws that impose a Christian (Traditional is simply a PC terms here) worldview upon everyone in the state contradicts the freedom of religion right in the constitution. A top-down imposition of a Christian/Traditional belief is also contrary to the example of Christ.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ric,

    Thanks for leaving your comment. You're correct, supporting traditional marriage is a statement against gay marriage. My point is the supporting traditional marriage is not anti-gay.

    Also, since plenty of straight couples get married with other or no faiths, I disagree that religious freedoms have been violated. Congress shall make no law respecting the establish of religion or to prohibit its free exercise.

    Lastly, you evoke Christ's name as if His example isn't followed. Christ spoke of following the laws of the land and respect those in authority over you.

    Ultimately, marriage is both a state issue & a Biblical issue. For many, sadly, it's only a state issue. And voters have rejected the concept of gay marriage. The Bible doesn't support gay marriage. But not supporting gay marriage doesn't mean that gays aren't deserving of Christ's love. Gay marriage is being sought as a right and an entitlement. It simply is not. But Jesus loves us all...right where we are...but He loves us enough to not allow us to remain the same.

    ReplyDelete