Thursday, July 26, 2012

The Chick-fil-A Thing

Sarah pretty much sums it up for me:
As I tell my teen and early twenties sons, you act like two year olds, you get treated like two year olds – I have TONS of friends who don’t agree with me on gay marriage.  I have tons of friends who don’t agree with me on much of anything.  Hell, I have friends who are communist.  I think they need to learn history, but that doesn’t mean I think they’re bad people AS PEOPLE.

On gay marriage, some of my more violently opposed friends ARE gay.  Some oppose it because they think it will up the ante on getting in other people’s face in a vain attempt at getting the approval mommy and daddy denied.  Some oppose it because they think it will destroy the bohemian aspects of gay life.  And some oppose it because given our common law marriage laws and alimony suits, no gay guy will ever feel comfortable letting an unemployed friend crash on his sofa for a few months.

And yeah, I have a bunch of friends who oppose gay marriage for religious reasons.  It is not my business to get between my friends and their G-d and tell them what they can and can’t believe.  As PEOPLE they’re not bad, and they wouldn’t mistreat a gay person for being gay.  (THOSE people are bad as people.)

I even have friends who believe in gay conversion therapy.  Look – I have friends who believe in crystals, auras and that they’re aliens in human bodies too.  Other than the fact that these quirks have enormous entertainment value (sue me, I’m a writer) they are otherwise sensible people, if you ignore the blind spot.

Do I picket their houses?  Write endlessly about how evil they are?  Tell them they’re not allowed to believe what they do?  WHY?  WHY IN HELL WOULD I?  WHAT WOULD IT GET ME?

So, yeah, you knew it was coming, guys, what the hell is this thing with Chick-a-fil-a?  No, seriously.  Have you gone off your collective minds?
At least Boston's mayor is coming to his senses, if ever so little:
Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino repeated today that he doesn’t want Chick-fil-A in Boston, but he backed away from a threat to actively block the fast-food chain from setting up shop in the city.

“I can’t do that. That would be interference to his rights to go there,” Menino said, referring to company president Dan Cathy, who drew the mayor’s wrath by going public with his views against same-sex marriage.

The mayor added: “I make mistakes all the time. That’s a Menino-ism.”

The Herald first reported last week that Menino warned “it will be very difficult” for Chick-fil-A to obtain licenses for a restaurant in Boston.
That the threat was made in the first place, though, and that so many people applauded it, gives me great pause.

Update:  Clarity from Instapundit:
More thoughts over at Gay Patriot, plus a recognition that Republican politicians didn’t try to keep gay-friendly enterprises Disney and Home Depot out of their jurisdictions. No, but Republican politics isn’t based around always having someone to hate. For the left, it’s always Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, the Kochs. It doesn’t matter who the bogeyman is, but it’s essential that there be a bogeyman in order to ensure solidarity.
Update #2, 8/1/12:
TODAY’S UNBIASED JOURNALISM. Meanwhile, some firsthand reporting by nonjournalists here. And I should note that when I passed the Chick-Fil-A near my house, the line wound out onto Kingston Pike and took up a hundred yards or so of street, after 8 p.m.

I don’t think this can be interpreted as opposition to gay marriage, so much as a response to bullying. But I do think that the bullying has probably tainted the gay-marriage brand, which is too bad. The gay-marriage argument is already winning — there’s no need to engage in Rahm Emanuel-style attacks, and doing so merely invites pushback. And, frankly, I’m happy to live in a country where people’s response to bullying is to push back.  link
Hear hear.

7 comments:

Peter Reilly said...

I've got plenty of right wing friends who get a little nutty when Obama's name comes up. I really don't think either side is better than the other.

MikeAT said...

Get this, Bloomberg is against the boycott, http://politicker.com/2012/07/mayor-bloomberg-chick-fil-a-ban-not-going-to-happen-in-nyc/

He's probably glad to get the "cops go on strike" off the radar!

Darren said...

Obama's the president and is actually doing harmful things--much harder case to make with Palin, et. al.

Anonymous said...

"Republican politics isn’t based around always having someone to hate. . ."

Um, maybe not ideologically, maybe not at the very, very core of the original cornerstones of Republicanism, but you don't think a significant part of the party platform now is based on hate? And though I do think 'hate' is a strong word for this example, I think 'vilify' might be more accurate, 'ad hominem,' perhaps. Let's take the near unanimous anti-gay sentiments rampant in the GOP, since we're talking about Chick-Fil-A. I think a majority of those who identify with C-F-A are Republican, and i think there is a significant number of those Republicans, possibly even those who read this blog, who would rather see gays stripped of all fundamental Constitutional protections than possibly, maybe tread on one giant corporation's First Amendment rights.

I personally think they should open up a C-F-A right in San Francisco. Why not? Let the market decide how that restaurant will fail or succeed. However, to believe for a minute that the GOP is not a party that thrives on a platform of "hate," or "discrimination" is probably more accurate, then you may need to remove some personal biases and think again. Gays? Liberals?? Obama???

Darren said...

It's interesting that having the same opinion on gay marriage that Barack Obama had when he was elected is now considered "hate".

I agree that the *market* should decide if C-F-A opens in any jurisdiction, *not* the government.

And I disagree that the Republican platform is based on hate. It's based on so-called traditional family values. You can disagree with those values if you'd like, and it's obvious you do, but I have to go pretty far down the list of reasons for holding them before I get to "hate".

But that's all a side point, isn't it? We're not talking about party platforms here, we're talking about bogeymen. Come on, do you even know what the Koch Brothers do? But every liberal knows they're supposed to hate them. And Rush Limbaugh, too, close personal friend of Elton John that he is. Glenn Beck? FoxNews? Chick-fil-A? Can you identify a person or organization that the right attacks with such vehemence as the ones I've listed are?

Anonymous said...

Like I said, 'hate' may not be the right word, and I was specific in clarifying. But C-F-A has not been shy about their support of anti-gay causes:

Marriage & Family Legacy Fund: $994,199
Fellowship Of Christian Athletes: $480,000
National Christian Foundation: $240,000
Focus On The Family: $12,500
Eagle Forum: $5,000
Exodus International: $1,000
Family Research Council: $1,000

Call it what you will, it doesn't matter. But you would have to go to a completely different list to call it 'inclusion.' And that's my problem with this.

Well, one of many.

Darren said...

Then don't eat there. My concern is that some headline-grabbing politicians want to use the power of government to prohibit C-F-A from opening restaurants specifically because of their owner's views, and that isn't cool--at least, it shouldn't be cool--no matter what your political bent is.

Again, I don't see conservative politicians threatening Amazon, Apple, Disney, or Home Depot (all gay-friendly organizations). No, they welcome such jobs!

I don't think everything should be so damn political. Do you get rid of friends when you find out they voted for the candidate you didn't? Do we now need to vet everywhere we shop, to ensure the owners or shareholders have the "right" views? What's that say about diversity?