Not quite a month after Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy expressed his opposition to same-sex marriage, former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee took issue with the ensuing backlash (read: constitutionally protected speech of those who disagreed with Cathy), saying he supports the "biblical definition of the family unit." He came up with a Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day which was marked by many a person showing up at their local Chick-fil-A on August 1st to show their support.
Some, however, argue their support isn't about what Dan Cathy said or gay marriage at all. Rather, they insist, it is about supporting everyone's right to free speech. This sounds good on the surface, but when we dig past the chicken fat we find a foul and ambiguous bit that the "free speech supporters" are trying to hide from the health inspector, not the least of which is the wholly unconstitutional notion that free speech means no backlash, no opposition and you guys over there just shut up, you stupid heads.
I'm all about free speech, especially the ugliest of it because it's like our own country-wide GPS system for locating bigots, people who think liver tastes good and those who are trying to bring back Saved By the Bell. I wholeheartedly support the constitutional right of the CEO of Chick-fil-A to express his opinions and I am adamantly opposed to the notion that any person or municipality could block a lawful, legitimate business from opening its doors or shuttering a business just because of something the owner or operator said about others.
The consumer has and always will decide who stays in business and who doesn't. Screwing around with the market for this particular reason sets a very bad precedent. At a different time, ours would be a very different world where the pro-gay marriage Microsoft would never have gotten off the ground. Leaving the consumer alone to decide who and what s/he will patronize is how it should be in this country as the act of patronizing is itself a form of free speech. I would not, however, choose a Chic-fil-A location to express my support of free speech.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Igor
Just offhand, I'd say that the Chik-fil-A company and it's supporters have no interest whatever in Free Speech. It follows along with being antagonistic to other constitutional protections, such as gays getting equal protection under the marriage laws because of the 14th.
2 - Mel Glid
I am in complete agreement with the what you wrote in regards to the right to speak out and not be punished by the government. As for Jim Henson and WBC , they too have the same rights. I may disagree with someone's beliefs or politics, but I stood up this particular time due to the governor and mayors press conferences! What they specifically said, and the purview they overstepped. For me, it was the last straw. I am not filled with hate, nor homophobic because I have a different point of view or religious belief. For God's sake, my G.P. was a lesbian and practiced with her partner! I say was, meaning she no longer practices, her partner was dying and she closed practice. What many showed support for and what drove the spontaneity was the constant labeling, creation and redefinition of words, the assault by governmental officials, and the nastiness of celebrity's spewing truly hateful comments..." ...anyone who eat CFA should get Cancer..." or Christian dogma or principles are not welcome here!
Radical : those whom believe in Constitutional principles and fiscal responsibility
Hate : the difference of opinion, support there of, or in opposition to what the radical Left deems appropriate.
Gay : a homosexual or lesbian, not an extremely happy, jubilant emotion.
Homophobia : one who disagrees with "gay" marriage, wishes to keep matrimony a sacrament and possibly foresees clergy being compelled to marry same sex individuals based on the current political climate of a split minority.
The silent majority is no longer being silent anymore. They are tired of constantly being assaulted in the news media, theaters, magazines, etc. The only religion right now that is being systematically targeted in the past 50+ years , has been Christianity. Islam is not being attacked during Ramadan, Judaism is not attacked during Passover, Yom Kippur or Rosh Hashana. Nobody is attacking Atheists in the media or through the dramatic arts. People are tired of constantly being targeted, bullied, and ridiculed. There are so many examples of this it cannot be listed here. That is just the religious majority, the Conservative majority is also fed up with being a target as well. An example of a huge bias is the way the T.E.A. Party was defined and portrayed v.s. Occupy Wall Street. Just using the ridiculous statements spoken by the former Speaker Of The House is a simple example of the propagandizing between the two. The media never ever portrayed the T.E.A. party in any positive manner; while extreme bias in omission was shown with the Occupy behavior. Examples of multiple rapes, small businesses being harmed due to their behavior. Let alone filth, drugs, public sex, masturbation, defecation, and fecal bombs. The T.E.A. Party was always, and still is portrayed as "possibly" may become violent, by government officials, while Occupy , who W A S violent at the worst , and horribly irresponsible at least was not covered in the repetitive fashion as the aforementioned grass roots movement.
What the media and arts did to Mrs. Palin and her family was abominable. Michelle Bachman was ridiculed the whole time she was campaigning and was called horrible sexually explicit names, yet no condemnation or apologies. Palin was harassed, stalked and hacked like no man or woman prior to her, even when she no longer was running! She was made by the Left. If they hadn't followed, stalked and targeted her, she would have stayed in Alaska and finished out her term. She is HUGE now that her name has been kept out there, and she has capitalized on the lemons that were handed her. No one ever went after Hillary like these two gals and they never went after her daughter, oh no that would be u n f a i r . I can hear the press squealing if the media went after Condaleeza Rice the way she was portrayed in the Post ( political cartoons ) or Justice Thomas ,for that mater. The stereo typing was a daily event. But today if they were liberal, it would be raaaaacism! I could again go on, but I won't belabor the point. I hope this gives you but an inkling of an insight into the thought process of mainstream individuals. Chik Fil A was a conduit, and a straw that loaded the camel's back a bit too much. Just like Obama-care was the straw which created the T.E.A. Party. That sir, is why Chik-Fil-A was swamped all across the country!
3 - Mel Glid
Excuse me, * mam' not sir.
4 - Baronius
I'm really not getting the Muppets reference. Were mayors refusing to allow the movie to play in their cities?
5 - Sweetums
The Muppets reference is clear to me. Use the link, though it might not help in your case
6 - Sweetums
and Mel appears to not get around much, if he thinks Christians and Conservatives are the only people attacked. Mel, feel free to get information from other sources than where you have been
7 - Les Slater
I agree with the gist of what Mel is saying even though I disagree with at least some of the specifics.
8 - Dan
Not sure what Diana is worked up about here, it seems perfectly natural that free speech supporters, of any stripe, would be more motivated to act in defense of speech they agree with. Although there could and should be some support from neutral observers when the persecution is coming from State officials attempting to unconstitutionally punish viewpoints they disagree with, as was the case here.
9 - Baronius
Sweetums - I watched the video. Those were some pretty stupid people talking. It had nothing to do with government intervention against free speech, though.
10 - Dr Dreadful
I can't exactly boycott Chik-Fil-A (or however the heck you spell it) because the mere name of the chain conjures up such a revolting image in my mind that I've never been tempted to stray near one.
11 - Igor
It seems that Chick-fil-a is experiencing a surge in business as conservatives rush to their support by buying more food.
You don't suppose This was all a ruse to pump up business, do you?
12 - Doug Hunter
The last thing southern conservatives need is more food.
It's an interesting phase in social discourse. The outrage and open hostility at Cathy's fairly inocuous statement in support of 'traditional marriage' (however that is defined) is an effective tool preventing other people from openly expressing the same ideas. This will contribute nicely to the decline in opposition to gay marriage. These are the way ideas grow and die in society.
Homosexuality is no more right or wrong than bigamy, prostitustion, or pedophilia... there are functional societies today and throughout history that allow or disallow each of these. Morality, especially apt when applied to sexuality, is fairly arbitrary... the biggest argument in opposition seems to be that some find it 'gross' or 'offensive'. Don't you just get a nasty knot in your stomach when you think of what Jerry Sandusky did to those boys? That's the same feeling others get when they think of homosexuality. Now the argument will be made that it's 'traumatic', the same lame argument can be applied to expain suicide rates among homosexual youth. The reality is it's not traumatic unless society tells you it is. There are societies where boy-man sex is a rite of passage, in some a requirement. To them it's normal, just another expression of love and companionship (and who can be against that, right).
13 - Igor
Doug continues the bogus equivalence of homosexuality with pederasty. Some people never tire of that.
14 - Igor
The advertising campaign is working, judging by the crowd at the local CFA. Brilliant. The fatty fast food fans are easy to identify by their obesity.
15 - Baronius
Well, I wouldn't eat the waffle fries, but their grilled chicken sandwich has fewer calories and half the fat of McDonalds' or Wendys' equivalent.
16 - Dr Dreadful
The reality is it's not traumatic unless society tells you it is.
No, Doug, I think that if you're a young boy the experience of being raped by an adult man is pretty fucking traumatic regardless of what society you're living in.
17 - Doug Hunter
#16
Do you speak from personal experience? Even if so, you hail from a society where it is utterly taboo. If like in others, it was taught to you as a vital part of your growth and development, something to look forward to, what frame of reference would you have for it to be "traumatic"? There's nothing inherently painful or damaging about putting a penis in your mouth, our brain is not prewired to think that disgusting... that is a learned response. In our society this is very feminizing and a threat to our manhood, in others it is what makes you masculine.
18 - Doug Hunter
#13
I don't know what that means. Obviously, they're both both sexual practices. I never stated or implied they're both the same thing. You'll have to clarify for me to have an appropriate response.
19 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus
"Homosexuality is no more right or wrong than bigamy, prostitustion, or pedophilia"
Did you just really include Pedophilia in that sentence?! So, you think a young boy or girl has the intelligence to understand consent or the full amount of what their actions cost? No fucking way!
These kids are being exploited due to their inability to understand the situation at hand. Jerry Sandusky is no different than the priests. They use the power & influence they have for their own sick & twisted gain!
20 - Glenn Contrarian
Doug -
I assume you're including pedophilia in that list because there are and were cultures that accepted such...but that fact does NOT make such a practice in any way equivalent to prostitution or homosexuality.
Why? There were cultures where ritual mutilation, torture and/or human sacrifice were accepted, where child soldiers were accepted. There's cultures now where women's genitals are mutilated so they won't feel pleasure during sex. And there there have been those where belonging to a certain ethnic group was a death sentence. Does that mean that such are in any way (moral or otherwise) equivalent to the American cultural mores of today? Of course not.
The existence of a certain practice in a culture does not make that practice right or acceptable. You should know better, Doug.
21 - roger nowosielski
I think Doug makes a valid anthropological point: the realities we acknowledge and respond to are social constructions.
22 - Glenn Contrarian
Roger -
If we depend on what you consider a purely anthropological point, then please address what I said in comment #20.
23 - Brian aka Guppusmaximus
" the realities we acknowledge and respond to are social constructions."
Well then, Roger, if that is in fact the truth then you can no longer bring up any discussion about a God or Creator because all we have for proof of that are social constructs. Keeping Doug's "point" in mind, how does that address evolution & the progression of intelligence in mankind? If we never figure out anything beyond what society tells us then how do you explain that computer in front of you?!
I'll tell you how... Dave's idea is utter bullsh!t!!
24 - Glenn Contrarian
Brian -
I'll tell you how... Dave's idea is utter bullsh!t!!
Um, Don't you mean "Doug's idea"?
25 - roger nowosielski
@23
For an atheist, Brian, you're a fundamentalist.
Think about that!