The disturbing attacks on Chick-fil-A
There’s one part of Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy’s recent remarks that the left seems especially intent on disproving: the part where he said,
… we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles.
The rest of Cathy’s comments, if you haven’t already heard, concerned his opinion of the propriety of gay marriage from a biblical perspective. As retribution for his voicing this opinion, some liberals in Chicago and Boston want to deny Cathy and his company the right to operate in their cities.
This is disturbing on a number of levels, two in particular.
The first is the idea that local governments might deny a business license to a company because of the beliefs of its owners. In Chicago, Alderman Proco “Joe” Moreno threatened to do just that in his ward. (The city’s mayor, former Obama aide Rahm Emanuel, was more oblique, voicing sympathy with Moreno’s perspective but saying only that a Chick-fil-A restaurant in Chicago “would be a bad investment, since it would be empty.”)
As Elizabeth Scalia notes, this is how fascism works. As the far-from-right-wing Boston Globe editorialized, in response to Boston Mayor Thomas Menino’s statement that “Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston” and that the company shouldn’t be allowed to open a store near famed Faneuil Hall along the city’s — first irony alert! — Freedom Trail:
… which part of the First Amendment does Menino not understand? A business owner’s political or religious beliefs should not be a test for the worthiness of his or her application for a business license. … If the mayor of a conservative town tried to keep out gay-friendly Starbucks or Apple, it would be an outrage.
Menino has since backtracked on his threat. Moreno appears to be digging in, although some of his fellow aldermen take a different view.
The second is the way Menino and Moreno are twisting the definition of the word “discrimination” to apply it to Cathy’s objection to — second irony alert! — the redefinition of the word “marriage” to apply to same-sex couples.
“You can’t have a business in the City of Boston that discriminates against a population,” Menino told the Boston Herald to explain his desire to keep Chick-fil-A out of his city.
“If you are discriminating against a segment of the community, I don’t want you in the 1st Ward,” Moreno told the Chicago Tribune.
But I have yet to see the first shred of evidence Chick-fil-A is actually discriminating against gay couples. Menino and Moreno cited no reports that same-sex couples in a Chick-fil-A restaurant have been denied service or asked to leave, nor any instances of gay employees or job applicants being dismissed due to their sexual orientation. This is hardly comparable to a Southern lunch counter turning away black customers half a century ago.
Nor could anyone accurately describe Cathy or Chick-fil-A as influential political agitators who are enabling some sort of “discrimination.” While much was made back in March of the company’s donations to groups that promote the traditional definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman, the company is practically silent in terms of donations to politicians and political organizations. According to the Sunlight Foundation, the sum total of all political donations by the company, its employees and its PAC, between 1989 and 2012, was just $177,410 — about $7,400 a year. And even this meager spending does not appear to have been tied to the issue of gay marriage.
If a mere difference of opinion with elected officials is enough to qualify as “discrimination,” then in some way or another virtually every employer would be, as Cathy put it in the interview that sparked this episode, guilty as charged. Civil society itself would be fractured irretrievably. As Scalia asked,
… where does the “punishment” spiral stop? The press declares Chick-fil-A “homophobic” (a dishonest word) and then the local governments start penalizing them for it; Jim Henson’s outfit stomps off. What next? Will people against gay marriage start boycotting Muppet stuff? Pyres of Elmo in support of Chick-fil-A’s right to be itself?
We’re already seeing a preliminary version of this: Activists are encouraging same-sex couples to visit Chick-fil-A stores next Friday for a “National Same-Sex Kiss Day”; former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is encouraging fellow social conservatives to “buycott” the company by patronizing its restaurants en masse next Wednesday.
Does anyone see this thing headed toward reconciliation?
The idea at the foundation of our freedom of speech is often said to have been summarized by the French philosopher Voltaire: “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” It’s a long way from Voltaire’s France to Menino’s Boston and Moreno’s Chicago, and the direction is a very disheartening one.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
474 comments Add your comment
CDC
July 26th, 2012
3:38 pm
Chik-Fil-A also gave MILLIONS of dollars to NOM in order to fight the legalization of gay marriage. They have admitted as much Kyle. Gay Americans, their friends and families have every right to be offended. And if people want to support this kind of bigotry with their wallets, more power to them, but for them to hide behind Christ while doing it is vulgar.
DannyX
July 26th, 2012
3:39 pm
Since Republicans are so devoted to the Bible maybe they should try to get rich people to end their evil ways.
“Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
Mr Cathy are you rich?
Jose
July 26th, 2012
3:39 pm
ATTENTION ALL TRUE SOUTHERNERS
we have a great opportunity with this CRISIS!!!!!!!!
all these liberals in the Souht that believe in GOVERNMENT CONTROL, GAY MARRIAGE, HIGH TAXES, HIGH SPEED RAIL, etc………….WHY DON’T WE PAY FOR THEM TO MOVE……….. to Chicago, NYC and California so they can LIVE with those that THINK and BELIEVE as they do
its a WIN WIN
they get to live with a GOVERNMENT that MIRRORS their BELIEFS
we don’t have to put up with them anymore
Mark
July 26th, 2012
3:40 pm
Freedom of expression is costly. Hopefully Cathy realizes this now!
Kyle Wingfield
July 26th, 2012
3:40 pm
DannyX @ 3:31: I posted a link to what I wrote at the time. Here’s the short version:
I never said NYC should deny the permit. I said it was unwise for elected officials to belittle the Americans who were criticizing the plans for the mosque; the analogous point in this scenario would be that it’d be unwise for elected officials to belittle the Americans who are criticizing Dan Cathy, which would also be true. I also said that while it was the mosque-builders’ constitutional right to build a mosque — albeit subject to the usual restrictions a local jurisdiction might place on it — that doesn’t mean it would be wise for them to do so. I might similarly advise Chick-fil-A that now would not be the best time to press forward into places where its new restaurants might be boycotted.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 26th, 2012
3:40 pm
The drama queens on the left are numerous today.
Bruno
July 26th, 2012
3:40 pm
Special for Up:
http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/2010/08/18/europe-shows-the-result-of-total-insistence-on-tolerance/#comment-27967
Bruno
August 18th, 2010
8:38 pm
“And they will conclude that even in America, with a prouder history of assimilation and inclusiveness than Europe has, it would be prudent to meet this outrage with something other than finger-wagging.”
Kyle–I gotta say, you just blew whatever good will you had built up over the last few days with this conservative. The only “solution” to your “concerns” would be to sanction discrimination against a particular group based solely upon their religious affiliation. And to accomplish that, you will need to overturn a key part of our Constitution, a part that I hold near and dear as a non-Christian.
In case you forgot, the non-Establishment clause was created in response to the oppressiveness that sanctioned discrimination in Europe had created in the Middle Ages. Your “solution” is far worse than the problem, and you should know that.
Scott Fresno
July 26th, 2012
3:41 pm
I do not think it is appropriate for a city to deny a business a license based solely on what the owner says about his beliefs. I do think it is perfectly okay, however, for people who disagree with those beliefs or find them offensive to voice their own opinions and boycott his business.
Jose
July 26th, 2012
3:41 pm
and PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE gave millions to the democratic party but not the republicans
they should be ashamed of themselves
in fact they should not be allowed to write policies
Aquagirl
July 26th, 2012
3:41 pm
This is part of the Gay Agenda. Bait the Chicken guy into foam-at-the-mouth statements, watch social conservatives eat more fast food in support of Chicken guy. Social conservative voting pool decreases, because who can vote from the ICU after a triple bypass?
Brilliant!
CDC
July 26th, 2012
3:42 pm
Did you have a problem with people and government leaders in Murfreesboro TN and NYC protesting Mosques being built in those cities Kyle? Bet not…
CDC
July 26th, 2012
3:43 pm
I love you Aquagirl.
detritusUSA
July 26th, 2012
3:43 pm
My problem with Mr Catheys remarks don’t really involve implied opposition to gay marriage only. He also said that they(meaning his family) were all married to their first wives and on biblical principles. That’s fine with me, however I refuse to refer to men and women in their second marriages as adulterers. (Matt 5: 31-32; Mark 10: 2-12)
I respect your religious beliefs, don’t publicly disrespect mine. Just follow the commandment to “love your neighbor” and we’ll all get along just fine.
Up Up and Away
July 26th, 2012
3:44 pm
Bruno
I didn’t deny what you said in your earlier post about speaking out on that issue.
Not sure if you read my reply to Kyle but while being somewhat consistent, he knows that that he was easy on his working about the mosque but came with “fascism” today.
Either way, I gave him a B minus
Kyle Wingfield
July 26th, 2012
3:44 pm
Up Up and Away @ 3:38: Go look up the definition of “fascism” and get back to me. I’m not being snarky: “Fascism” has a specific definition with a business/economic component that is separate from, say, authoritarian or totalitarian, and which didn’t apply to the question of the mosque.
Big R
July 26th, 2012
3:45 pm
You liberals are the real bigots in every sense of the word. YOU are the ones intolerant of other people’s views, YOU are the ones intolerant of other peoples beliefs, YOU are the ones always trying to condemn people for what there are not. I read comment after comment in a myriad of publications only to see YOU spewing hate towards others that don’t agree with you. You never address the issues because you can’t argue the truth, (Lev. 18:22, Romans 1:26–28)
Jason
July 26th, 2012
3:46 pm
What is this “traditional marriage” definition that christianists like to use as a weapon? Traditionally, 10,000 years ago, a wife was whichever the lead caveman wanted right then. 4000 years ago, it was between a man and a woman who was a virgin on her wedding date (others would be stoned to death). 3000 years ago, a wife was one of King David’s harem of wives and concubines. 1000 years ago, it was whichever young lass the viking was able to kidnap. 100 years ago, it was Mitt Romney’s great grandfather, and his great-grandmother, and his other great-grandmother, and his other great-grandmother, and his other great-grandmother. 50 years ago, it was between a white man and a white woman. In Appalachia, it’s between a man and his 12 year old sister. Stop with this fake story about “traditional marriage has always been defined exactly as it was 40 years ago.”
Scott Fresno
July 26th, 2012
3:46 pm
“I might similarly advise Chick-fil-A that now would not be the best time to press forward into places where its new restaurants might be boycotted.”
That doesn’t sound too different from what Rahm Emanuel said.
Brain
July 26th, 2012
3:47 pm
I seldom agree with you, Kyle, but I do on this one. I’m disgusted that Dan Cathy actually believes we risk God’s wrath based upon Dan’s perverted interpretation of an allegorical text, but he has the right to open his stores anywhere. If folks want to make a political statement about his views, then they have the right to eat somewhere else.
One other thing: as much as I disagree with Dan Cathy, it takes courage to risk what he did to express his firmly held belief. On that, I applaud him…..Furthermore, in spite of his position on this, he and the rest of the Cathy clan have done more to leave the world a much better place than almost any family I know.
Follow the Money
July 26th, 2012
3:47 pm
Jose
July 26th, 2012
3:39 pm
ATTENTION ALL TRUE SOUTHERNERS
we have a great opportunity with this CRISIS!!!!!!!!
Will you be wearing your hood during this great roundup? Better take it to the dry cleaners, so you can have in time for the weekend.
Aquagirl
July 26th, 2012
3:47 pm
I love you Aquagirl.
Hopefully not in a gay sort of way, because then we’ll both be forever denied peach milkshakes and waffle fries.
Old Farmer
July 26th, 2012
3:48 pm
Sure Mr. Cathy has the right to speak out. But so do the mayors of Chicago and Boston. The ability to do business in a location is a privilege, not a right. Let CFA challenge it in the courts and let the court decide and I’ll abide by that.
It’s not only Mr. Cathy who has the right to express his opinion and act on it. Besides that, the mayors of Chicago and Boston are accountable to the voters. If the voters don’t like what the mayors did, they can throw them out.
Kyle Wingfield
July 26th, 2012
3:48 pm
Bruno @ 3:40: And what “solution” are you referring to? All I said was that it was unwise for elected leaders to deride the people objecting to the mosque. That didn’t mean then, and doesn’t mean now, they had to acquiesce to what those objectors wanted.
Native Atlantan
July 26th, 2012
3:48 pm
Flaming liberal here but happen to agree with Kyle on this one. As a gay man in a 25+ year relationship, I have no issue with Cathy and his beliefs. In fact, you’d have to live under a rock to not know where he stands on issues like this. His company doesn’t discriminate against me and I happen to love Chik-fil-a, when I’m in the mood for fast food. I actually will give Cathy props for standing up for what his beliefs……more of us should do the same.
Misty Fyed
July 26th, 2012
3:48 pm
Typical libs. The party that demands inclusion and tolerance has neither. One person voices an opinion that is contrary to their liberal mindset and they would deprive 100s of new jobs in a city. Mind you there is not a shred of evidence that the company ever actually discriminated against a single customer nor employee but how dare he have an opinion. Democrats…the party of hate.
BlueinRed
July 26th, 2012
3:49 pm
@BigR – and not every Christian believes in your viewpoint on the bible either.
Up Up and Away
July 26th, 2012
3:49 pm
Kyle
I gave you credit, however you were very easy on the wording compared to today.
Spin that all you like, but I read the article you posted in your replay as well as the one that was linked within that article. You were not as harsh as you were today. Your choice and you can play the semantics game all you like, but admit at least admit it.
Kyle Wingfield
July 26th, 2012
3:49 pm
Scott Fresno @ 3:46: You’re right — and I alluded to that in the OP. But it’s qualitatively different from what Menino and Moreno said.
Obama Is Wrong
July 26th, 2012
3:51 pm
Let me tell you what kind of “bigot” Dan Cathey is. I support a charity called the Kenya Project whereby kids in Kenya, many without parents, are given a school and clean, safe place to stay. When Dan Cathy was approached about supporting this charity, he took out his checkbook and wrote a $10,000 check on the spot. He has continued to support the charity with kitchen equipment, additional funds, and many Chik-fil-A managers have been on mission trips to the school.
As a Christian, I believe you have to see that the Bible tells us that homosexuality is sinful, abdominable behavior. I also believe as a Christian that we are all sinners. Thus, I take the approach to Hate the Sin, but love the Sinner. I have gay friends and do business with some of them. However, I believe that gay marriage is sinful and will never support it. I believe other Christians take a similar approach. If that makes us bigots okay, I’ll accept that as I believe the laws of God trumpth those of man any day.
Misty Fyed
July 26th, 2012
3:53 pm
In a economy such as this…screw chicago and boston. I’m sure CFA will cry all the way to the bank…I just want to hear the mayors of those cities explain to the unemployed how they had a major company who wanted to bring jobs to their city but he turned them down because their owner supports traditional marriage. You can’t pay your bills…but at least we stand on principle.
Jefferson
July 26th, 2012
3:53 pm
Politicians don’t like liquor stores by churches, day care by Penn St., porn shops by schools. Up north, chicken stands — What’s next ?
Rick
July 26th, 2012
3:55 pm
“Separate but Equal” was eventually overturned by the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court Case in 1954. Shamefully, it was not very long ago.
Once marriage equality is officially declared an inherent right, we can put this ugly period in American history to bed (please excuse the bad pun). Cathy’s comments just prove certain sectors of the population are generally slow and resistant to change. Welcome to the south.
Up Up and Away
July 26th, 2012
3:55 pm
Obama is wrong
How is that Leviticus working out for you?
@@
July 26th, 2012
3:55 pm
Question for the libs.
If, in the not too distant future, Dan Cathy professed to having “evolved” on the issue of gay marriage, would he be your BFF?
schnirt
detritusUSA
July 26th, 2012
3:55 pm
Hate the sin, love the sinner is an oxymoron!
Jose
July 26th, 2012
3:56 pm
NATIVE ATLANTAN
could it be that you understand that no matter what Cathy believes, that this country is moving forward in accepting gay marriage and that the younger generations that take power do not hold the same beliefs as those of the boomers and the one following it?
dj
July 26th, 2012
3:56 pm
FREEDOM OF SPEECH – does anyone understand what it means? Really? Who cares what the owners believe. If you like the chicken – buy their chicken! Anyone who feels that Chick fila should not be allowed to open restaurants is UNAMERICAN. Grow up, read the constitution, and celebrate the fact that we can all live together and not always have to agree!
Jose
July 26th, 2012
3:57 pm
maybe RAHM should give back the money he stole from americans when he fleeced us when running Freddie Mac
Jefferson
July 26th, 2012
3:59 pm
Its in him and its got to come out.
Party lines, folks.
dc
July 26th, 2012
3:59 pm
as usual, the supposedly tolerant are in fact the most intolerant folks of all. what a bunch of hypocrites
Bruno
July 26th, 2012
3:59 pm
Up: Not sure if you read my reply to Kyle but while being somewhat consistent, he knows that that he was easy on his working about the mosque but came with “fascism” today.
Kyle: And what “solution” are you referring to? All I said was that it was unwise for elected leaders to deride the people objecting to the mosque. That didn’t mean then, and doesn’t mean now, they had to acquiesce to what those objectors wanted.
Kyle–I’m not sure if you’re trying to rewrite your column from Aug 18, 2010, but you characterized the proposed NY mosque as being “offensive”, and strongly suggested that the Cordoba group withdraw their plans to build a mosque out of concerns for “sensitivity”. You then went on to build an argument that tolerance for Muslims in Europe has led to intolerance on the part of the citizens there.
It’s really incumbent upon you to explain what you meant by saying “it would be prudent to meet this outrage with something other than finger-wagging.” I took this to mean that you supported denying a permit for the mosque. Here’s your chance to clarify your statements.
In advance of your clarification, I have to side with Up on this one. you seem to have an inconsistency in your positions. Tolerance for the Cathy’s has to be equaled for tolerance for others we don’t necessarily agree with if our Constitution is to mean anything.
Tealiban Party
July 26th, 2012
3:59 pm
Big R
July 26th, 2012
3:45 pm
You liberals are the real bigots…. (Lev. 18:22, Romans 1:26–28)
And in Numbers 11:31-34, God sent a plague because the Isrealites ate too much quail. Hope he doesn’t feel the same way about chicken.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 26th, 2012
4:00 pm
I go to a restaurant for food.
I go to a bar for drink.
I go to a repair shop to have my car fixed.
I don’t give a damn what the owners of each believe in, as long as they do a good job at their jobs.
There are too many people in the business of other people’s business.
dj
July 26th, 2012
4:01 pm
In total agreement with you, DC. You nailed it.
Bruno
July 26th, 2012
4:01 pm
Here’s Kyle’s column from Aug 18, 2010. Maybe others here are reading something different from what I saw.
http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/2010/08/18/europe-shows-the-result-of-total-insistence-on-tolerance/?cp=10
@@
July 26th, 2012
4:01 pm
Without question, Cathy votes Democrat. He resides in Clayton County. No Republicans candidates here.
SayWhat
July 26th, 2012
4:06 pm
Why is standing on what you believe ignorance and bigotry? What is ignorant about believing marriage is intended for a man and a woman? Why is believing something is wrong bigotry? This isn’t about ignorance and bigotry. It’s about believing something and standing for it, now matter which way the current trend blows. Why should all this be shoved down the throats of those of us who wish to hold on to our core values?
Native Atlantan
July 26th, 2012
4:06 pm
@Jose — I believe all Americans are evolving in their collective beliefs…..
Thomas Heyward Jr.
July 26th, 2012
4:07 pm
“As Elizabeth Scalia notes, this is how fascism works.”
.
See RomneyCare for a BETTER example of Fascism.
.
Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
@@
July 26th, 2012
4:08 pm
Actually, in their actions against Chic-fil-A, the gay activists are blurring the definition of discrimination.
Gays can work at Chic-fil-A, they can eat at Chick-fil-A…they just can’t get married at Chick-fil-A.