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
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 27th, 2012
10:41 am
Somebody is really obsessed with that Tennessee mosque . . .
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
10:43 am
The left doesn’t see the intolerance to Chickfila nor did many on the right see the intolerance they had toward the Muslim community in TN.
HOT AIR
July 27th, 2012
10:44 am
You have the right to be disgusting but not in front of my children. Open displays of affection are meant to be in your face and that will draw a response you won’t like. You are trying to incite confrontation and that is childish behavior.
sheepdawg1
July 27th, 2012
10:45 am
Everyone here shares at least one belief in common with Mr. Cathy. The right to an opinion. If you don’t believe and support him in that right, then you are a hypocrit. So which is it?
Bruno
July 27th, 2012
10:45 am
Don’t agree with Cathy, but I certainly support his right to have an opinion. I’ll still eat there; it’s delicious!
Voice of Reason–The truth is that no two people will ever agree on every position in life. Remembered this joke for you by Emo Philips:
“Once I saw a guy on a bridge about to jump. I said ‘Don’t do it!’ He said, ‘Nobody loves me.’ I said, ‘God loves you. Do you believe in God?’ He said ‘Yes.’ I said, ‘Are you a Christian or a Jew?’ He said ‘A Christian.’ I said, ‘Me too! Protestant or Catholic?’ He said, ‘Protestant.’ I said, ‘Me too! What denomination?’ He said, ‘Baptist.’ I said, ‘Me too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?’ He said ‘Northern Baptist.’ I said, ‘Me too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?’ He said, ‘Northern Conservative Baptist.’ I said, ‘Me too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?’ He said ‘Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region.’ I said, ‘Me too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879 or Northern Conservative Baptist Great lakes Region Council of 1912?’ He said, ‘Northern Conservative Baptist Great lakes Region Council of 1912.’
I said ‘Die, heretic!’ and pushed him over the edge.”
@@
July 27th, 2012
10:46 am
Rightwing Troll:
@@, you “evolved”???
Yeah…in hindsight, I’m thinking the ownership society was a huge mistake. Is that the evolving you were talk’n ’bout?
Kom Choke
July 27th, 2012
10:46 am
Chick – Fil – A has the best fast food any where. Just because you don’t like their opinion you don’t have to slander their food. Your dishonesty sux.
iggy
July 27th, 2012
10:47 am
“to organizations working to maintain discriminatory laws against the LGBT community.”
So you are stating CFA will not hire someone based on sexual orientation? No doubt the question “are you Hetrosexual or Homosexual or MetroSexual or A-sexual or Bi-Seuxual or Non-Sexual or Tri-Sexual” appears on this employment application.
Murphy Brown
July 27th, 2012
10:48 am
If you don’t agree with someone, whine, cry, rant, pout – take your marbles and go home. Next year you will try to be more adult like?
md
July 27th, 2012
10:49 am
” You can scream “Freedom” and what your rights are all day, but what the mayors of Boston and Chicago want to do is perfectly legal and there is not a darn thing anyone can do about it, including Chick-Fil-A”
No it’s not…..they can block businesses based on the laws on the books that apply to everyone, they can not arbitrarily decide they like one business more than another. They can try, but they would lose that in court all day long…………..
You would be correct only if CFA withheld service based on their beliefs…..and they do not.
HDB
July 27th, 2012
10:50 am
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin…
July 27th, 2012
9:51 am
“Easy, sport.
If you apply now, chances are the bank is going to want you to make the payments….”
I wouldn’t mind that IF I could get the LOAN!!
Remember…the banks and credit agencies already have things so screwed up, you don’t know what you NEED to get the loan……
Bruno
July 27th, 2012
10:51 am
I am a gay but I will still be eating sandwiches there because of – the BEST Sandwiches & SUPERIOR CUSTOMER SERVICE!
Deron–No doubt that CFA offers the best customer service in the fast food industry.
BTW–I like your attitude. The most effective cure for bigotry is familiarity. It’s much easier for people to hold bigoted attitudes if they don’t spend much time with the objects of their blind hatred. When we do spend a lot of time with others who are seemingly different from us, we ultimately realize that we have a lot more in common than we imagined. At that point, the harsh feelings usually go away.
Steve
July 27th, 2012
10:53 am
Here’s my list:
1. Freedom of speech – not in question here. The Cathy family gets to do and say what they want within the letter of the law. The result: others’ rights to react to their ignorance by answering. Call them… consequences.
2. Fascism: pumping millions of dollars into causes that have NOTHING to do with making chicken sandwiches (not from personal funds, mind you, but from corporate funds), but rather with the intent of denying rights given by our GOVERNMENT to a certain group of citizens. Wrapping it in an American flag and pinning a cross to it doesn’t change what it is.
3. Separation of church and state: If you subscribe to a set of faith-based beliefs, and actively seek to impose said set of beliefs through laws (which the last time I checked were the responsibilities of legislatures who are SUPPOSED to operate in the interest of ALL citizens, not just the Christian ones), that is a clear blurring of the lines.
4. Freedom of Religion: Prohibiting my right to marry and love whom I choose is NOT part of exercising YOUR religious freedom. Allowing me that right in no way compromises your religious freedom. Allowing me to love and marry the person of my choosing will require NOTHING on anyone’s part. You and yours will not be required to do anything except exercise the same tolerance that I exercise everyday in allowing you to love and marry whom you choose, and that is exercised by all people of differing faiths and political beliefs in this country.
5. Labels: branding someone a leftist liberal or a right wing nut is a convenient way of dismissing that which you don’t understand. It is an act of hardening your brain so you don’t have to deal with the facts of a situation. It also is a sign of black and white thinking – a clear marker of fear and stupidity. The world is NOT black and white. Retreating to a polar position is a convenient way of not having to wrestle with big and difficult things. It also helps the strong control the weak (see Fascism).
Homosexuality as sin: If it were so simple to “pray the gay away”, then there wouldn’t be a single gay person in this world. Try coming to grips with being gay in this culture. The conclusion every gay person has to come to: no matter how hard you pray, God does not find it necessary to fix what isn’t broken.
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
10:53 am
Bruno
Good point. Sad thing is that many on both sides are unwilling to do so. However as you mentioned, those who do usually find some common threads to get past the barriers.
Edward
July 27th, 2012
10:53 am
G.I. Joe: if your response involves contacting me or anyone else in any way through physical violence, then I hope you are prepared to meet my .45 that I am licensed to carry. I’m fully able and trained for self-protection and not afraid to do so. Keep your rugrats at home if you’re that scared.
So tell me, where is the outrage when Baptists boycott dozens and dozens of businesses that don’t bow down to their beliefs? Would you say blacks are being intolerant of the KKK? How about Jews being intolerant of neo-NAZIs? It really is humorous when the majority starts whining when a minority that they have persecuted for centuries begins to fight back. Sucks to be you. Get used to it because we are not going away, we’re not going to hide, we’re not going to shut up and sit down. You can either learn to live with us being out and open or you can sit home and whine and beat your chest like an ape on some anonymous forum.
Murphy Brown
July 27th, 2012
10:55 am
Sheeple – you are wrong. You don’t have to boycott everyone you disagree with. You are a fanatic if you do. Hypocrite? Know this. We don’t follow you sheeple over the cliff just because you think we should. You are a sheeple – not a leader.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 27th, 2012
10:56 am
“but rather with the intent of denying rights given by our GOVERNMENT”
Epic fail, Steve.
Rights are not given by government, but rather are safeguarded by government.
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
10:56 am
Edward
GI Joe and HOT AIR are just keyboard commandos. They will not be doing anything. They may not like it, but they will move along. Both will be going from Chickfila to Chickfila from open until close on that day in question to get a peep.
bwhahahahahahaha
Bruno
July 27th, 2012
11:00 am
A reading of the wingnut comments on this blog refutes all of your whining ,crying, and swooning about how bitter and angry liberals are… funny stuff…
@@, you “evolved”???
Impressive, I was unaware that conservatives could do so. Maybe there is hope for us all…
Am I the only one who sees the irony of someone who calls himself “Rightwing Troll” defending liberals against the charge that they are bitter and angry?? I’m guessing the guy doesn’t have any mirrors in his house.
Kyle Wingfield
July 27th, 2012
11:00 am
Up Up and Away: Actually, GI Joe and HOT AIR are the same person …
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
11:02 am
Kyle
Matz
July 27th, 2012
11:03 am
Murphy Brown,
You make a good point. It would be silly to boycott everyone I disagreed with. But this really isn’t about disagreeing with Mr. Cathy. It’s about his decision to put himself in the political media spotlight by going out of his way to say things publicly about people — many of them customers or friends and family of his customers — he doesn’t like, about something they are/do that’s absolutely none of his beeswax and has nothing to do with the selling of farmed chicken products. I’ve known for years I don’t particularly agree with his beliefs, but so what? I’d still get a salad now and then.
It seems that this time, he went out of his way to be divisive, and to encourage divisiveness among his customer base. It also appears he’s getting EXACTLY what he wants: a clientele who agrees with him, and the lack of icky lib’ruls darkening his sacred drive thrus.
We should congratulate him on the success of this PR move, and then we should EAT MORE KALE!
Oblama
July 27th, 2012
11:03 am
steve – Chick – Fil – A is a corporation but is PRIVATELY owned and is not listed on the stock market. They have the right to do what they want with THEIR money. You leftists think it’s your money but it isn’t…….. you have that Obama “redistribute the wealth” attitude tattooed on your brain. It’s their money. Do I have to explain the free enterprise system to you?
Bruno
July 27th, 2012
11:06 am
Prohibiting my right to marry and love whom I choose is NOT part of exercising YOUR religious freedom. Allowing me that right in no way compromises your religious freedom. Allowing me to love and marry the person of my choosing will require NOTHING on anyone’s part.
Steve–Not sure where you get your information, but marriage is not a right , it is a privilege in the same way that obtaining a driver’s license is a privilege, not a right. A subtle, but important difference. Privileges are subject to any number of conditions and qualifications and are not legally enforceable.
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
11:08 am
Oblama
Their right (and it is their right) to make the stand they did does not preclude them from any consequences, good or bad.
I agree that the statements on the mayors was stupid, but once again, they have the right to say what they did, but not the right to say there will be no consequences.
Bruno
July 27th, 2012
11:10 am
It seems that this time, he went out of his way to be divisive, and to encourage divisiveness among his customer base.
So, Matz, I take it that you won’t be voting for Obama, since he has predicated his entire Presidency on dividing our country into various factional groups?? With him, it’s all about Villains and Victims.
Matz
July 27th, 2012
11:11 am
Oblama: You leftists think it’s your money but it isn’t
Would you please tell us which leftist thinks Dan Cathy’s money is his or her money? I’ve only ever spent my own money at one of his establishments, and was not aware that I had the option to spend someone else’s instead. Could you elaborate?
Kyle Wingfield
July 27th, 2012
11:11 am
Up Up and Away @ 11:08: “they have the right to say what they did, but not the right to say there will be no consequences.”
From their fellow citizens, yes. From government, no. Otherwise, it isn’t really free speech, is it?
Oblama
July 27th, 2012
11:11 am
Edward – The threats of violence appear to be coming from you.
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
11:15 am
Kyle
We have words but not actions in terms of keeping them out of the city. Time will tell.
And like the TN mosque case were the local government and a percentage of the citizen attempted to keep the mosque from going forward, I doubt they can really keep Chickfila out.
Bruno
July 27th, 2012
11:16 am
Good point. Sad thing is that many on both sides are unwilling to do so. However as you mentioned, those who do usually find some common threads to get past the barriers.
As I mentioned earlier, Up, you and I probably have a lot in common even though we appear to be on opposite sides of the political fence. One difference we may have, though, is our level of politeness in dealing with religious phonies like “Obama is Over”. You win in that department.
I will also agree with you that there seems to be a critical difference in tone between Kyle’s Chick-fil-A column and his previous columns on the NYC mosque. It’s pretty obvious to me where his sympathies lie regarding those two situations, even though he ultimately does support the Constitution in both cases. Which, of course, is his prerogative as an opinion writer.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 27th, 2012
11:18 am
Bruno, I can buy into your “rights vs. privileges” argument, but only so far.
A privilege is certainly something government can control, such as a minimum age for someone to get their drivers license, for instance. But to use sexual orientation as a basis for allowing that privilege, when it is illegal to use it in every other instance, seems to be wrong. As such, the marriage piece seems closer to a right (although not absolute) than a privilege.
Kom Choke
July 27th, 2012
11:19 am
Edward you really need to calm down with the threats or you will be monitored for content. Just show a little decency and respect for others. We don’t want anyone kissing and groping in public – gay or strait.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 27th, 2012
11:22 am
“We don’t want anyone kissing and groping in public – gay or strait.”
I don’t know – two hot chicks kissing and groping . . . . (just kidding!)
HOT AIR
July 27th, 2012
11:24 am
Actually Kyle there are six of us sharing this computer and I can assure you we are not all the same but we are basically in agreement on this subject. We all live in this apartment complex and get together to blog, play poker, watch football, etc. Is there a rule against more than one person using the same computer? It’s fun responding to these nut cases on here and best of all is cheap entertainment. Some of us are poor college students going to UGA.
td
July 27th, 2012
11:25 am
“Separation of church and state: If you subscribe to a set of faith-based beliefs, and actively seek to impose said set of beliefs through laws (which the last time I checked were the responsibilities of legislatures who are SUPPOSED to operate in the interest of ALL citizens, not just the Christian ones), that is a clear blurring of the lines.”
Are not Religious beliefs really nothing more then a set of mores and values? Is it not true that secular humanist (like you) also have a set of mores and values? Is it not also true that laws reflect the communities sets of mores and values?
Why do you think your set of mores and values are more relevant, important and should supersede the mores and values of the majority of this country?
Surf Ant
July 27th, 2012
11:26 am
I will be having a chicken sandwhich every day next week. Stand by your beliefs CFLA
Bruno
July 27th, 2012
11:26 am
But to use sexual orientation as a basis for allowing that privilege, when it is illegal to use it in every other instance, seems to be wrong. As such, the marriage piece seems closer to a right (although not absolute) than a privilege.
Ti–On a personal level, I agree with you regarding the unfairness of discriminating against gay people in terms of granting the package of privileges that go along with the contract of marriage. However, that doesn’t magically transform a privilege into a right, no matter how much we wish it to be so. The reason marriage can never become a “right” is simple: we can’t force anyone else to marry us. As such, it is unenforceable.
Though it’s mot much consolation, gay people can pretty well secure most of the marriage privileges that heterosexual couples enjoy through legal methods, though it costs a few bucks to do so. With the exception of SSI survivorship benefits, of course.
Kyle Wingfield
July 27th, 2012
11:28 am
Bruno @ 11:16: Yes, my sympathies lie differently in the two cases. But as you note, ultimately, I support the Constitution in both cases. Isn’t that the only test that matters? Wouldn’t this be a pretty bizarre world if we were expected to examine each case by every other mildly analogous one, and express our sympathies — again, not reach conclusions but express sympathies — according to consistency with the other cases rather than what we believe in the present one?
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
11:29 am
Bruno
Of course this is a political blog, so political differences will arise. However when it comes to the individual I am more concerned with the consistency and not the hypocrisy displayed by both sides. Consistency on a certain level can be an insight to one’s character and integrity or even lack of those characteristics.
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
11:30 am
Kyle
Even though you replied to Bruno, that’s what I was attempting to convey yesterday. Maybe my wording was not as precise as it should have been. All in all, I still gave you a B minus.
Thank you
Bruno
July 27th, 2012
11:32 am
But to use sexual orientation as a basis for allowing that privilege
One other example of sex discrimination which comes to mind is the unequal access to locker rooms by reporters. I remember that years ago a judge forced male sports teams to allow access to their locker rooms by female reporters, yet I know of no corresponding female sports teams which were forced to open their doors to male reporters.
md
July 27th, 2012
11:39 am
I have to admit that hypocrisy can be found on both “sides” depending on the issue, but it comes from quite a few on the left on this issue. “Hollywood” has certainly weighed in against CFA, but was nowhere to be found prior to the President’s evolution…….
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
11:42 am
md
You must have been in an up roar when the town in TN attempted numerous legal and not so legal maneuvers to keep the mosque from being built.
Bruno
July 27th, 2012
11:43 am
Wouldn’t this be a pretty bizarre world if we were expected to examine each case by every other mildly analogous one, and express our sympathies — again, not reach conclusions but express sympathies — according to consistency with the other cases rather than what we believe in the present one?
Again, Kyle, the reason I am critical of you for your lack of support for the NYC mosque is due to the vital role that freedom of religion played in forming our country. There are no litmus tests contained in the non-Establishment clause, most certainly not “sensitivity” to protestors feelings. As a professed lover of the Constitution, I would have been more pleased to see you take the high road and offer to help build the foundation for that mosque, rather than using your bully pulpit to express your offense.
Perhaps you can help me understand where you are coming from a little better by explaining why you were offended by the proposed mosque?? Do you believe that all Muslims speak with one voice??
Up Up and Away
July 27th, 2012
11:44 am
md
I say that because some never cared about the actual actions that were taken in TN, yet are mad as heck about the stupid comments on those mayors.
Hopefully you do not fall into that category, but it certainly is displayed right here on this blog
Kyle Wingfield
July 27th, 2012
11:52 am
Bruno: And I applied no litmus tests. My conclusion was the same as yours. I think I’ve said, back then or in the past couple of days, all I have to say about it.
Steven
July 27th, 2012
1:30 pm
Tiberius, you are entitled to whatever you like, but if the county or city government does not agree with the zoning, the business will not be zoned. I am actually quite accurate. Several Wal-Marts have not been built in this area due to traffic or environmental concerns. By the same token, a club will not be zoned to be in a large, residential area. A strip club will not be zoned to go across a school. When was the last time you saw that sort of club near a school or church? You don’t see it, period. The government designates zoning and if they do not want a certain business there, the zoning will not happen. Even if the business gets zoned for a certain kind of business, a license or permit still needs to be obtained and yes, they can legally be turned down for the said permit or license for any variety of reasons that I have stated. The end game, discrimination on either side is unfair and ugly. I happen to be gay and will not eat at Chick-Fil-A, but I do not think it is fair for a city or county to do this, it just happens more times then you will ever imagine.
dj
July 27th, 2012
1:37 pm
Emanual said that chickfila’s values are not chicago’s values… yikes, is he trying to insult chickfila or compliment them? i consider that a compliment!
dj
July 27th, 2012
1:39 pm
has anyone seen the the crime there? geez.