How will your beliefs be recognized by the new morality police?


For those not aware, the CEO of Chick-fil-a, Dan Cathy, came out making the following statement regarding his beliefs:

“We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that. We intend to stay the course. We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles."

This stance has of course drawn much criticism.  It has also initiated a boycott of the restaurant itself.  Most recently, Kermit the frog and Miss Piggy came out to stand against Chick-fil-a.  While at the same time it is not reflective of the business policy of Chick-fil-a.

I have no problem with this boycott.  In fact, I support this style of action.  When you find a business that operates contrary to your beliefs, it is your right not to patronize the business.  I also support the right of organizations to speak out against Chick-fil-a and convince other people that this or any other business has a view point contrary to that of the organization.

Where the line is drawn is when a government entity decides that it will prevent a company from doing its business because of the viewpoints of the CEO or any other employee of that business.

Whenever I as a Christian speak out about gay marriage, birth control or abortion; I am immediately chastised for attempting to impose my morality on the country.  The idea presented to me is that our country allows people the freedoms to make decisions regarding their love life or their bodies that must not be infringed against.  However, recently government officials within Chicago and Boston have decided that they are allowed to impose morality on their cities.

Early this week, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel stated that:

“Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago values. They’re not respectful of our residents, our neighbors and our family members. And if you’re gonna be part of the Chicago community, you should reflect Chicago values,”

This was followed by Joe Moreno, Alderman of the Chicago’s 1st District, who let his constituents know that:

"Same sex marriage, same-sex couples - that's the civil rights fight of our time. To have those discriminatory policies from the top down is just not something that we're open to. ...We want responsible businesses."

Chicago is not a lone wolf in this desire by local governments to impose morality.  In Boston, Mayor Thomas Menino, said:

“Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston,” Menino told the Boston Herald. “You can’t have a business in the city of Boston that discriminates against a population. We’re an open city, we’re a city that’s at the forefront of inclusion.”(The oddest part of that statement is for Menino to call Boston an open city as he closes the door on a specific belief.)

Please explain to me how this is not an attempt by the government to impose a morality on its citizens. 

I understand that cities have the right to zone area for specific use and/or non-use.  For instance, people usually request that their elected officials prevent things like strip clubs, bars or heavy industry from moving into their neighborhood.   However, those objections are based on the nature of the buisness and not the beliefs of the owner. To my understanding Chick-fil-a is not prohibiting those with a gay lifestyle from enjoying a sandwich.  Nor to my knowledge is it the policy of the Chick-fil-a to verify sexual preference prior employment.  Since, no laws within Chicago or Boston have been violated and Chick-fil-a is attempting to/or has establish a restaurant in an area zoned for that use; the values of the CEO should play no part in the government’s decision.

In our politically correct society, Dan Cathy must have understood that he would attract a fire storm because of his beliefs.  However, no business man should feel that his company will be treated differently by the government because of his beliefs.  It should be up to the people to protect the morality of the country and not a government hell bent on control.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Bren July 27, 2012 at 03:47 AM
The CEO of Chick-fil-a is free to express his opinion. However, if his corporation practices discrimination against a protected group (refuse service, employment opportunities) it raises issues of eligibility for any taxpayer-funded contracts, subsidies, grants, etc. My guess is that the legalities were carefully checked before Cathy indulged in the luxury of a anti-gay stance.
James R Hoffa July 27, 2012 at 05:06 AM
@Bren - What's the point of your comment? 1) Prove where Cathy has engaged in any kind of questionably discriminatory activity or has even taken an anti-gay stance. From the comment quoted, all Hoffa sees is a man supporting the traditional family model and its corresponding values. I don't see where he attacks, diminishes, or discredits the LGBT community in any way. 2) The SCOTUS, nor has the legislature, provided the LGBT community with protected class status as of this posting. So there goes that supposition. 3) Why are you inferring that Cathy or his company every received, has applied for, or is anticipating applying for "taxpayer-funded contracts, subsidies, grants, etc" without providing a link to support such a conjecture? You're becoming about as valuable to the discussion on these boards as morninmist and Bucky.
skinnyDUDE July 27, 2012 at 05:23 AM
Bren The so called anti gay stance isnt not a stance at all . Its a Christian view That marriage is between a man and a women . It is the Majority view when you look at every state that puts it on the ballot. It is the view to Love thy sinner but hate thy sin. If this view is foreign to you I wonder what cave you been hiding in all these years. If the the choice in the country is between Christian values or the Liberal Stance of No values I think the American people will make the right choice. This is not a discrimination issue . Chick fil a believes in ALL people but as a private business they are guided by the values of Christians. What if a Muslim owned Chick fil a and practiced his faith would this be an issue? Islamic law teaches that homosexuality is a vile form of fornication, punishable by death. This isnt an issue on the left. Amazingly its Only Christian values. The left attack on Christians and the nations actual foundation of beliefs is astonishingly Ignorant.
Jason Patzfahl July 27, 2012 at 12:00 PM
Does Dan Cathy, also believe in upholding the biblical laws of Leviticus that state, "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death." Leviticus 20:9. Or Leviticus 20:10 which states, "And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death." With a literal interpretation of the bible Newt Gingrich and 50% of all Americans should be put to death, or at least not allowed to enter a Chick-fil-A . . . simply because they have divorced. It amazes me how the religious right pick and choose which passages of the bible they are going to uphold and which they are going to blatantly ignore. "It ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand." ~ Mark Twain
Brian Carlson July 27, 2012 at 12:46 PM
Jason...not to mention, Thou Shalt Not Kill...and Christ's extrapolation that if you are angry with your brother, you have already killed him in your mind. I have to agree with you regarding the custom selection of biblical teachings, lip service to upholding what they claim to believe and wave before others as the law of God. They will say that Christ essentially did an update on the Mosaic laws... Hence the non-observance of scores of laws that Jews upheld. My question for the religious right is....what did Christ teach you regarding this or that? I agree with Lyle... The owners can say what they like..this is a right...and the people who object can say what they like and organize boycotts ..... Assuming that the owners are not breaking the law on hiring, and are not restricting gays from entering their stores (now of course they are not likely to), and I haven't seen anything so far to say they are... Government officials should not act against them. Lyle stated this clearly. One aside though... I wonder if a national chain owner announced that due to his or her religious beliefs he thought some race was sub-human or inherently evil or was sinful or that God didn't like them, (let's say the owner was a Klanner), would we expect that the owner was violating civil rights on some level by excluding people from the store?
Brian Carlson July 27, 2012 at 12:47 PM
In this case the owner would say, "Oh ANYONE can eat hear... These are just MY views," but the reality is that the owner, of course, would not want these people there and had made that known by stating his beliefs and offending them. Technically the members of the group could come and go.... Clearly though they knew they were Not welcome. Thoughts?
Bren July 27, 2012 at 01:10 PM
Hi Jimmy the Skimmer! Focus and read the last sentence of my comment. skinnyDUDE, I'm a Christian. My Christian education taught me, "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" (NIV, Matthew 7:3); "When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." (NIV, John 8:7), etc. My takeaway from Jesus' words is that yes, people may do things with which we may not agree, whatever that may be; but if they are not breaking a law we should focus instead on improving our own attitudes and behaviors. I do confess to a measure of skepticism when confronted with individuals who try to force their version of Christianity on others and who do not practice Christian behavior as an example. Jesus had counsel for people such as these: "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean." (NIV, Matthew 23:27) "He replied, Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: 'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.'" (NIV, Mark 7:6)
Bren July 27, 2012 at 01:16 PM
Or from Deuteronomy 24:1: "Suppose a man marries a woman but she does not please him. Having discovered something wrong with her, he writes her a letter of divorce, hands it to her, and sends her away from his house." (NLT) How many attorneys would lose income if divorce were still this simple? ; )
courttime July 27, 2012 at 01:44 PM
@ Luke It is due to the biblical "remember the sabbath day and keep it holy." Chick-fil-a restaurants have always remained closed on Sundays.
J. B. Schmidt July 27, 2012 at 02:21 PM
@Jason, Brian and Bren That is a limited understanding of the how the Old Testament is applied to Christianity. Much of the moral law within Leviticus is still maintained by Christians today; however, the ceremonial law was established for a people that lacked a savior. A people that were condemned to hell by their actions until Christ kept the laws perfectly. Christians today are to be imitators of Christ. Christ did not advocate for the stiff penalties of the ceremonial law of Leviticus, but he did advocate the moral laws: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." (Matt 22:37-40) Christ liberated us from the law of Leviticus by living his perfect life and death. Galatians 5:1-13 has a great explanation of how Christ has set us free from ceremonial law and that "The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." (v.4) In Christ's quote in Matthew he is summarizing the 10 commandments which were at to be lovingly carried out as an expression of our faith in Christ's saving grace. Homosexuality is condemned in the NT, 1Cor 6:9,10 + Romans 1:26,27, as are many other sins. The Christians job is not to condemn, but in love lead people to faith in Christ. Cathy doesn't condemn, but points out what is right.
James R Hoffa July 27, 2012 at 02:32 PM
@Bren - "Hi Jimmy the Skimmer! Focus and read the last sentence of my comment." Hoffa did - that's why in his response to your posting, Hoffa opened by asking what the point of your comment was. If you already realized the answers to the hypotheticals that you raised, whereby such answers diminished the significance of the posed hypotheticals into a non-issue, then one has to ponder why you even bothered to make such a comment in first place. Unless of course you were deceitfully trying to be divisive in perpetuating such unfounded propaganda and rhetoric. Thus, just as Hoffa concluded earlier, you're becoming about as valuable to the discussion on these boards as morninmist and Bucky. And that's a fact jack ;-)
J. B. Schmidt July 27, 2012 at 02:32 PM
@Brian Regarding Civil rights violation. While I think it is moral unacceptable for people to regard any class of human as sub-human and as such forbid entrance in their place of business; for a government to establish that morality goes against what I feel was the design of the fathers and their desire for personal private property rights. Civil rights laws should not extend past how people are viewed by the government, that is the government must view all people as equal. The government is not in place to tell me how I am to interact with my fellow citizens. Therefore, it should be in my right to allow who I want into my place of business. On the flip side it is the consumers right to never patronize a business such as that.
James R Hoffa July 27, 2012 at 02:43 PM
Hoffa prefers Mark 13:20 wherein it states "no flesh shall be spared." Get ready for Pinhead and the rest of the Cenobites because Hellraiser is coming soon to an earth near you! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgWnbGNClQ0
Steve ® July 27, 2012 at 02:45 PM
CowDung July 27, 2012 at 03:05 PM
That does bring up an interesting point. It seems that Rahm Emmanuel is quite the hypocrite for not calling out his former boss (Obama) for his stated opposition to gay marriage.
Dave Koven July 27, 2012 at 03:33 PM
Oh, for crying out loud! Chick Fil-fil-a, just sell your chicken. If people are free to choose to buy your product, they're also free to choose their life style. Chick-fil-a is a chicken stand, for Pete's sake, not a church pulpit.
Randy1949 July 27, 2012 at 03:41 PM
I think family is great. I'm married to my sweetheart from teenage years (together 45 years now) and we're now being blessed with grandchildren. I think everyone should have that ability -- even those people who are attracted to the same sex. They should be able to spend a lifetime with their sweethearts too. I prefer my chicken with a side of coleslaw, not proselytizing. This will probably lose them as much business as it gains them.
Luke July 27, 2012 at 05:32 PM
@jason Your question is one of ignorance, which liberals often throw out. Cathy is a Christian, which means that he is not bound to the Torah (i.e. Jewish law / Levitical law). Think about it.
skinnyDUDE July 27, 2012 at 05:34 PM
Jason what if Chick - Fil - a was owned by a Muslim .He believed in the muslim teachings and Islamic law. That law forbids Homosexuality and the penalty is death . Do you think the liberal left would say a peep? There are muslim owned Businesses you know.....I avent herd a peep on there views of Homosexuality . Its only attacks on Christians. The country was founded in Christian views so that is why the left hates them. Who really is being intolerent here? Get a clue! You are the one's with the inconsistant views on all matters.
Steve ® July 27, 2012 at 06:01 PM
The CEO of Chick-fil-a is free to express his opinion ► insert some wild liberal hypothetical lie to frame a story around my desire that he fail Brenda- You could make a great career at the Journal Sentinel. You already have the format down pat.
Bren July 27, 2012 at 06:55 PM
The Old Testament tells the story of human awareness, the evolution of intellect and the search for purpose--why are we here? The New Testament deepens that exploration, including the introduction of the Savior who provides context and also introduces inclusiveness. Unfortunately, the New Testament also introduces the politicization of Christianity; we see the nucleus of diverging opinions (Peter/Paul), the genesis of a "church" never advocated for by Christ (where three or more of you are gathered together...) and which was doomed to schism. I'll point out that 1 Corinthians and 1 Romans were written by Paul, who never met Christ; he writes his own opinions and interpretations. Likewise, Luke writes in Acts 6:2, 3, 4: "So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. 3 Brothers and sisters, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them 4 and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word.” Jesus never placed himself above others. Therefore, I have long held the view that the New Testament, beyond the books of Matthew, Mark, and John, are apocrypha. J.B. you are correct. The Christian's job is not to condemn, it is to lead in love. Leading is not forcing. Cathy's opinions do not reflect Christ's teachings.
J. B. Schmidt July 27, 2012 at 07:48 PM
@Bren First, please point out in Cathy's quotes where he is being A) forcing or B) non-Christian. He simply stats facts and then thanks God for his family. You understanding of the New Testament church is incorrect. There was no divergence and in Peter's letters he reinforces Paul's opinions. Since, Peter also writes about he subjects that Paul does, then the writing of Paul is obviously not simply his own opinion and therefore able to be dismissed. Not to mention that entire Christian church recognizes Paul's writing to be as inspired as the rest of the bible. As for your ideas on the politicization of Christianity, please explain. As with most subjects, you appear to only have half the story and yet speak from a position of authority.
Bren July 27, 2012 at 08:09 PM
J.B., I was responding to your comment about "Christians," in terms of leadership/forcing. I understood your comment to be generalized within a religious subset rather than Cathy's specific opinions. If I misunderstood, my apologies. I do not believe that my interpretation of the New Testament is incorrect. The schism between Rome and what became Constantinople/Byzantium, due to theological disagreements, came to an early head over the words of the Nicene creed as early as A.D. 381 (2nd Ecumenical Council). Arianism was not yet resolved, discussion of the role of the Holy Spirit in the Trinity, and the fact that the 2nd Ecumenical Council was held in Constantinople. Peter and Paul were definitely the two "personality stars" of the early Christian Church. As far as all Christianity revering Paul's words, that is true. There are also synods and faiths that worship what they call the "literal" Bible; that is to say as printed. It is known that edits were made to Bible texts in both the Old and New Testaments to make them more interesting (such as the addition of camels to trade routes which did not occur until much later than the time of writing), etc. A number of Books originally included in what was called the Bible were removed at points (apocrypha). I surmise the other "half of the story" is where I agree with you? ; )
Luke July 27, 2012 at 10:02 PM
@Brian, I believe your other questions were answered elsewhere. But in response to your last one, what business is owned by people that are not already selling to people that disagree with them on a regular basis? Is there such thing as a business owner that agrees with everyone? Do YOU agree with everyone? Finally, most states already have laws that allow privately owned restaurants to kick people out for any reason. But who does it? Most owners want the business.
Luke July 27, 2012 at 10:15 PM
@Jason, Still waiting for you to inform us why 50% of the religious right should be concerned about Levitical law......... After all, you wrote with such confidence........
skinnyDUDE July 27, 2012 at 10:51 PM
Hypocrisy Alert .....Can the left be this Ignorant???? Until recently President Obama held the same stance on gay marriage as the CEO of Chick-fil-A,. Why wasn't he an Evil uncaring bastard in the last Election? He had the same stance. You liberals and your opinions get more laughable by the moment . Another OFFICIAL = GIVE ME A BREAK Moment from the Looney Left!
Bren July 28, 2012 at 02:35 AM
Mr. Hoffa, did you write something? I must have skimmed right past it!
James R Hoffa July 28, 2012 at 04:57 AM
@Bren - If that's the case, then your skimming skills must be so poor, that I honestly can't fathom what good they actually provide you! Studies have shown that those with fourth grade reading level or lower may not possess the ability to effectively skim. It's OK Bren, some people are just less capable than others. It's nothing to be embarrassed or ashamed of. As you're not an effective skimmer, then Hoffa suggests that you actually commit the time in the future to reading for detail - your takeaway and comprehension of the things you read will be vastly improved! In fact, if you take Hoffa's advice to heart, I'm sure that it'll reduce your tendency to embrace unfounded conspiracy theories and perpetuate them here on the Patch. Or at least one would hope that with a better understanding, you'd at least vastly reduce engaging in such nonsense! The truth shall set you free Bren! It'll be like looking upon the world with a fresh set of eyes. Of course, Hoffa's not rushing to call his bookie any time soon ;-)
Richard Head July 28, 2012 at 11:54 AM
Bren says: "The CEO of Chick-fil-a is free to express his opinion. However, if his corporation practices discrimination against a protected group (refuse service, employment opportunities) it raises issues of eligibility for any taxpayer-funded contracts, subsidies, grants, etc. My guess is that the legalities were carefully checked before Cathy indulged in the luxury of a anti-gay stance." In this paragraph, Bren points out what is wrong with America today. 1. Protected Groups - This is reverse discrimination and the practice of creating protected groups, for whatever reason, must end. 2. Taxpayer funded subsidies for private Corporations - This is always wrong - and practiced by both sides. It is time to end this mis-use and abuse of tax money. 3. Private Business excluding "undesirables" or members of "protected groups" should be a right of private business. 4. "The CEO of Chick-fil-a is free to express his opinion" - who is then punished by Liberals and members of the "protected group" for exercising that right, while the Liberals and members of the "protected group" would sue for discrimination anyone who punished them when they freely express their opinions. 5. The LGBT Community partners with NAMBLA and wants to move the agenda towards sexual emancipation of children.
James R Hoffa July 28, 2012 at 04:15 PM
The federal 'protected classes' laws prohibit employers and business from discriminating against people based upon the following grounds: Race Color Religion National Origin Age Gender Familial Status Disability Veteran Status Genetic Information You'll notice that sexual orientation is not on the list. Of course, there are always exceptions, such as in tv/film/stage acting, etc.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something