© Miri WTPOTUS August 9, 2012
The progressive left severely criticized the CEO of Chick-fil-A for daring to tell a religious publication that he supports traditional marriage. Some stated that those who hold similar views are better off not speaking at all. They warned CEO Dan Cathy that by publicly voicing his personal religious views, he made his company the target of boycotts. They also took his company to task for financially supporting what some “progressive” organizations characterize as “hate groups”.
The goal of such criticism, of course, is intimidation. The goal is to “discourage” Christians like Mr. Cathy from speaking out and also from using his money to support organizations with which he agrees. This is not unlike what conservatives experience when they donate to conservative causes. The rabid criticism, from the left, of the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United is an example.
Christians should be seen and not heard, and they do not have a right to fund organizations that support their religious or political views, if their views are in opposition to the views of the progressive left [emphasis added to all quotes].
The groups Chick-fil-A gives to include the Family Research Council and Exodus International,according to Equality Matters, an initiative associated with the progressive Watchdog group, Media Matters. The Family Research Council is designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, while Exodus International is a Christian Ministry that has long endorsed ex-gay therapy, a controversial practice of “curing” gay people that mainstream mental health organizations have disavowed. (In recent months, the president of Exodus has tried to distance his group from the idea that gay people can be “cured.”)
Now, some of us would call the Southern Poverty Law Center a “hate group”, and Media Matters has a close association with George Soros, whom many consider to be a not very nice man; but you don’t see those caveats in the Huffington Post article, written by “gay voice” advocate Lila Shapiro. Of course, it all depends upon your political and religious views, which we’re still allowed to have in this country, at the moment.
According to some, there’s no end to the “hate” of those pro-traditional-marriage Christians. Some “gay voices” were even offended by the turnout for Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day. Now Christians aren’t even supposed to assemble, if by doing so they offend the sensibilities of those with whom they disagree.
The Shapiro article contains a slide show identifying companies that have been boycotted for pro-gay political speech, political activities, or advertisements, including:
Oreo, Betty Crocker, Levis, Cheerios, American Apparel, Walt Disney World Resort, Starbucks, Wheaties, Procter and Gamble (Tide, Pampers, Crest), Microsoft, The Home Depot, Girl Scouts, Macy’s, Pepsico (Pepsi, Fritos, Quaker Oats, Gatorade), Safeway, Old Navy, Target, J. C. Penney, Pillsbury, Walgreen’s, Ford, GAP, Green Giant.
Fair enough. Boycotts or buycotts. We all have the same rights. People on both sides of any issue are free to vote with their feet. They’re free to spend or not spend their own money wherever they choose.
But there’s one big honking difference here. You don’t see mayors or alderpersons, or community activists who have the ear of government officials, threatening to illegally use the powers of government to openly discriminate against companies that are headed by Christians who happened to exercise their constitutional rights of freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
The most amazing part of this entire story was how unfazed these politicians were about their thuggish threats. It’s as if they have NO CLUE about the law and the Constitution, even though some are lawyers and some have made it a career to fight for civil rights. Note how Shapiro framed it:
Elected officials have urged Chick-fil-A to stay out of their cities…
Thomas Menino, Mayor of Boston:
I was angry to learn on the heels of your prejudiced statements about your search for a site to locate in Boston. There is no place for discrimination on Boston’s Freedom Trail and no place for your company alongside it.
Chicago Alderman Proco “Joe” Moreno:
“Because of this man’s ignorance, I will now be denying Chick-fil-A’s permit to open a restaurant in the 1st Ward.” … Moreno, meanwhile, said it will take “more than words” to get him to reverse course.
“They’d have to do a complete 180,” the alderman said. “They’d have to work with LGBT groups in terms of hiring, and there would have to be a public apology from (Cathy).”
Moreno did the 180. Maybe the ACLU coming down on the side of Chick-fil-A had something to do with that.
Rick Garcia, Chicago gay activist:
“I think it’s important that the city sends a message that we want business here … but what we can’t have and don’t want are businesses that have discriminatory roles,” Garcia said, adding that he’s a defender of free speech.
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel:
The anti-gay views openly espoused by the president of a fast food chain … have run afoul of Mayor Rahm Emanuel and a local alderman, who are determined to block Chick-fil-A from expanding in Chicago.
“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,” Emanuel said.
Openly gay New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn,
who wants to be mayor:
wrote to NYU President John Sexton asking the school to boot the Chick-Fil-A location from its campus — the only one in the city.
She told the Daily News editorial board Tuesday that she waited to do so until after NYU’s controversial expansion had cleared the Council because she didn’t “want there to be any misimpression that there was any connection.”
The 2013 mayoral contender said she used official Council letterhead for her Saturday missive because she thought “it would be ridiculous if I wrote on personal stationery to the president of the university.”
NYU spokesman John Beckman said Cathy’s comments “are out of step with NYU’s views on this matter,” and that the school’s University Senate would reexamine in the fall whether to keep the chicken shop on campus.
San Francisco mayor Edwin M. Lee tweeted:
Closest #ChickFilA to San Francisco is 40 miles away & I strongly recommend that they not try to come any closer.
For now, these progressive thugs have backed off, although we don’t know what’s going to happen with NYU, a private institution, but one that probably receives tax dollars and must follow federal law.
I recently wrote a post about NEO-COMS and their plans to force religious people and institutions out of the public sphere. Illinois bishop, Daniel R. Jenky of the Diocese of Peoria, sees through the plan, which uses issues like gay marriage, abortion, and contraception against Catholics, in order to prevent them from providing health care, foster care, and adoption services. He gets it. Says Jenky,
Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services, and health care. In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama – with his radical, pro abortion and extreme secularist agenda, now seems intent on following a similar path.
In my previous post, I wrote about how Catholic bishops are becoming mobilized this election, in defense of the religious rights of Catholics (and other Christians, by extension). The bishops warned that they would resist totalitarianism in a letter in which they made clear
that the free exercise of religion is being defined down to a bare “freedom of worship.” That is, religious people are allowed to think and pray as they want in their homes and churches, but they cannot follow the dictates of their conscience when they provide services to the public.
Christians are not to provide services to the public, and now they’re also not to speak publicly about their religious beliefs.
In the neo-com view, religious people should be forbidden to speak, to assemble, to donate to causes of their choice, and even to engage in commerce, if their beliefs are in opposition to the views of the neo-coms.