.

Why Batavia's Pending Chick-fil-A Should Be a Non-Issue

Do we really have to go over this again?

Do we really have to go over this again? C’mon! I thought I’d already cleared the whole thing up in The Beacon and Courier-News. But no! Just because some insipid fast food CEO makes some sort of asinine statement, it apparently means we that have to reopen the entire can of worms.

And this time it was Chick-fil-A head honcho Dan Cathy who regurgitated the same old tired intolerant and bigoted bleep we’ve already heard a thousand times before. “Blah blah blah, gay marriage. Blah blah blah Bible, Blah blah blah God, Blah blah blah eternal damnation.”

The irony is that, not only does the Bible fail to define the concept of marriage, but it doesn’t mention anything about same-sex unions at all. But even if it did, ain’t it funny how some southern fried folks are all too eager to pick up on some of the prohibitions while completely ignoring a host of others.

For example, Leviticus 19:19 warns against the use of mixed fibers like polyester. I always thought wearing a leisure suit was a mortal sin.

We ignore biblical caveats against Beatle haircuts (Leviticus 19:27), astrology and tattoos (Leviticus 19:19), divorce, eating shellfish, and my all-time favorite, having your wife defend you from a male attacker by grabbing him by a rather delicate area (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)!

Quite frankly, any wife willing to go that far to defend my honor is certainly worth having around—especially if she’s got a firm grip.

When the Bible does discuss marriage, it gets kinda wacky, “When brothers live together and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the deceased shall not be married outside the family to a strange man. Her husband's brother shall go in to her and take her to himself as wife and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her.” (Deuteronomy 25:5)

Kinky!

But the most delicious irony is the Good Book’s prohibition against touching a pig, much less eating pork. Thus, anyone who’s ever partaken of a Chick-fil-A chargrilled chicken club sandwich is going straight to hell.

Hey! Don’t blame me! I only report the rules; I don’t make ‘em. It’s just that if you’re gonna start reciting biblical verses, then you probably shouldn’t be picking and choosing.

All that said, I also want to be clear that, despite what some Democratic mayors seem to think, even morons like Mr. Cathy are covered by the First Amendment. Why he’d want to wade in on this kind of controversial topic completely baffles me, but it’s every American’s God-given right to say some of the stupidest things imaginable.

I just wish you all wouldn’t avail yourselves of that right quite as often as you do.

But banning Chick-fil-A from Chicago and Boston? Really? Louis Farrakhan is a bigoted lunatic, but Rahm Emanuel ain’t saying anything about his South Side presence.

So while I certainly wish conflicting intolerances would cancel each other out, banning fast food franchise isn’t the answer. Personally, I don’t plan on patronizing the impending Batavia location, for no other reason than they serve distressingly mediocre deep fried fare that does nothing more than make you fatter than you already are.

But when it comes to this kind of semi-accepted discrimination, here’s an interesting litmus test. What if, instead of disparaging same-sex wedlock, our absurd CEO came out against interracial marriage? Remember, it wasn’t that long ago that southern pastors cited the same Bible in an effort to ban that “unnatural” practice.

I’ll tell you what would happen—there would hell to pay. Every last restaurant would be picketed, there would be real calls for a boycott, and, to save the company, Cathy would immediately issue a mea culpa and embark upon the Oprah/Jesse Jackson reconciliation tour.

There certainly wouldn’t be a ridiculous Chick-fil-A appreciation day.

Ain’t it also funny how we can so easily look back on and decry that kind of abject discrimination, but we never seem to see it in ourselves.

To wit, in order to entice $10 contributions, Republican regulars are now offering a $5 Chick-fil-A coupon. But isn’t the GOP supposed to be the party of less government? And isn’t inserting your nose into other people’s bedrooms about as intrusive as it gets?

(For an alternate ending to this column please see my blog at www.thefirstward.net.)

Who cares what people do in the privacy of their own home and, when you really think about it, who cares what some silly CEO has to say about it? As I’ve said many times before, the mere thought of observing any of my portly, white, middle class, heterosexual neighbors engaged in a carnal embrace terrifies me so much more than same-sex weddings.

Do we really want to be on the wrong side of history on this one? Do we really want our grandchildren to read the news stories and say, “What were they thinking?”

Let’s let this one go and move onto more important things.

Dwight Swartwood August 07, 2012 at 05:08 AM
Well, it seems we care more about this Chicken stuff than we do about our taxes. Chick-Fil-a has a pretty strong and public belief tradition. They are not open on Sunday for example. Why? They believe Sunday is central to worship and family values. If you want chicken on Sunday, you can get it somewhere else. If you don't like their high regard for the traditional family, you can get your chicken some where else as well. McDonalds and Burger King love when people become fixated on this stuff.
donaldowens August 07, 2012 at 06:51 AM
Companies do give out samples. They are looking to put their products in potential consumers' hands. They wouldn't do it if it didn't work one of the place that always worked is "Official Samples" search online
thefunkychicken August 07, 2012 at 11:14 AM
If you want chicken on Sunday ,cook it at home.
Gabrielle McLeod August 07, 2012 at 03:35 PM
I find it a little ridiculous that we boycott Chick-fil-a because the owner prefers traditional marriage, when in in the middle east, Muslims actually kill homosexuals... and will we stop buying gas from them? Of course not; we tolerate their intolerance. Why do we not tolerate the somewhat intolerant religion that shaped America, and instead tolerate the radically intolerant religion that's threatening to destroy America? Furthermore, I can't believe how uninformed Jeff Ward is. Homosexuality is mentioned in the Bible on more than one occasion. And I wish people would stop citing Biblical rules from Leviticus to try to make Christianity seem ridiculous; the whole point of those rules is that they're stupid. They're impossible to follow. That’s the point of Christianity, to be freed from having to follow those ridiculous laws. Someone needs to inform Ward to that it's usually a good idea to get your facts straight, before posting articles online.
Mike Bruno August 07, 2012 at 04:21 PM
Thanks Tom Brown. That was a bulls-eye.
Mike August 08, 2012 at 02:55 PM
Colin "Marriage" is a RELIGIOUS word. Recognized as a sacrament is many religions. The Gov't recognizes this and gives "civil marriages" certain rights. But "marriage" is NOT a right. It's NOT in the constitution. Churches and politicians and MOST Americans are against changing the RELIGIOUS definition of marriage. Obviously you didnt read the UK law. IT's a great compromise giving same sex unions every "right" as married folks but not called "marriage". Looks like you are to busy being self-rightous and calling people who disagree with you "bigots" than you are about actually giving equal rights.
c.stange August 08, 2012 at 03:28 PM
To those claiming to be "Christians" posting here, Please get over yourselves!!! Since when did God ask for your help???? What he did ask us to do was share the Gospel The Good news of what Jesus has accomplished for us on the cross, and with his resurrection. And to Love God and Love our Neighbor as ourselves. Wouldn't doing this have been a better use of time, instead of advocating Chick-fil -a. and being judgemental??? If I want a chicken sandwich, I will have a chicken sandwich wherever I want. The chicken Sandwich didn't have anything to do with this !!!!! -
Mike Bruno August 08, 2012 at 04:20 PM
@Mike It would certainly be simplified if, indeed, the word "marriage" was owned by the religious. Alas, the etymology of the word "marriage" is ambiguous...and I have done a fair amount of research. It should be evident that, since we are still battling over it's meaning, the ownership of the term is NOT clear. I would suggest that, from the civil perspective, the states recognize "religious marriage" and "civil marriage" as being identical under the law. Civil authorities can define it as they wish, and religious organizations can define it as they wish.
Colin C. August 08, 2012 at 05:23 PM
Mike, If you wish to live your life following "moral" codes based on myth, superstition, and magical thinking that is your right. It is not your right to try to impose those codes on those who prefer to follow science and rational thought.
Jill K. Amoni August 09, 2012 at 08:52 PM
Thank goodness for free speech so that I may tell Jeff Ward...yeah...YOU, dude...that your comments are the epitome of ASININE... Your values or lack thereof, are NOT mine! I came to this article because I wanted to find out when the Batavia Chick-fil-A will open and this popped up when I googled with NO date at all...just a long rant of a proud secular man! When will it open? That's what I want to know. Can you please let me know something useful?
Mike Bruno August 09, 2012 at 09:03 PM
Jill; you wield the word "secular" like it is something bad. One should understand that the opposite of "secular" is "theocratic". Our nation was founded as a secular nation and I honor our founders for it and we should all strive to live to their ideals. BTW: Chick-fil-A says "Late summer 2012" for their Batavia opening.
Mike Bruno August 09, 2012 at 09:19 PM
...except for the slavery and stuff like that!! :-)
Brian Drye August 10, 2012 at 01:07 PM
but you somehow feel that bashing Christians is having fun? The saints cry for you.
Brian Drye August 10, 2012 at 01:10 PM
Actually, oppossing same sex marriage is a "less government" stance. Marrriage is, and always has been a religious institution. If the government wants to allow same sex unions than that is the governments business.
Jeff Ward August 10, 2012 at 01:14 PM
Brian, I'm not bashing Christians, I'm holding their feet to the fire! I'm simply pointing out that you can't adhere to some biblical edicts and not others. And a convuloted argument to justify why you can exposes many Christians and legal positivist hypocrites. Jeff
Brian Drye August 10, 2012 at 01:18 PM
Exactly, This whole attack had nothing to do with the gays. It was instigated by liberal poltical types and blown up by the media before the facts were checked. Every chance they get the liberals love to bust down the church doors and instill their opinions on everyone. Christian bashing is their favorite past time. The liberal motto is: "all men were created equal...except liberals are more equal than everyone else"
Colin C. August 10, 2012 at 01:39 PM
Brian, We are not "bashing Christianity". We are arguing against hate, bigotry, unfairness, and injustice. When some people use quotes from the Christian Bible to support and justify their intolerance we will argue against that also. Gays, per se, are not the issue. The same disagreements have sprung up concerning slavery, civil rights, women's rights and a host of other issues. Instead of accusing "liberals" of church bashing perhaps you might consider accusing "conservatives" of misusing the Bible for their own purposes. since you can "cherry pick" some passage from it to support almost any idea. Again I would like to refer everyone in this discussion to Matthew 22:37-40. Whenever I have a question about what it means to be a Christian I go to that for an answer. I don't always like that answer but then, in any moral decision, the most difficult thing to do is usually the right thing to do.
Brian Drye August 10, 2012 at 03:25 PM
Excelent bible verse, however didn't you just acuse me of cherry picking? And when did conservative become synonamous with Christian? If you ever took a logic class, some Christians are conservatives and some conservatives are Christians, that does not mean all Christians are conservatives, and it deffinately does not mean that all conservatives are Christians. I would argue the point that many that call themselves Christians do not practice Christianity, but it is not my place to judge. The point is you are judging a man for having an opinion that is part of his religious belief PERIOD. He did not descrimnate and openly hires gay people to work at his business. It is like saying I don't condone divorce, I am against divorce, I wish divorce on no one, but I do not hold it against you if you are divorced. What is wrong with having that belief?
Colin C. August 10, 2012 at 05:50 PM
Brian, There is “cherry picking” random and sometime relatively peripheral passages in order to “prove” a particular point of view and then there are, according to Jesus, the two most important laws, upon which everything else is based. But, as I have said before in this discussion, the real point is that it is counter to the intent of our democracy to pass laws that are based upon a particular group’s religious beliefs alone. Many people who state an opposition to homosexuality identify themselves as “conservative Christians”. I did not create that designation. Any person can hold any belief that he or she wishes in America but when that person acts on that belief to the detriment of others a line is crossed that makes that action unacceptable. It has been widely reported that the president of this company has contributed a considerable amount of money to “anti-gay” causes. I believe that crosses the line from belief to active discrimination. At any rate, I have not condemned the man or his belief. I have simply stated that I will not patronize his restaurant because there is a chance that a part of any money that I spend there will go to support a cause with which I disagree. And I do oppose any action that discriminates against any group because of race, religion, creed, gender, or sexual orientation. It’s time that we get past this tendency in America.
Bob Loblaw August 10, 2012 at 06:31 PM
It's not, except by maybe the people that write for it. There is very little if any credible or ethical work being done here.
Bob Loblaw August 10, 2012 at 06:33 PM
It's too bad we'll never see that many "Christians" lined up to donate at their local food pantry.
Bob Loblaw August 10, 2012 at 06:37 PM
Among them is Exodus, a group that claims to "cure" gay people.
Bob Loblaw August 10, 2012 at 06:40 PM
I'm going to bet that at least some if not all of the $2 million Mr. Cathy donated to such "enlightened" groups as Exodus, which claims to "cure" gay people, came from CFA revenues.
Bob Loblaw August 10, 2012 at 06:48 PM
This post is so comically ignorant it's disgusting. You clearly know nothing about Islam (the largest religion in the world, by the way). And let's not forget about the Crusades if we're going to characterize entire religions as being bastions of violence extremism! Why are you allowed to cherry pick out the aspects of your religion you don't like (sorry, the Old Testament is part of your religion whether you like it or not!), the adherents of which could be considered extremists, yet you characterize all of Islam as a violent religion that's threatening to "destroy America?"
Bob Loblaw August 10, 2012 at 06:48 PM
violent*
Jane Sinclair August 13, 2012 at 04:01 PM
To the person hiding behind "Bob Loblaw"....so crafty using "Among" to insinuate there are others. WRONG They have never given a penny to that organization. You obviously know nothing about Chik-fil-a and their charitable work, but why would you? The list of their charitable contributions exists...go find it. I did.
Jane Sinclair August 13, 2012 at 04:04 PM
Once again...see my last response to you person-TOO-CHICKEN-to-post-under-your- real-name..."Bob Loblaw"...meh
OutSpoken1 August 16, 2012 at 06:29 PM
So...... it's NOT OK to give to the "straight alliance" groups? Why is it OK to give to the "pro-gay/lesbian" groups? Who is deciding which group is "bad" and which is "good"?
OutSpoken1 August 16, 2012 at 07:46 PM
Well said!!!!!!
Brian Drye August 21, 2012 at 01:24 PM
"It has been widely reported that the president of this company has contributed a considerable amount of money to “anti-gay” causes. I believe that crosses the line from belief to active discrimination." So pro-family, or pro-marriage is now anti-gay. I think if they want to have civil unions that's fine although I do not support the gay life style. My personal belief is that it is harmful to society. If I donate to causes that seek to educate why this is harmful, or to share my opinion is that anti-gay? Even if you find it anti-gay that does not make it hate speach.

Boards

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