It never ceases to amaze me the frequency with which those who claim to be victims of religious oppression react by calling the kettle black. The latest example is the Chick-Fil-A non-shocker. The president of restaurant was asked his stance on the marriage issue. Of course the media and homosexual activists were in utter shock that Dan Cathy espoused the Christian view of marriage. The culture is becoming increasingly hostile towards Christians who dare affirm Christian teaching. My offense is the lack of recognition of anyone other than fellow Christians that Chick-Fil-A is being targeted for the sole reason of holding Christian values. That’s it. No claims of any actual discrimination. Just that the company is considered “Christian”.
Apparently same-sex marriage activists and their supporters believe it is OK to refuse tolerance toward CFA because, of course, CFA doesn’t deserve it. Of course they fail to realize tolerance is reserved for people with which you disagree. But activists aren’t satisfied with merely voicing their dissatisfaction with Cathy’s opinions — which he is wholly unable to force on anyone. No, they feel they must act in a way they themselves would be outraged if done to them and their cause.
(Washington Post reporter, Sally Quinn) — While Christians will be showing up at the restaurants in droves today, there is a movement afoot by “The Gay and Lesbian Alliance against Defamation” to stage kiss-ins in front of many outlets. Mayors of Washington, San Francisco, Boston and Chicago have expressed their outrage at the company policy.
What to do if you feel the same way?. The idea of a boycott is so clichéd. Even the kiss-in doesn’t really make the point.
Gays and lesbians could start applying for jobs at Chick-fil-A. Get in there. Become managers, take over the places. Gays could begin patronizing Chick-fil-As and I don’t mean carry out. Make the restaurants the gay hangouts of the community. Gay partners and Married gays could begin taking their children there. They could start having birthday parties for their kids. They could have Gay pride events there. (They have an events manager – just call) They could even have gay weddings there.
You see, for Quinn and her ilk, it isn’t enough to disagree and debate. No, CFA should be “infiltrated”. Gays and lesbians showing up at their storefronts making out isn’t strong enough. CFAs need to become hangout spots and hold gay wedding ceremonies. They need to be punished. Activists know Christians believe homosexual sexuality is morally wrong and so they foist that behavior on CFA and their customers — many of whom have no interest in this fight and just want lunch.
Gay activists persistently wonder why there is such push back from the Christian community, as if they have offered no provocation (See: [Get] Over The Rainbow). The homosexual movement has masqueraded as a passive cause. They refuse to allow anyone to disagree with what gay activists consider moral sexual behavior. They consistently show that any opposition will be met with public homosexual displays of affection, protest, and threats of political action attempting to close the business. If this isn’t the gay activism’s equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church, I don’t know what is.
CFA is being confronted, boycotted, and protested for the sole reason of their president’s religious views. For all the demands for tolerance, there seems to be a blatant double-standard as to who deserves to be tolerated, and the kind of behavior which is an acceptable form of protest. It doesn’t help your cause to behave in such ways toward your ideological opponents. If tolerance is requested, tolerance should be given — even if nothing more than to set an example.
Sifting Reality 
Actually, I saw a number of claims that Chick-fil-A discriminates. What no one was able to offer was proof.
the only accusation of discrimination I heard was the contrived stretch that it’s discrimination to support traditional marriage, which of course, isn’t discrimination at all.
Perhaps a lillte compare and contrast on how Christianity treats gays vs. how other religions treat gays. I haven’t yet seen the protest outside of any muslim owned buisnesses.
Or possibly a “little” compare and contrast.
I am curious to know if the people protesting are going to go inside the restaurant to kiss or if it is in the parking lot? I know this article said “in front” but others I have read were simply unclear… Why I am wondering is because if they try to take it inside they won’t be allowed to stay in without ordering something because Chick-Fil-A has a no soliciting policy just the same as many restaurants do. I see this as a bit of a set up by the “activist” involved. If they are thrown out they are going to scream that they are being discriminated against. If they actually follow the restaurants policy and buy something, then they are defeating their purpose… I don’t see the logic in that at all. If it is in the parking lot, are they planning on staying there all day? Infiltrating their restaurants as the person in that article suggested is ludicrous. It is very clear to me a double standard.
You couldn’t be more right KT. That’s a common homosexual-activist tactic. Be disruptive to the point where it’s out of control and inappropriate then scream bigotry when asked to leave “just because they’re gay” and for no other reason. They create what they call bigotry by flaunting sexuality. Like “I dare you to find what I’m doing offensive!”
Disagreement just isn’t good enough. It’s comply or pay the price when it comes to this issue, unfortunately.
You know how to tell when you are wrong? When you find yourself re-framing the issue so that the other side seems wrong. When you start making scenarios up that would be truly wrong when they haven’t even happened.
John, why are people boycotting CfA? Not the reason you tell yourself so that you sound more (but still not even) correct. Not the reason you tell other Christians so you can all say “Yes, yes, homosexualists are Nazi assholes!!”. No, John, what is the real reason? If you cannot articulate it, then you are certainly wrong. You are wrong by measures of ignorance or self-deception.
But let us say, for the sake of argument, that you are correct (even though you are not). Why can’t filthy homosexualists decide where they choose to spend their money? Why is it wrong to boycott any business? What is it they are doing that is so offensive to you? Why can’t they “infiltrate” a business if what they are doing is perfectly legal? Isn’t the Tea Party “infiltrating” government? Running candidates in Republican primaries in an effort to change the culture of the Republican party? Why is it wrong for homosexualists to do this, but not Teabaggers? Is it illegal to kiss another man in public? Illegal to have a birthday party for your child in a Christian restaurant if you are gay? Illegal to apply for a job if you are a homo?
If they want to do those things, fine. There is nothing illegal about those things. Hell, if the idiots are stupid enough to get jobs in a company that is solely owned by Dan Cathy to “infiltrate” it and change the culture, all the power to them. What on earth would that accomplish?
I am aware that a stupid idiot dressed down a CfA employee and filmed the moment thinking he was funny. I tried Google to find all the homosexualist blogs laughing and applauding the guy for being a hero. How many do you think I found? If this guy is at all representative of the greater homosexualist community, where is all the news outlets and blogs calling him a brave hero- a martyr for the cause of gay rights? Just because one douchebag agrees with a cause doesn’t mean that he is representative of the entire movement.
George
I don’t care where gays spend or dont spend their money. What I am pointing out is the reasoning. They are boycotting because the owner is a Christian who espoused Christian views. That is bigotry, not illegal, but bigotry.
Second, there is a stark difference between running for political office in an attempt to shape your government and culture, which gays are most welcome to do, and “infiltrating” a private business in an attempt to dismantle it and change it. Again, not illegal. Are you saying it is perfectly acceptable to attempt, undercover, to do something like that to a business just because they wont give their blessing to your sex life? Thats one of the most selfish, petty, egotistical, narcisstic thing I have heard in a while.
No one is suggesting that gays and their families should be barred from having parties there. But I think you know there is more than just the technicality of the words Quinn is using. Infiltration is not a positive thing. Quinn is suggesting a “covert mission” of sorts in an attempt to cause havoc with the franchise, and you know it.
You also seem to be misunderstanding me when I differentiate between homosexuals and those who support same-sex marriage, and same-sex marriage activists. I have made this distinction many times. I dont think most gays are of this ilk.
However, the “kiss-in” which was planned is not a protest, its antagonism. And a classy at that. Note the “Jesus is a C***” t-shirt. They believe gays gross out those neanderthal Christians so we’ll show them, we’ll put it in their faces, in front of their kids…that’ll show em and make them like us.