Chick Fil-A: Eat Mor Controversy

54 CommentsGay community, News, Salt, Special Days

These are the words spoken by Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick Fil-A, that has caused so much trouble:

“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.”

“I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say ‘we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,’ and I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about,” he said on the radio program, “The Ken Coleman Show.”

I for one, am of the opinion that in a free country, with the right to free speech, that one may exercise that freedom in a gracious fashion even if it is politically incorrect.

But I agree with many that Dan Cathy was wrong—dead wrong—in part of his comments though.

He was wrong in this statement:“I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him….”

No. Homosexual marriage is God’s judgment on those who shake their fists at him.

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (Romans 1: 26-27)

The murder of innocent millions in this country by abortion is a sign of God’s judgment.

Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. (Romans 1: 28-32)

I will take time out of my day on Wednesday to eat at Chick Fil-A to show my support for the American Way, the right to express oneself freely, whether it’s popular or not.

And because I care for those who will be kissing each other to show their support for their cause on Friday, I’ll exercise my freedom of speech a bit more vocally, in a gracious, respectful and gentle way, of course.

I will tell of the great love that God has for the homosexual community. I will speak about how he demonstrated that love by dying on a cross for their sins, by being buried for three days and rising again. I will explain that because they have broken God’s Commandments by lying, stealing, hating and lusting—it’s not just homosexuality—that they will face an eternity in Hell, unless they repent and trust the Savior.

If a gay person should object that he/she was born homosexual, I will softly reply that is why God commands us to be born again.

Alan Noble asks in his article, “The Chick-fi-Asco: Why Boycotts are Awful”: How exactly is Chick-Fil-A discriminating? Then he lists these five answers.

One of the worst parts about this debacle has been the way that all sides have glossed over or willfully misrepresented how Chick-fil-A discriminates against homosexuals. It seems like both sides are more concerned with winning the war than with its legitimacy. Various sources have claimed that this is all about:

  1. Dan Cathy’s personal views on marriage.
  2. Dan Cathy’s personal views on homosexuality.
  3. Chick-fil-A’s company-wide political stance on gay marriage.
  4. Chick-fil-A’s giving to anti-homosexual organizations.
  5. All of the above.

The correct answer is… #5. Sort of. Let’s work through these options briefly to sort out what’s really at issue here.

Please click here to read the rest of this article to sort out the real issues.

Read about the “Kiss In” here.

Comments (54)

  1. Luong

    Reply

    THANKS A MILLION for standing for our Christian Faith! I love you so much!!! We only need 100 more business leaders like you to turn America back to our Christian roots. Amen.

    • Really?

      Reply

      America has no Christian roots. Many of our founding fathers were deists.

      • Whateverman

        America has no Christian roots. Many of our founding fathers were deists.

        No matter how often this fact is pointed out, Christian revisionists will ignore it.

      • Nohm

        That is hardly an atheist claim, Steve; scholars of all religious backgrounds come to this same conclusion.

        I’m curious, Steve, what’s your understanding of the religious beliefs of our founding fathers, and where do you get this information?

  2. Jay Rillo

    Reply

    Awesome post!!! Love God. Love people. Homosexuality is sin. Just the same as all the junk all the self-righteous struggle with on a daily basis. Jesus went to the cross for all of it. He put on sin and became sin so that we through Him would put on righteousness, that which is a gift from God and not because of religious requirements that one may or may not meet. …by grace and grace only, not by works that any man should boast.

    Jesus loves gays, lesbians, bisexuals, democrats, republicans, vegans, hippies, addicts, stay at home moms. the list goes on.

    Thanks again for the post!!!

      • vintango2k

        “You’re wrong does not equal I hate you!”

        I agree, might give you and other people on this blog some pause to reflect and think about that next time you make assumptions about what atheists or people of other religions say, think, do, or believe without actually asking them next time, or many of the other false equivocations that pop up from time to time. =)

    • Michael Marcavage

      Reply

      God hates all workers of iniquity. Psalm 5:5

      Furthermore, there is nothing “gay” about homosexuality, and there is no such thing as a “gay community” no more than there is a “rapist community.” Christians must not fall into legitimizing the homosexual lifestyle, which I am seeing more and more.

      As far as Steve’s criticism of Dan Cathy, I do not believe Cathy is wrong when he said expressed that a nation living in open rebellion toward God and His commands begs for more of God’s judgment. While it is true that it is a judgment on the homosexual to be given over to a reprobate mind, the Scriptures are replete of examples of open rebellion bringing on God’s destruction.

    • Whateverman

      Reply

      Homosexuality is sin.

      So is lying, but for some reason, you don’t see Christian Restaurant Chains making donations to groups who support honesty.

      I wonder why…

  3. Nohm

    Reply

    Hi Steve,

    I find it frustrating that the Chick-Fil-A supporters, such as yourself, continue to create a strawman argument against the protesters.

    Let me be clear: people, in general, are not protesting against Chick-Fil-A because of the CEO’s opinions, or what he said. People, in general, support his right to free speech.

    That is NOT the issue that people are protesting against.

    People are protesting because the company donates large amounts of money to anti-gay groups, and “pray the gay away” organizations.

    That is why people are protesting, not because of the CEO’s speech or opinions.

    You’re hardly the only person who got this wrong, Steve, but I’m at a loss why people continue to think this when all of the protesters I’ve seen are very clear that they’re protesting the donations, and NOT the speech.

    Is it clear, now?

    For the record, I’ve never been to a Chick-Fil-A, so my “boycott” will be an easy one. 😀

    Also, I believe that Mr. Cathy can say whatever he wants about marriages; I completely support free speech. I just find failed mind-reading to be really ridiculous.

    • Steve Sanchez

      Reply

      Did you not read the accompanying article? It breaks down how much money actually gets donated to “anti-gay orgs. Read it then comment. Thanks.

      • Nohm

        I have read it, and I don’t fully agree with his description of which of those groups are and are not anti-gay rights.

      • Nohm

        To be clear, I read it before I posted. Just because that guy says something doesn’t mean that it’s fact.

        Therefore, I read it, and then commented.

        Authoritarians are interesting people.

      • Nohm

        Hi Steve,

        If I owned a company, and my company only donated $100 to the KKK, and I said, “hey, it’s only $100”, would that be okay?

        I mean, my company only donated $100 to the KKK. That’s not a lot of money, right? To the KKK.

        It doesn’t matter how much was donated. The action of the donation is the problem.

      • Steve Sanchez

        And what exactly is the problem with the organizations he donated to? Are you really likening these orgs to the KKK? If so, I guess you will never enjoy a chicken sandwich.

        Pretty specious. I expect better from you Nohm.

      • Nameless Cynic

        Wow, Steve. Intentionally obtuse. You can do better than that.

        He did not compare the groups in question to the KKK, and you know it. Try answering his question instead of trying to divert it.

        I, however, WILL compare homophobic groups with the KKK, in that they both intentionally discriminate against minorities.

        But that’s just me. Nohm did not. His point was that, even though the amount of money given was miniscule, it still amounts to a donation to a group you disagree with.

        Your answer was intentionally off-topic, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

      • Nohm

        Hi Steve,

        You wrote: “And what exactly is the problem with the organizations he donated to?”

        Some of them actively fight against the civil rights of gay Americans.

        Therefore, some of them actively fight against the civil rights of free Americans, and I will fight that always, whether they are gay or Christian or both or something else altogether.

        “Are you really likening these orgs to the KKK?”

        Not exactly, and certainly not in regards to lynching (which even the KKK and white supremacy neo-nazi groups can’t really get away with any more), but they are the same in that they are actively fighting against the civil rights of other free Americans, for specious reasons that aren’t supported by evidence.

        As Nameless Cynic said, and given your own history of often using hyperbole, I’m wondering if you are being intentionally obtuse here. Are you?

        “If so, I guess you will never enjoy a chicken sandwich.”

        Chick-fil-A is hardly the only place that serves chicken sandwiches; I had a delicious pollo asada torta on Monday, in fact. I only recently learned that we have a Chick-fil-A on the campus in my town, but I rarely go to campus (because I’m almost 40 now).

        I have never been to a Chick-fil-A, but that’s because I’ve never known of where one is, and not because of the beliefs of its owner (which I don’t care about).

        “Pretty specious.”

        I completely disagree. I think you misunderstood what I wrote.

        Again, my point is this: if I had a company, and my company only donated $100 to an organization that was fighting against the civil rights of any free Americans (e.g., Christian Americans), is it okay that my company only donated $100 instead of $1,000,000?

        As I said above, “It doesn’t matter how much was donated. The action of the donation is the problem.“

      • Steve Sanchez

        And what civil rights are you referring to? Marriage? Nope. They can never marry. Marriage has always meant matrimony between a man and a woman. Always. Civil unions? Fine. Marriage? Never.

        BTW, I’m sure that who ever donated to the Uganda cause was not aware that they were trying to execute homosexuals. No Christian would ever support that. I’d like you to find out if anyone knew beforehand that the Uganda Gov’t was doing this, then they contributed. If so, then they need to be ostracized.

      • Nohm

        Hi Steve,

        You wrote: “And what civil rights are you referring to? Marriage?”

        For one, sure.

        “Nope. They can never marry.”

        They sure can in a few states, now. And they can marry in certain countries, such as Canada.

        That way, they can get the same benefits of marriage that heterosexual couples have.

        “Marriage has always meant matrimony between a man and a woman.”

        Please support this claim. If you attempt to support this claim by using the Bible, and only the Bible, please be aware that I will be bringing up the many patriarchs in the Bible where matrimony was between a man and many women, and The LORD didn’t seem to have an issue with it.

        In addition, in Muslim countries, marriage is matrimony between a man and up to four wives. Therefore, your statement is incorrect in any Muslim country, where marriage obviously has not “always meant matrimony between a man and a woman.”

        “Always.”

        Muslims and many of the LORD-supported kings (such as David) would seem to disagree with you here.

        “Civil unions? Fine. Marriage? Never.”

        I see no legal difference between the two. Please show me what the legal difference is because, as you can imagine, I don’t care what someone would claim to be the theological difference between the two.

        Obviously, if I don’t believe in a God (regardless of what Paul said to the Romans), I’m not going to believe that God determined what marriage really is (and, even then, the Bible itself doesn’t match your description).

        “BTW, I’m sure that who ever donated to the Uganda cause was not aware that they were trying to execute homosexuals.”

        For my own curiosity, why are you sure about this? Did you follow this in the news when it was happening? The Ugandan government was not exactly hiding what their plans for homosexuals (death) was.

        As I mentioned in another comment, you’re engaging in the “argument from incredulity” fallacy here.

        You agree that the KKK, during their lynching time, viewed themselves as good Christian men and women, right? Would you say, “I’m sure the KKK were not aware that some of them were trying to lynch African-Americans”?

        “No Christian would ever support that.”

        As I mentioned in another comment, you’re engaging in the “No True Scotsman” fallacy here.

        “I’d like you to find out if anyone knew beforehand that the Uganda Gov’t was doing this, then they contributed.”

        This is a fair request, and I’ll look further into this. If it turns out I’m wrong, I’ll post a comment here admitting as such. I’d also encourage you to research (I know, I know) this issue, as you might have missed it when it was happening.

        But, as I said, the Ugandan government wasn’t exactly hiding this idea, and they got it directly from Americans.

        “If so, then they need to be ostracized.”

        Ostracized?? That should be their punishment?

        Not in my opinion; I think it should be much stronger.

        Lastly, Steve, can you at least agree that, if the FRC knew the plans of the Ugandan government before they donated money to them, then it doesn’t matter how much money was donated? That the real issue is that the money was donated for such an awful cause to begin with?

        Can you at least agree with that?

  4. Richard Chavarria

    Reply

    I like the part of this post that says, “..that’s why you must be born again.”

  5. Steve L.

    Reply

    This may be the best thing that ever happened to Chick-fil-A!!
    God’s purposes here may be 5 fold!!

  6. Blythe

    Reply

    I am all for free speech, this person was free to say what ever he wanted, (within the law of course), but on the other hand, he shouldnt mind the fall out because others dont agree.
    its all such a storm in a tea cup.

    and I had never heard of the chain before all this. Doesnt sound very appealing though.

  7. The Jesus Man

    Reply

    Steve, thanx so much for the updates. Don’t have a Chick-fil-a were I live but would support the cause, What an wonderful opportunity to reach the lost. “I wish Christians” would see this. Steve our ultimate goal as Jesus said is to seek and save that which is lost Luke 19:10. If you say that you love God, than wouldn’t you reach out to them?

  8. Nameless Cynic

    Reply

    Really, Steve? Tell me again what Jesus said about homosexuality? Exactly nothing. If it is such a sin, why didn’t Jesus feel he should mention it?

    And Paul’s Letter to the Romans? He was talking about idolatry. That was the sin in question. As for the rest of it, those frisky pagans had a bunch of interesting customs, including the use of temple prostitutes, which could just as easily account for the “unnatural passions” in question there.

    As for the harm Chick-Fil-A is doing (aside from the damage to your arteries), I recommend you read this. But since I know that most of your readers won’t click through, let me give you the important two paragraphs (you’ll have to go there for the supporting links, though).

    Growing up is never easy. But, teenagers who grow up gay are four times more likely to take their own lives. No, that has nothing to do with our sexuality on its own — suicide rates are lower where gay kids are accepted. It’s because our institutions, and all too often the adults in our lives, tell us we’re not as good as our straight peers. In 29 states, it is legal for an employer to fire me for who I am. In 31 states, leaders and voters have told me that I am not worthy of the fundamental human right to marry. You want to marry because you love your Mr. Right; I have no rights to do the same. And, the consequences of this inequality are terrifying and real. For example, I can be denied access to my loved one on his deathbed. There are over 1,100 other rights that I am denied.

    When gays get so angry about a chicken sandwich, it is because Chick-fil-A has given around $5 million to fight to discriminate against us. When we praise brave Eagle Scouts who give up their badges in protest of the Boy Scouts of America’s prejudice, it’s not about scoring political points; it’s because there are kids in dens who are being taught to believe that they are less than equal. When we rant about the pastor who preaches that gays should be thrown into a concentration camp, we scream out of fear. And our fears are justified — in the last seven days, a lesbian in Nebraska was carved with a knife, a gay man in Oklahoma was firebombed, and a girl in Kentucky was kicked and beaten — her jaw broken and her teeth knocked out — while her assailants allegedly hurled anti-gay slurs at her.

    • vintango2k

      Reply

      That sounds like… yes… that sounds like crickets chirping… does anyone care about this person’s plight? Can anyone on this site offer a solution to help this person out?

      • vintango2k

        Here’s another fun fact, the Family Research Council donated 25K to defeat the effort in Congress to condemn a bill going through the Ugandan government that extends the death penalty to homosexuals… Chick-fil-A donates millions to organizations like the FRC. So uhmm… is this one of those situations where the old testament now ‘counts’ and we should be lobbying congress to extend death to homosexuals now Steve?

      • Nohm

        Hi Steve,

        You wrote: “Of course not, and you know it!”

        I’m glad you agree, and I acknowledge that this is consistent with other things you’ve said in the past.

        But Vin’s point about the “Family Research Council” still stands. Here is a group that tried to defeat the effort in Congress to condemn this action by Uganda to extend the death penalty to gays (now they just lock them up in prison, which is still a major problem, but I guess at least it’s not death).

        Therefore, again I’ll ask, even if Chick-fil-A only donated $100 to the “Family Research Council” (a group that supported a country’s government’s goal of putting gays to death for the sole “crime” of being gay), does that make it right, because it’s only a small amount?

      • Nohm

        Hi Steve,

        You wrote: “See my other comment where I answered this.”

        I would contend that you didn’t answer this; you simply expressed disbelief that the Family Research Council would do such a thing knowingly.

        That’s called “Argumentum ad incredulum” (an argument from incredulity), and it’s a fallacy. Then you stated that no Christian would do such a thing, and that’s the “No True Scotsman” fallacy.

        Steve, there are a lot of people running around this world who call themselves Christians, and you only agree with a very small slice of that group. The problem is that an outsider like me has no way of determining who is a “Real True Christian” and who is not, because each person says that they are one, and all of the other slices in the group are not.

        Because, to my knowledge, none of you can demonstrate this.

    • Nameless Cynic

      Reply

      Oh, Steve. Really? You take a brief cut of Romans out of context, and want to set up a belief system based on that?

      “All of the New Testament” is authoritative? What about 2 Peter 3:16? “(Paul’s) letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.”

      Romans 1: 20-32

      For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

      Statement: “God is all-powerful.” You should understand that – you keep making the same statement yourself. It’s the core belief that must be set up here.

      For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

      There’s the “crime” in question. They ignored Jehovah, and set up statues to other gods. Read it again. That is what they did. And that is then followed by a description of what the people did.

      In phrasing which is most likely mistranslated, by the way.

      You may want to reread Romans 1 again.

      • Steve Sanchez

        Nameless,

        I always appreciate liberal scholarship because it provides a great laugh. Seriously. I just read the liberal’s interpretation of what happened when Jesus turned the water into wine. Wanna hear it?

        You’re right about the idols, though, mentioned by Paul. Because of idolatry, there is a downgrading of human dignity culminating in shameful lusts. Guess what those are?

      • Nohm

        Hi Steve,

        You wrote (emphasis mine): “You’re right about the idols, though, mentioned by Paul. Because of idolatry, there is a downgrading of human dignity culminating in shameful lusts. Guess what those are?

        “Because of idolatry”.

        Hence, Nameless Cynic’s “liberal scholarship” in this issue is correct.

        But, I have to point out something.

        You wrote: “I always appreciate liberal scholarship because it provides a great laugh.”

        How do you demonstrate that your scholarship is more correct than “liberal scholarship”? Please explain.

        How do you demonstrate that your beliefs are more correct than the beliefs of liberal Christians?

        This is one of the primary problems with beliefs based on faith.

      • Nohm

        Hi Steve,

        You wrote: “Context”

        Okay. Please explain exactly how you use “context” to demonstrate that your scholarship is more correct than “liberal scholarship”?

        For example, please explain the exact context in which Paul’s epistle to the Romans was written, and how that supports your scholarship, and not the “liberal scholarship” that Nameless provided.

        Even after you acknowledged that the culmination of shameful lusts was “because of idolatry”.

        Lastly, is it possible, in your opinion, to be in love someone without lusting for them, shameful or otherwise?

  9. T. Alvarez

    Reply

    I just came back from eating at Chick Fil-A.
    I stood in line with my kids for 1 hour 50 minutes to order our meals.

    The support from my small town for Chick Fil-A is overwhelming. I even saw friends from a nearby town that came to eat there too to support them too.

  10. Nohm

    Reply

    Hi Steve,

    I had a really bad day today, and I apologize for being a bit more negative in my comments than I usually am.

    • Steve Sanchez

      Reply

      No problem. I hope you have a better day tomorrow Nohm. Go get some chicken nuggets and waffle fries with a cherry Coke tomorrow! 🙂

      • Nohm

        Again, I have no interest in going to a Chick-fil-A, since the only one I now know of is on campus, and parking there is a nightmare.

        Plus, I’m not much of a junk food guy. And I really dislike Cherry Coke.

      • Nohm

        Having said that, I am very interested in reading your responses to my points/questions from yesterday, regardless of how I phrased them.

      • Steve Sanchez

        Instead of going through all that, I think you would benefit from a book called “How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth.” It gives you the “rules” if you will, about how to accurately interpret Scripture.

        Todd Friel has a book called (and video series, I believe, called “Herman Who?” A book on hermeneutics. I haven’t seen them or read the book, but he’s solid.

        This is much easier for me. And you, being well-read and inquisitive, will add to your understanding about us, those ‘fascinating” believers.

        Thanks!

      • theB1ackSwan

        Granted that Coca-Cola have given money to marriage equality groups for some time now.

      • Nohm

        Hi Steve,

        You wrote: “Instead of going through all that, I think you would benefit from a book called “How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth.” It gives you the “rules” if you will, about how to accurately interpret Scripture.”

        I own this book; I bought it way back when I was a Christian.

        I disagree that it is a book “about how to accurately interpret Scripture”; it is a few people’s opinion about how to accurately interpret Scripture. I now own a few of these books, and none of them agree with each other, and I tend to find that what you call “liberal scholarship” is based more soundly on the evidence than Fee’s and Stuart’s opinions.

        “Todd Friel”

        Ugh.

        “has a book called (and video series, I believe, called “Herman Who?” A book on hermeneutics. I haven’t seen them or read the book,”

        Neither have I.

        “but he’s solid.”

        We’ll have to agree to disagree here, because I think Todd is many things, but “solid” (with regards to theology) is not one of them.

        He does have the Good Person script down to a T, though; I’ll give him that.

        “This is much easier for me.”

        But the problem here is that I wanted your opinion; I know the opinions of Fee, Stuart, and Friel.

        “And you, being well-read and inquisitive, will add to your understanding about us,”

        I disagree. I would only add to my understanding about those particular people. I don’t view “believers” as one big group; I view them as individuals. As I’ve written before, I ask questions to you because I want to know your answers, and not the answers of others. I get bummed out when you refer me to other sources, especially when it appears that you view them as authorities.

        “those ‘fascinating” believers.”

        You guys are fascinating to me, no question.

    • Whateverman

      Reply

      your dialogue in the comments has been gracious
      Gracious? That’s stretching the meaning of the word. Steve is unfailingly polite, but like everyone else, he occasionally displays anger and pettiness. I would say Nohm is gracious.

      and true
      This is a lie.

      • Nohm

        Hey, thanks WEM!

        To be fair, I’m certainly not always gracious.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *