Wednesday, August 8, 2012

What I Think About: Polarization and Chicken Sandwiches

Chic-Fil-A drama--it's everywhere.  And technically I'm over it.  Way over it.  So in some ways I'm really bummed I'm writing this but here I am, plunking away on my Mac keys.  I tend to have multiple personalities this way.l

As a committed ally to the GLBTQ cause and a follower of Christ, I've wanted to stay out of the chicken sandwich debate but last Wednesday the Facebook rants were more than I could handle.  I'm not a "sit on the sidelines" kind of girl.  Mike Huckabee and people who are my Facebook friends were showing how committed Christians were since they were lined up at Chic-Fil-A and how this made the leftists crazy. (As though no Christian was ever on the left ... As though I can only be a "good" Christian if I eat a chicken sandwich or verbally condemn GLBTQ people as sinners).

I had a few people ask my take.

You asked for it.


I don't believe sexual/affectional orientation is a choice.  I've been my affectional orientation my whole life--why would it be different for someone else? (I know people have stopped "being" gay but I also know people who have "stopped" being brunettes.  It doesn't mean they were never brunettes--just that they've made a conscious decision to take actions to not be a brunette anymore--maybe because blondes have more fun and privileges. They will always be brunette, regardless of what changes they make to their lives/hair color).  You might believe orientation is a choice but you should know there is no solid proof one way or the other.  So your opinion is just that--OPINION not fact. The big question is this, should your opinion supersede the rights and opinions of others?  If so, why?

For the sake of this debate, I'm gonna play along with the "choice" theory even though I think it's hooey.  Let's talk about choices.

I was not born spouting opinions or toting a firearm but both of these CHOICES are protected.  I was not born a Christian but I CHOSE to become one and that choice is protected.  Choice is protected and valued ... except, it appears, where choosing to love someone is concerned.  Then that choice is discriminated against and put to a vote.  Don't forget, people, that real--and I mean REAL--persecution is coming.  We will be persecuted for CHOOSING Christ.   For CHOOSING our religion.   The precedent we set by denying justice and equality to those whose lifestyles we disagree with will come back on us.  Those we deny Christ to will have their say.  

Most importantly, Jesus did not require us to be clean and perfect before He loved us.  He LOVES people in the darkness.  He loves us at our darkest.  The only CHOICE that in unforgivable is denying Christ.  All other choices Christ can work with.  So get over your "it's a choice" moot point and and take people as they are.  Loving people is a CHOICE.  I CHOOSE to love as Jesus loved--without question and prerequisite because I believe HE makes all things work together for good.  


Now this whole stink started because Cathy stated Chic-Fil-A supports traditional marriage.  Sounds great, right?

But what is traditional marriage?  Look in the Old Testament Mosaic Law.  Ask King David.  I'm pretty sure the picture of "traditional marriage" was polygamy.  Yes, yes.  We live under the new Covenant.  The new covenant only denies polygamy to men who want to be church leaders.  Polygamy is not prohibited in the Bible and is, in fact, our longest standing picture of marriage.  Aren't we all brideS of Christ?  Does Chic-Fil-A really support "traditional" marriage that includes polygamy?  I doubt it.  What they support is the church definition of marriage being the unity of man and woman that came out of some church meeting long after the death of Christ.

Am I saying I'm for polygamy?  I did NOT say that.  The Bible clearly states everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial.  What I'm demonstrating is how "traditional" marriage doesn't exactly mean what Cathy thinks it means.  Traditional depends on who creates (and enforces) the tradition (we have a historical tradition of slavery but I'm pretty sure none of us are on board with maintaining that practice).

And while I'm on the topic, granting marriage equality doesn't take away what marriage means to "traditional" Christians.  The biggest threat to marriage is divorce (not marriage) and to that I say, Christians, look at your Church and the divorce that is rampant there.  Attack THAT practice and save marriages!


I know what the Bible says about homosexuality.  Do you know what it says about obesity?  Money grubbers?  We still let those people (who make those anti-Christian choices) in church and get married. What gives? Do you know what the Bible says about slavery (and do we support it)?  Do you know what it says about women who aren't virgins (and do we follow that mandate)?  Do you know what it says about powerful women and women leaders (and do we support it)?  Remember the Bible has been used as a bludgeon to uphold slavery, racial segregation, and objectification.  The WORD is truth; however, when used to be "right" rather than "righteous," it is a tool that turns people FROM Jesus rather than TO Jesus.

And now Jesus.  Half the people are supporting Chic-Fil-A because that's what Jesus would do.  Really?  Because the Jesus I know loves whores, and thieves, and the corrupt, and the unclean and He'd probably be feeding those people rather than supporting the Pharasiees who tell those whores they don't deserve equality because of their choices--because they don't uphold every aspect of the law.  The Jesus I know--well, He would be giving grace, not condemnation.

Our role is to turn people TO Jesus and let HIM work in their lives.  We are not the Holy Spirit; it is not our role to judge and convict sinners.  We are just tools who gets to love people so they know Jesus and let Him and the Spirit do mighty works in their lives.


Cathy--the President of Chic-Fil-A, as an individual, has a right to his opinion.  However he came out (pun intended) as a spokesperson for his company; thus, it makes sense those opposed to his opinions would lash out at the company.  

Right now you're probably thinking some "free speech" nonsense and that's what it is.  NONSENSE.  Our free speech has been and always will be limited.  Don't believe me? Threaten the President's life.  Go into a crowded venue and scream FIRE!  Trust me, there will be repercussions for what you say.

We can say what we want--that is a given--but with the right to free speech comes the responsibility to accept the consequences of our words.  This is especially true of Christians who will be held accountable for every word we say (Matthew 12:36).  Don't deceive yourself into thinking Cathy (or anyone) should be allowed to say whatever they want without consequence.  How dangerous that would be ...

On a business sense, I don't think states or cities should be able to deny permits because they disagree with a company's opinions, as long as their business practices are legal and ethical.  On the other hand, if individuals want to boycott (not persecute, boycott.  Boycotting is not persecution.  You want to know about persecution?  Read The Voice of the Martyrs) that is their right.

If you just said, "Amen," keep reading.  If you don't want the Government to interfere with opinions, and businesses, then why in the hell should Government be allowed to interfere with whom one loves and shares intimate relations with?  Big Brother Government is bad at work AND at home.  

Now some of my friends insinuate boycotting pushes people away and that Christians should love people rather than boycott them.  Brilliant argument, though tragically flawed. Those who boycott companies they perceive as being Anti-Gay are doing so because they LOVE people and they are taking a stand for equality.  Some support for the 1st Amendment.  Others boycott for the 14th Amendment. 


First, this isn't a right/left issue.  I know lots of Lefties who support Chic-Fil-A and a lot of Righties who refuse to eat Chic-Fil-A because they support martial equality.  Stop polarizing this issue Right/Left because no issues is as easily defined as right/left, regardless of what our politicians and media would like us to believe.  Look at me!  Fiscally conservative, socially liberal.  I don't fit in the box--neither do most people.

As for hate mongering--I know how Christians are labeled as being hateful for standing up for their right to their religious beliefs (frustrating because I'm so pro-equality but because I follow Christ I'm assumed to be an enemy to the cause).  But I also know how Christians draw a line in the sand and are point out the sins of everyone who isn't on their side of the line.  Christians call people they don't know sinners (and sometimes an "abomination") but get irritated when the "sinners" call them hateful?  Hmmm ... 

Here's the truth.  Both sides are slinging crap.  Left and Right.  Both sides.  Faith-based and non-faith based. BOTH SIDES.  So don't come to me with this "I'm being persecuted for my beliefs" garbage because I'm not throwing you a pity party or buying a chicken sandwich to help you feel less persecuted.

If you can dish it, you better be ready to take it.

Or you could learn to turn the other cheek.  I remember reading that somewhere before.  Maybe it was in the Bible.  Or did we forget that part when we were, you know, reading about how it is our Christian right to point out the sins of others (while ignoring our own) and condemn them/discriminate against them for who they love?


I support the rights of anyone who wants to eat at Chic-Fil-A or NOT.  Doing one does not make you a better defender of free speech, religion, the Republican Party, or Jesus.  Doing the other does not make you a hate-mongering looney liberal hell bent on bringing down marriage and The Church.

This whole incident has done one thing: it has demonstrated how Satan still uses the Pharisees of self-seeking pride and desire to be "right" in order to widen the chasm of misunderstanding and keep people who need Jesus from knowing Him (and keep people who know Jesus from loving like He does).


Want to comment?  Go for it but I reserve the right to moderate comments.  As the blogger I CHOOSE to limit your free speech if you are unable to enter into conversation and express yourself without being hateful, vindictive, attacking, defensive, or using offensive language/names toward me or others.


  1. I was actually out of town and almost completely cut off from social media when this broke, so I came back and was like what is going on with the chicken?

    I tried reading different articles/posts about it, but there was so much hate going on- from both sides, that I stopped even trying to read it all.

    Something I thought a lot about is how very little I know about the personal beliefs of the CEO's of the businesses that I frequent. And unless I'm willing to research everyone before I decide to go into a store, then I probably shouldn't get all up in arms over this one.

    In fact, I probably couldn't shop anywhere if I really researched- b/c I probably disagree with something that everyone believes.

    Maybe this is oversimplifying it- but it's how I choose to think about it.

    And as for Chick-fil-a? On a personal level: I will continue to eat there because out of all the fast food restaurants here, that has always been my favorite. It doesn't mean that I agree/disagree with what was said- it just means I like their chicken. And that I like everything that ours has done to support the local community.

    1. You were lucky for missing the fight! I'm with you, I won't let these sort of discussions change where I eat ...but I also won't judge if other people feel differently!

  2. I, too, am so over this whole thing. People make choices all the time. Whether or not to eat at a chicken place is pretty low on the list in the whole scheme of things.

    1. Yep. People fighting for free speech could prob find a better cause. And people wanting to boycott anti-gay companies might consider and oil boycott...lots of our oil producers aren't exactly gay friendly

  3. I'ce been nodding along to your entire post!! I wrote one similar...well, different, but its in total agreement with yours. I'm so glad I found your blog. :)


    1. Thank you :) I'm glad you found my blog bc now I've found yours :)


{Reverse Psychology}
I DO NOT like comments. Whatever you do, don't leave me a comment about this post or your thoughts or any connections you have to what I wrote. Seriously, I don't care.
(Did that reverse psychology work???)