The Right Opinion
The Left's Orwellian Assault on Chick-fil-A
To punish dissenters, left-wing politicians promise to use the full force of the government.
One of the more blatant displays of progressive thuggery is playing itself out in Boston and Chicago. Boston Mayor Thomas Menino threatened to keep fast food franchise Chick-fil-A from opening any restaurants in that city because he doesn't want any business operating there "that discriminates against a population." In Chicago, Alderman Proco "Joe" Moreno announced that he will pursue the same course in his district for the same reason. "If you are discriminating against a segment of the community, I don't want you in the 1st Ward," Moreno told the Chicago Tribune. Such "tolerance" is based on an effort to deliberately mischaracterize as anti-homosexual what Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy said about traditional marriage. That mischaracterization has been aided and abetted by a media more than willing to amplify the distortion.
The true story -- as opposed to what is currently being presented -- involved an interview of Cathy by Biblical Recorder editor K. Allan Blume. Blume asked Cathy about his support for traditional marriage. "Guilty as charged," Cathy answered. Further on in the interview, he explained what he meant. "We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that," he said. Blume also revealed that Cathy does not impose his beliefs on others. "We're a business that serves the public, all people are welcomed into Chick-fil-A, and frankly we do not feel called to weigh in on a lot of social activism that's taking place as it relates to the definition of the family, but we do definitely want to encourage strong families."
"Homophobic" references regarding gay marriage? None. That "inconvenient" fact was corroborated by Blume. "He was not saying 'guilty as charged anti-gay,'" noted Blume, who further revealed that Cathy "never even brought up that subject. Everything he stated was on the positive side...He never stated anything negative." The Biblical Recorder published the interview on July 7th. It was re-posted on July 16th by the Baptist Press, and subsequently picked up by the Huffington Post, the Associated Press, USAToday, the Los Angeles Times, and other news agencies.
The level of willful distortion media and public figures have engaged in, portraying Cathy's statement of a popular and religiously based position as a hateful rant, is chilling. Like the Huffington Post, which published the piece, "'The Onion' Introduces Chick-Fil-A's 'New Homophobic Sandwich,'" Chik-fil-A critics have vigorously made the case that Cathy's support of traditional marriage is little more than homophobic hatemongering. They further assumed that if Cathy is homophobic, that prejudice must be reflected in his company's policies regarding hiring and customer service. They did this despite Cathy's assertion that his company "does not feel compelled to weigh in on a lot of social activism that's taking place as it relates to the definition of the family[.]"
Hack politicians were more than comfortable to ride atop that wave of distortion. "Chick-fil-A doesn't belong in Boston," said Menino, who delivered a warning to the franchise. "If they need licenses in the city, it will be very difficult -- unless they open up their policies." Menino added an Orwellian outburst to his diatribe as well. "We're an open city. We're a city that's at the forefront of inclusion. That's the Freedom Trail. That's where it all started right here. And we're not going to have a company, Chick-fil-A or whatever the hell the name is, on our Freedom Trail." Thus, the "forefront of inclusion" is off-limits to those who don't align themselves with the reigning government's position.
Chicago alderman Moreno echoed Menino's faux self-righteousness, as well as his jackboot aspirations. In an op-ed piece presented to the Tribune by one of his aides, Moreno referred to Cathy's statements as "bigoted, homophobic comments." Then came the hammer. "Because of this man's ignorance, I will now be denying Chick-fil-A's permit to open a restaurant in the 1st Ward."
Leftist Mayor Rahm Emanuel supported Moreno's distortions and ambitions. "Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values," the mayor said in a statement. Emanuel's most recent discussion of Chicago values prior to this one was to tell the city's street thugs, who have driven Chicago's murder rate up 30 percent over last year, to "Take your stuff away to the alley." Since Mr. Emanuel is apparently resigned to a certain level of mayhem in his city, he has hectored those perpetrating it to move to another location away from children, but seemingly within the city limits -- the same city limits that he and his alderman would prevent a Christian-run business from occupying.
Thus the bankruptcy of progressive values, literally enforced by the heavy hand of government, is illuminated. One is left to wonder how many other would-be business owners in Boston and Chicago will be forced to reveal -- and perhaps "revise" -- their political ideology in order to set up shop in those cities. One might also wonder how many existing businesses will be checked to see if they also have the "proper" ideological credentials to remain in operation. With respect to Chick-fil-A, Moreno noted that's exactly what is expected. After contemptuously dismissing First Amendment concerns with, "zoning is not a right," he explained how the company could get back in his good graces. "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)."
Such arrogance is remarkable, especially when one considers the virtual certainty that these same people and their fellow travelers would be screaming "fascism!" if some conservative-minded community sought to ban gay-friendly companies such a Starbucks or Oreo Cookies from operating within their confines -- based on nothing more than comments made by company executives. Thus, another aspect of progressive bankruptcy is revealed: the complete lack of intellectual consistency, and the massive amount of hypocrisy such inconsistency produces.
Americans should be outraged by this overt intolerance masquerading itself as open-mindedness, the attempt to use government power as an ideological billy club, and the media's calculating effort to take what Cathy said and twist it into something completely different. Yet for progressives and their media enablers, this is the price one is expected to pay for refusing to kowtow to the parameters of political correctness.
On the other hand, it is very likely both Chicago and Boston are violating Mr. Cathy's First Amendment rights. Three Supreme Court cases, Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Service Commission, Rust v. Sullivan, and Board of County Commissioners v. Umbehr, make it clear that government may not deny a private business permits because of something said by its owner. Unless officials in either Boston or Chicago can produce evidence of discrimination by Chick-fil-A, preventing the company from operating within their respective cities is unconstitutional.
In other words, this controversy has been manufactured, plain and simple. It represents the epitome of the progressive impulse to control individual thought, using the threat of government retaliation as persuasion. It has been egged on by a corrupt media that no longer bothers to get the story right, when the right story doesn't accrue to progressive interests.
Furthermore, the idea that opposition to gay marriage is tantamount to homophobia is nothing more than a progressive construct aimed at forcing people to accept the gay activist agenda in its totality. It is a ham-fisted attempt to label someone who might be open to homosexuals receiving the same government-mandated services and benefits that married people do, but uncomfortable with redefining "marriage" -- a word commonly understood by every culture in the world for more than five thousand years -- as a hopeless bigot. As far as the activists and their enablers are concerned, one is all in with the gay activist agenda, or unrepentant homophobe who can literally be run out of town. It is precisely this kind of thinking on which the attempt to deny Chick-fil-A the ability to operate in Boston and Chicago is based. In other words, for "progressives," tolerance and totalitarianism are two sides of the same coin.

32 Comments
mark in massachusetts
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 9:52 AM
Mumbles Menino thinks he,and he alone,rules the roost in Boston.He needs to push against someone who will push back.Chick fil a should call his bluff and take him to court if he tries to deny them a building or occupancy permit.He's an Italian-American Catholic and he backs hate-filled,so-called 'tolerant' groups? He's a disgrace to the area,not just Boston.He has traded his soul to Satan for public fame and votes.
Bruce R Pierce in Owensboro, Ky
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 10:48 AM
Actually I believe the Mr. Cathy should comply with the wishes of those despots that want to keep his Company out. If it were not for those that were already employed I would suggest he even close the stores that are already there. Turning the other cheek would send an even stronger message; remember the admonishment to be nice to your enemy's and in doing so you heap coals upon their backs. The people of the Cities in question know why they won’t be able to get those sandwiches anymore; they may even do something about it. If not those communities are lost anyway.
Robinius in Broomfield, Colorado
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 10:50 AM
Why would anyone choose to live in Boston? They have elected an incredibly stupid man to be their mayor. Mr. Menino equates being pro traditional marriage with being homophobic? Boston and Chicago are obviously intolerant cities and should be avoided. Mr. Cathy has my support and continuing business. Hysterical fools like Menino have the support of nearly no one. I suggest he pick up a copy of a best selling book and read it carefully. The Bible. Although, as a Catholic he probably has a dust covered copy somewhere in his basement.
Miguel in TX
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 5:01 AM
Really? Do we have to bash religions other than our own to prove a point? Yes the man is overstepping his bounds as a Mayor and I'm sure the lawyers have been chomping at the bits for some new reason to make money off of the working class.
Ken in Dayton, OH
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 10:52 AM
The radical left is comprised of mostly simple-minded and gullible people, which is why they quickly resort to name-calling and demagoguery when confronted with facts and rational thought. I will now drive drive 20 miles out of my way for a Chick-a-fil sandwich and definitely stay away from Boston and Chicago in the forseeable future. Kudos and God bless you, Mr. Cathy!
wjm in Colorado
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM
Chicago and Baltimore, the new Sodom and Gamorah.
Rod in USA
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM
Nice observation. But yo left out New York and San Francisco! ;--)
wjm in Colorado
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 3:33 PM
Pick any two liberal enclaves you wish, if the shoe fits............
Miguel in TX
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 5:02 AM
Looks like you might be surrounded by them coast to coast...
Rod in USA
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 12:58 PM
I occasionally find it sad and humorous at the same time that the minority that are the homosexual crowd, would be so insecure as to have emotional reactions every time someone says something that does not absolutely embrace their lifstyle as being every bit as normal as the majority (heterosexual).
It could be construed as an admission that their lifestyle is not normal and they know it. "Accept us! Accept us! You *must** accept us!*"
Now I am not a homophobe, but I do not support gay marriage and I think such behavior is best kept private (whether you are homosexual or heterosexual). I just find it sad that the majority are contionually being goaded, coerced, taunted, attacked (etc.) into accepting and embracing behavior which is not in keeping with their beliefs, while at the same time, the minority (homosexuals) refuse to even discuss that their behavior might not be normal. Double standard. Hypocritical, if you really think about it objectively.
rippedchef in sc
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 1:15 PM
They are guilt ridden and miserable,always looking for some type of confirmation that their behavior isn't heinous.They need to parade around,be noticed-they need drama,they thrive on shocking people,always looking for the person who will stand against them as a target for their wrath.They need to lash out,they have to hate-their knowledge of the sinfulness of their behavior is in-born and they can't escape it.They are consumed by their sin and have only the desperation of the hell bound to direct their actions.I know we are to hate the sin and love the sinner,however with the innate threat to my family,I'm afraid my compassion is quite faint.
Rod in USA
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 1:07 PM
Arnold: I made my first comments after reading only half of your article. Sorry I was redundant with your second half! Totally right on the money!
As I read the post, I envisioned immatute LGBT fanatics picketing Chick-Fil-A, which they may have a right to do to a certain degree. But then I envisioned them harrassing customers:
LGBT Picketer: "How can you support this horrible establishment?!?!"
Patron: "I stopped to get lunch. What's the big deal?"
Picketer: "They supprsee gay rights!"
Patron:" I think those remarks were misconstrued and taken out of context."
Picketer: "Homophobe! Gay basher! We have rights too! How dare you criticize us!?!?!"
Patron: "I don't believe I said anything critical of you, and if you rewind the tape..... you will find I said nothing at all about my position on LGBT issues at all."
You see where it is going. Scariest part is the leftist progressives doing just as Arnold points out: bearing the billy club to opress a business over a non-business issue.
rippedchef in sc
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 1:18 PM
I would add-"get outta my face and away from my family before you get hurt"
swizard101 in Santa Maria CA
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 4:28 PM
An open challenge to any Chick-Fil-A boycotter: How does the message about "diversity" get advanced when you demand others tolerate your views, and then demonstrate intolerance of their views by boycotting a restaurant whose owner has done nothing more than voice views (when asked) which fall outside of those you will tolerate? Does the boycott not demonstrate intolerance of his personal preference as he actually stated it? Does the boycott demonstrate something altogether different?
Responses that keep focused to the question above will be respected and debated if they refrain from the broader issue. Keep in mind that this writer draws a clear distinction between the issue of tolerance and equating that with approval. I believe from what I have read that the owner of that company has expressed his views in a manner that clearly shows tolerance for other views and life choices, but not approval of them.
Those who demand approval need not respond unless they are willing to offer that same approval to the owner of Chick-Fil-A and denounce the boycott, mayors, and zoning boards whose actions intend to damage and restrict a peaceful conduct of business and business growth.
DAVID in DALLAS TX
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 4:38 PM
Can I go just one day, just one day without hearing about this 3% of the population who think they are so oppressed?
Bubba in USA
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 5:26 PM
Went to Chick Fil A last week, yesterday and will go on August 1. I'm not even a huge fan of chicken but this bullying cannot stand. Encourage your family and friends to do the same!!
Richard Ryan in Lamar,Missouri
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 7:18 PM
My family loves Chick-ril-a. This whole bruhaha will just make us more likely to eat at Chick-fil-a any time we are near one. We have a granddaughter who is a lesbian. We do not approve of her life style, but we don`t make an issue of it. She just had to point out to me that Chick-fil-a is against the so-called gay individuals. I advised her that Mr. Cathy had said nothing against gays and that he only said they support traditional marriage. I also informed her that I too supported traditional marriage. These people don`t bother to check out the facts, they just automatically jump to the defensive posture if someone expresses an opinion different from their own. By the way, gays are anything but gay. They can be the most violent people on earth.
Miguel in TX
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 5:10 AM
Fact: Over $2 million dollars have been funneled by Mr. Cathy into anti-gay legislation that denies the rights of a SMALL group of citizens their rights that are provided via marriage.
Capt. CAll in New Mexico
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 11:25 AM
Okay, so what? How many millions of dollars have been spent by homosexual groups to deny the rights of Christians to live by their beliefs? Hmmm? Marriage is ALWAYS about heterosexuality, and ALWAYS has been. It is people like you who are trying to change the status quo, trying to deny the rights of Believers. Even if you do succeed in calling your abnormal relationship "marriage," that will not make it so. You are exactly right---homosexuals are a "small" part of the population. So we are not going to bow to your agenda to try to force the views of the minority onto the majority.
Miguel in TX
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 12:19 PM
Fact: Marriage WAS a religious institution until some near-sighted christians thought it would be a good idea to link the IRS with the institution of marriage. Never mix religion and politics and you won't have this sort of issue. If tax credits, rights in hospitals, etc. were not part of the package deal of marriage and if it wasn't necessary to get a license for marriage then things might be a whole lot different. Once it becomes a federal institution it is subject to the People's will and right now a majority of Americans feel that gay people are being kicked around a little by religious groups. I don't agree with the way either side is handling the current situation and both sides need to learn to coexist. Gay people aren't going away and neither are christians. Hate can be dialed down though and our individual actions toward each other can change. That doesn't mean your fundamental beliefs have to be torn down though. Most Christians in one way or another feel that being gay is a sin so let God do his work on judgement day and until then don't make this a living HELL for everyone.
M Rick Timms, MD in Georgia
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 1:56 PM
Most folks I know have no problem with Gay people doing what they do in the privacy of thier homes - just like heterosexuals. That iis not enough for many Gays however. They want to march into the streets half clad to expose their Gay lefestyle to the world in order to seek acceptance as normal.
I have no problem with the concept of civil union for Gay couples to gain access to spousal priviledges such as insurance coverage, viistations and other cicil rights. But that is not enough! Gay's now want us to redefine the definition of marriage - a religious institution - into one that they can play in = and perhaps feel a little more normal.
For what it is worth-- Chick-fil-A is a great restuarant that does not descriminate, is a very good employer and provides college scholarships to thousands of it's employees - many of whom are likely gay or lesbian.
They run their business in a Christian manner and if that is a sin, then they are "guilty as charged".
It is also clear that the two guys in Boston and Chicago have never had a delicious Chick-fil-A sandwich or they would have kept quiet. If you have never had one, give it a try.
Miguel in TX
Sunday, July 29, 2012 at 3:25 PM
I'll admit I was a little angry at first when I found out they have also given over $2 million to support legislation to anti-gay marriage legislation. Then I realized that like most people have said on this post..."free speech is still a right everyone has in our country." And the Supreme Court did rule that corporations also have that right via the cash they give to campaigns. Like I said in the above post, Marriage became a federal institution when it became entangled with the IRS and other agencies within the government. Instead of using legislation to restrict the rights of others why not use legislation to regain your religious institution from the government. Create legislation that causes civil unions to be the standard for all citizens and then those who choose a traditional marriage ceremony can do that based on their religious freedom. Churches still have the right to deny service to groups based on religious beliefs. You could also further separate government from religion by eliminating tax free status. This is just another way for the government to impose certain restrictions.
Richard Ryan in Lamar,Missouri
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 7:37 PM
Chicago`s alderman Moreno and mayor Emanual have good reason to oppose anyone who supports traditional marriage. Since they are both no doubt members of the Mans Country club in Chitown, they automatically go ballistic when someone has an opinion contrary to their own. Both they, and mayor Menino are blights and a curse on this country.
mark in massachusetts
Friday, July 27, 2012 at 9:17 PM
I have nothing against openly homosexual individuals.I do,however,have a problem with hetero-bashing fruits like Dan Savage.He's the type of intolerant bigot who I would LOVE to punch in his big mouth.If a heterosexual man esposed the vitriolic garbage that cums out of his mouth they would be accused of a bigotry and slapped with a civil rights violation.I guess if you're not a Black Panther,Liberal,Muslim,Homosexual,Socialist,Commie,or Fascist then your opinion is worthless.I wonder what a psychopath like Hitler or Stalin would have done to these people.They should be happy that they can be open with their views instead of trying to jam them down everyones throats.
Jim in Alabama
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM
Here's how communism works. Use the "Black Panther, Liberal, Muslim, Homosexual, Socialist, Commie, or Fascist" as a battering ram to weaken the cities gates. Once they're broken, slaughter the noble resistance first, then liquidate the useful idiots. Up against the firing squad wall go the "Free Speech Protesters". The ACLU won't last a month. The Hippies will be sent to work camps. The Rainbow will find itself turned to a dark monotone, in the back of the closet, or getting stomped. The race baiters will be told that's no longer a problem in the New Society and be shut up or shot.
The truth is that all the fools useful to the destruction of a society are useless in the building of a new one. And the northern reaches of Alaska will become the new Siberia.
The most frightening thing about this new wave of assaults is the degree to which the left turns on a dime and speaks the latest "Party Line" with one voice. Mark Levin pointed out that 3 months ago the Chick-fil-A position was Obama's position! Now, barely a month since Obama came out for Gay Marriage, anyone who whispers his former position is an Enemy of the People, and must be publicly castigated and threatened. Communist Parties everywhere have enforced this kind of Party Discipline for a century, with a life and death severity, within their hierarchies, from the top down. Now we seem to be watching the next generation of thought control...spontaneous thoughtless obedience, no jack-boot needed, and no threat beyond the possible disapproval of the leftists adopted Psycho-circle of the "Good People."
Greg in Mass. in Weymouth, Ma.
Sunday, July 29, 2012 at 12:48 PM
Scary formula Jim, but oh so true. I don't wish it on anyone, but it would be so much fun to be a witness to the new so-called FAIR SPEECH, ANTI DISCRIMINATION crowd advocates, when it is their turn to be turned on and discriminated against by the GOVT. that doesn't need their usefull idiotness anymore. They would be like the Romanian dictator Cecescau's(sp) in the courtyard facing a firing sqaud of the people they dominated and subjugated for so long. I still remember his wifes quotes just before they were opened fire upon. She was yelling at her husband to tell the crowd and firing squad to tell them who they were. They can't do this to us. We are the monarchy. This is what all the hate-speech disiplinarians will be saying to their firing squad. DON'T THEY KNOW WHO WE ARE???/// They most definitely know who they are.." USEFUL IDIOTS.' God Save the USA.
pete in CA
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 7:00 PM
The real problem in this country today is that hetro-phobia is so widespread.
enemaofthestatistquo in GA
Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 9:10 PM
Jim in AL; "The truth is that all the fools useful to the destruction of a society are useless in the building of a new one. And the northern reaches of Alaska will become the new Siberia." That's why the US can't drill in ANWR, must leave it pristine for the useful idiots, they'll be digging for oil with shovels, those are the shovel ready jobs!
Miguel in TX
Sunday, July 29, 2012 at 4:07 PM
One thing is for sure, Most of you on here have an active imagination. Instead of using it to create doomsday scenarios you should use it to think of ways to mold your country into what our founding father's would have wanted. But let's not forget some of those founding father's possessed slaves. Some ideals are worth examining and amended for the betterment of our country's survival. I see no benefit in denying the rights of anyone. The 'far right' doesn't like it when industries are over regulated so why over regulate someone?