Paul,
I wanted to take a minute to send you a note implore you to reconsider your support for Dan Cathy and Chick-Fil-A. I know we spoke (very briefly) and superficially about it the other day but I was hoping to take the time to frame the issue for you in a way that made it clear how very important this is.
I understand, for you, the issue seems to be their 1st Amendment right to free speech. You and I are both in agreement on this. Dan Cathy has every right to speak his mind and have his opinion, and any attempt to stop him from doing business via political red tape or government intrusion is wrong, plain and simple. Except for a few people who have decided to make statements that Chick-Fil-A is not welcome in their cities, however, there is no legal plan in place that I am aware of (in any of those cities) to actually block the stores from opening. There is also no attempt to close any existing stores.
Protests and boycotts by private citizens based on the actions and statements of that company, however, fall well within the parameters of the 1st Amendment. The constitution does not give us the right to speak in a vacuum and to be free of any consequences for what we say. Until Dan Cathy can prove that he has been denied something by the government or actually jailed for his opinion, he cannot say his 1st Amendment rights have been violated. I am not violating his rights by refusing to spend a red cent in his establishment, nor am I doing so by urging friends and family to do the same.
It is one thing to support his right to free speech (which I also support) but quite another to support the company itself. Supporting the company supports their message. Their message, based on their words and actions, is one of intolerance, bigotry, and exclusion. I'm not sure where the idea came from that people are attempting to claim that the company discriminates against gay employees or customers. To my knowledge, no one has actually ever claimed this and it is not the point at all. Whoever has decided to frame the argument to you in this manner is using a red herring to obfuscate the true nature of the outrage.
In addition to Dan Cathy's speech in which he used words to describe the fight for marriage equality rights as "twisted up," "deprived," and "arrogant," Chick-Fil-A has donated over 5 million dollars to the anti-gay groups "Focus on the Family" "Family Research Council" and "Exodus International."
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.co...ed-up-kind-of-stuff/politics/2012/07/24/44412
To break them down:
"Focus on the Family" is a group founded by James Dobson whose biblically inspired anti-gay rhetoric is a cornerstone of their ideology. They have fought against equal protection under the law for gay Americans for as long as I can remember.
Talking Points (Pro-Gay Theology) - Focus on the Family
"Family Research Council" is the anti-gay group run by Tony Perkins (NOT the actor)
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?incl=search/SEARCH_RESULTS&f=SEARCH_RESULTS&text_search=gay&x=0&y=0
"Exodus International" is group that, until very recently, practiced "Reparation Therapy" on gay men and women. You may have heard it spoken of facetiously as "Pray the Gay Away" but there is much more to it than that. It was families putting their children through (what amounts to) sanctioned spiritual torture because these children were taught that they were unworthy of the love of God or their family unless they became something other than what they were. The stories of depression and, in some cases, suicide that resulted from this are heartbreaking. Although Exodus no longer practices this sham therapy, they are still working vehemently against the rights of fellow Americans to be protected under the law from discrimination.
Exodus International
As for marriage equality, most of those who are working against it see it from a strictly religious perspective. Marriage, however, is a civil, state sanctioned contract that does not rely on religion for its validity. Members of the clergy are allowed to work on behalf of the state to legally perform marriages. You can still have a legal marriage without the benefit of "clergy" but you cannot have a religious marriage recognized without the state license. Both a marriage performed by a priest and a marriage performed by a JP (or even, for that matter, a drive-in chapel in Las Vegas) are equal in the eyes of the law. To have Dan Cathy refer to us and our relationships as "illegitimate" and to give these large amounts of money to groups dedicated to keeping us 2nd class citizens (or worse) is appalling to me and, I hope, to those I know and call friends.
I understand that rights for gays (and marriage rights in particular) are not something that are on your day to day radar, as they are on mine, but I beg you to look at it from both a human rights as well as a family perspective. Your boys will be close to marrying age soon and, God willing, grandchildren won't be all that far behind. If one or more of those grandchildren should turn out to be gay, will you be able to look them in the eye and tell them you stood in support of a militant group who thought of them as unworthy of God's love or as "illegitimate" in their relationships and lives?