My Thoughts on Chick-Fil-A

Setting the Stage and Getting It Right

Dan Cathy, president and CEO of Chick-Fil-A, was at a Christian leadership conference of sorts last month [July 2012] where Rev. K. Allan Blume of Baptist Press cornered Cathy for an interview. The interview, which according to Blume lasted no more than 30 minutes, was conducted casually in the prayer room of Colonial Baptist Church of NC. They spoke about family values and how Cathy’s values have shaped the values of Chick-Fil-A and guided him in leading a multi-million dollar company. When asked how he felt about some who dislike Chick-Fil-A’s support of traditional family, he responded, “Well, guilty as charged…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.” It was this seemingly innocuous statement given to a Christian media outlet, by a Christian leader, in the context of a Christian church that caused liberal media groups to interpret something that just isn’t there and wasn’t said by Cathy. In his original interview with Baptist Press, Cathy said NOTHING derogatory or demeaning toward any group or person that didn’t share his position nor can it be inferred from his original comments. {http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=38271}

It was reported by the Huffington Post (owned by America Online which is in turn owned by Time Warner – a media group that has never been known for playing nicely with any form of conservativism) that Chick-Fil-A took an anti-gay / anti-same-sex marriage position. {http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html} This sparked a firestorm of media hullabaloo both against and supporting the fast food chicken chain. Mike Huckabee called for a national Chick-Fil-A Day which witnessed tens of thousands of supporters flooding the chain’s 1,608 stores nationwide in support of the chicken purveyor’s alleged corporate position. Major same-sex rights groups also called for a boycott of Chick-Fil-A that included a “kiss” day, two days after Huckabee’s appreciation day, that encouraged same-sex couples to take videos or pictures of themselves kissing at or in front of a Chick-Fil-A restaurant.

The stage was now set for global media attention and backlash. The issue of same-sex marriage vs. “traditional” marriage had now invaded fast food! I’ll confess. Originally, I thought Dan Cathy was imprudent for making his statements because it put his 1,608 franchisees, who may or may not agree with him, in fiscal, personal, and societal danger. I agreed with Cathy’s statement but disagreed with the apparent imprudence behind making them. I have come to change my mind on that position in recent days. In fact, that is exactly why this post has taken so long to come to fruition  - I have had to wade through a lot of media garbage to get down to the truth.

IMHO, Dan Cathy Was Right

I have been asked repeatedly about what I thought about this whole Chick-Fil-A debacle and have answered the same way to every questioner. I had even posted a joking comment on Facebook that Huckabee and Chick-Fil-A missed a great opportunity for even more increased sales by not coordinating with the boycott “kiss” day which took heat and generated some nasty scorn. So, why do I think Cathy was right?

I believe Dan Cathy has, as does every American, the right to espouse his views as he sees fit, so long as it is done peaceably. Huh! Pesky little thing that First Amendment, isn’t it? That means that those who disagree with Cathy share the same right, so long as their information is correct. When information isn’t correct that more than borders misrepresentation. How, then, was Cathy right? I believe Cathy was right to voice his position. He was asked about his personal values and responded, initially, as an individual American and Christian. He has the right to do so and was right in answering Rev. Blume’s question. I also believe Cathy was right in upholding the biblical position of marriage; one which I have always held and will continue to unapologetically hold (see my post The Same-Sex Marriage Debate and the Christian, May 15, 2012).

In the same interview with Baptist Press {http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=38271} he implied that this was not merely his personal position, but was company policy – and so it is. Chick-Fil-A has never made their support of the biblical view on marriage and the family a secret. As was pointed out in the Baptist Press interview, the company supports college football in a big way, has started and/or supports foster care homes, a leadership foundation, and several other distinctly Christian organizations. They support the biblical teaching and idea of marriage and the family without apology. Not only do they do so, but let their stance bleed over into community service. In other words, they’re not just all talk.

I believe Dan Cathy was right for two reasons. First, he stood for biblical truth. Second, he exercised his First Amendment freedom. For both he and many in his organization have come under a variety of attacks.

What’s the Real Issue?

What’s the real issue here? The real issue is free speech. Most in the liberal media organizations and quite a few, not all, in the same-sex community ardently defend the First Amendment’s right to free speech until someone espouses a view which contradicts and questions their own. That kind of speech is branded hateful, unloving, ignorant, biased, discriminatory, and the list goes on. If the liberal media and same-sex community have the right to preach what they believe on the issue without criticism or question, why aren’t Dan Cathy, Chick-Fil-A, the tens of thousands who waited in mile-long lines to eat at Chick-Fil-A, and the several other companies who take the same stance afforded the same right? {http://www.theblaze.com/stories/here-are-5-christian-companies-that-join-chick-fil-a-in-publicly-proclaiming-their-bible-based-faith/}

The Chick-Fil-A media debacle has, if nothing else brought a major national problem back into the spotlight; free speech is largely a one-sided affair. One of my wife’s favorite movies is The American President. In it, President Shepherd, played by Michael Douglas, makes gives a speech to the country. In it he says, “You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours…Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free". While I don’t agree with the political tenor of the movie, the statement was correct. We cannot allow free speech to go out the window just because we disagree with those who disagree with us. Whether you agree with Dan Cathy or not is not the issue. The issue is whether or not we want the America of our forefathers or a nation terrorized by the rescission of one of our base freedoms for which so many have fought, bled, and died to preserve.

Post-Script

I have found the article published in the West Valley View recently on the matter very helpful. It’s a well thought out article and worth the read - http://westvalleyview.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=42746&SectionID=6&SubSectionID=141&S=1.