Skip to comments.(Vanity) One Man, One Chick, or Unintended Consequences
Posted on 08/05/2012 7:31:32 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
One of the biggest news stories in the past week was the brouhaha over the remarks of one Dan Cathy (President of the fast food chain Chick-Fil-A) concerning support for traditional marriage. Homosexual activists were aghast that in this day and age, someone was allowed to run afowl of the anti-public-
blasphemypiety laws, and began calling for a boycott, as well as denouncing Chick-Fil-A as a purveyor of Hate.
Some of the usual (left wing) suspects joined the fray; among them, GLAAD, who released a report that Chick-Fil-As brand rating had plummeted following Dan Cathys remarks; Chicago Alderman Proco "Joe" Moreno, who announced that he would block Chick-Fil-A from building a new franchise location in his ward (Chicago Mayor Rahm Dead Fish Emmanuel, who declared the Chick-Fil-A did not represent Chicago values, backed him up); and Bostons mayor, Thomas Menino, who sent a letter to Cathy stating in part that [t]here is no place for discrimination on Boston's Freedom Trail and no place for your company alongside it. San Francisco Mayor Edwin Lee weighed in on Twitter, first declaring Very disappointed #ChickFilA doesnt share San Franciscos values and later stating Closest #ChickFilA to San Francisco is 40 miles away & I strongly recommend that they not try to come any closer. Sarah Palin, on the other hand, who during her publicized bus tour last summer, toured historical sites in Boston, proudly Tweeted a photo of herself with her husband Todd standing inside a Chick-Fil-A, saying Stopped by Chick-fil-A in The Woodlands to support a great business. (She was visiting the Woodlands to attend a rally for Tea Party candidate for the U.S. Senate, Tom Cruz. Cruz ended up defeating the GOP-e approved candidate in a runoff, and will likely join the Senate for real this fall. Double win for Sarah!) And even ¨ber-RINO and Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, pulled his head out of his cloaca long enough to chastise other government officials for their actions, saying during a weekly radio address that it's not the government's place to "look at somebody's political views and decide whether or not they can live in the city, or operate a business in the city, or work for somebody in the city." And finally, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee weighed in on Facebook, encouraging people to support Chick-Fil-A by going there to eat on August 1.
What happened? Two things; or really, three. First, and most importantly, the buycott worked: all across the Country, Chick-Fil-A franchises were mobbed with customers, many of them having to call in numerous extra staffers to handle the rush: it was the single largest sales day in franchise history. Secondly, the press made a great show of minimizing the story; when News crews showed up, the story was not given much airtime, nor emphasized, and in many cases, did not even make it on the air. And finally, the homosexuals and totalitarians, having seen the determination of ordinary Americans not to be bullied by an alliance of perverts and leftist politicians, decided to up the ante a little: a bomb threat was called into a Chick-Fil-A in West Virginia; graffiti reading Tastes Like Hate in a font resembling that in Chick-Fil-As own advertising was spray-painted on a franchise in Torrance, CA; and a man, Adam Smith, who at the time was the CFO of a multimillion dollar publicly traded company, made a YouTube video of himself berating a young woman working the drive through window of a Chick-Fil-A franchise, but was not quick enough to delete the video before it went viral: he was fired from his job within hours. (Watch the video here; and recall as you do just which side claims to be fighting for tolerance.)
Now, claims of hate and similar posturing aside, the crux of the issue is that the homosexual community and their liberal and Communist supporters (but I repeat myself) are making what amounts to a full-court-press for marriage; their claim at first is that they are being discriminated against because they cant marry who they want, but that is specious: many heterosexuals do not get to marry who they want -- have you ever read Romeo and Juliet? Very well, comes the response from the homosexuals, that just proves our point: just as Romeo and Juliet were unhappy over being denied their love, surely you see that denying marriage to homosexual couples is cruel? Well, no, I dont: the purpose of marriage is not just the happiness of those involved, unless you want to justify the man runs off with his secretary / woman runs off to Europe to find herself (*) divorce court mentality. Marriage is also about providing for the raising of children; about a help-meet for life (till death do us part); and, speaking of death and children, of inheritance.
And it is here that the rubber chicken meets the road; that is, when pressed, many homosexual activists will claim that it is this, above all else, which is so wretchedly unfair, and discriminatory, about current laws. We all know of the horrors of AIDS; and homosexual activists often claim that they have no way to visit their partner in the hospital and to be guaranteed admission, no way to arrange for community property or inheritance in the case of their death; if only, if only, we were allowed to be married, it would all be clear sailing. And it is for this reason that I am against homosexual marriage. Because, in todays modern, enlightened society, has anyone noticed what the I Want To Be Married To Be HappyTM / no-fault divorce movement has done to heterosexual marriage? People can get married at the drop of a hat; and once the process has started, its a feeding frenzy for the lawyers. Think carefully about what you want, vs. what you just think you want: in fact, once homosexual marriage is accepted, and "gay" divorces (now theres an oxymoron for you, given the historical meaning of the words!) are in full fling, it will be an open question whether the homosexual community will be happy with what they have fought for, when their worst enemies are their former lovers. Or even worse, if it comes out that the treatment of a man divorcing a woman, is generally much worse than the treatment of a man divorcing another man, you just know some enterprising young lawyer is going to come along and demand that the laws governing heterosexual divorces get revised -- and ironically enough, on the same equal protection grounds on which homosexuals are seeking marriage. And Im sure the homosexuals sometime allies, the feminists, are just going to be ticked *pink* about that possibility. The law of unintended consequences strikes again!
Be careful what you wish for -- you just might get it.
(*) ...in the beds of several sophisticated European lovers, no doubt.
Thank you for this nice synopsis and excellent critique.
Chick-fil-A was the target of an orchestrated attack much like the one that was perpetrated against Rush Limbaugh. Progressive entertainers routinely use language that makes the word “slut” sound tame. Businesses are routinely and successfully targeted by progressive groups. The businesses pay their tribute or change company policy and no one is the wiser. Targets are carefully selected. They would not attempt a massive attack on the Black Muslims or the Catholic Church because they would clearly fail. Catholics and Muslims have said the exact same thing as Dan Cathy. They miscalculated in their attacks on Chick-fil-A and Limbaugh but have been successful in many other cases. If Chick-fil-A wanted to adopt Chicago values they would have to shoot an occasional patron. It would seem that Mayor Rahm Dead Fish Emmanuel should have higher priorities considering the number of fatalities in Chicago.
In Islam they have loopholes like these. Prostitution is illegal, but 15 minute marriages with insurance of a divorce afterwards is OK...
We see where this gay-marriage thing is going...
Now, aside from that point, what is clear is that insanity is starting to rule. Insanity is funny when it is temporary, say, we drink some wine, we know we can go back to it by sobering up for a few hours. WIth gays, they do not go back, they are worse than addicted, they are stuck on insane and stupid, and HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE SEALS IN THAT INSANITY!!! for the state to be able to exploit people through this deviancy of the word marriage, lopping everyone seriously married under state scrutiny and destruction.
Homosexual marriage is a necessary step towards the incarceration of the whole country into a legal mumbo jumbo death camp, much like the Soviet Union was a vast sewage system of human life.
What it is, it is a mentality of socialist entitlement, where those who do not even want to try to work or approach the work of sanity, have completely given up, and, yet, they still claim for a throne, for a vanity self belief of grandeur into kingships of bling bling homosexuality or what not affirmative action.
Their insane profit and insanity in indulgence in luxury claim - because of some past temporary insanity vaguely blamed upon those who are sane today and recovered - is to ask to be totally insane and “happy-gay”, and yet to rule and distrust those taking care of them.
Having the IRS take care of Obamacare, child support and all of these things related to marriage and family court decisions that are completely crazy and automated is just that. The bureaucrates sit there completely clueless, continuing the machine of collection going no matter to whom the money goes to, completely ridiculing the concept of collecting taxes, but wasting them to some ridiculous buffonery.
GAAKK!!!! I have to wait 8 hours and 13 minutes before Chick-Fil-A opens near me!
I can't wait to pick up some of the above!
Chick-fil-A is being attacked for the owners expressions of what he belief relative to marriage. There is no history of discrimination at Chick-fil-A in relationship to sexuality or race of their employees.
What the hell is the problem?
The young girl that was the victim in the “attack video” against Chick-fil-A handled the situation with class and grace. She deserves a bonus!
he belief = his beliefs
Thank you so much for your wonderful essay, dear grey_whiskers!
I like what you wrote!
For me though the point that hit the hardest was your last one about Unintended Consequences. In many ways I think the biggest pushers of “Gay” marriage are the Lawyers. They see major dollar signs over litigating divorces between gays. Especially since so many of them are drama queens.
Drama in a divorce means BIG money to the lawyers.
Or, at a bare minimum for Chicago values, you would have to slip envelopes full of money to the cashier, the cook and the manager to make sure that your order didn't get "lost"
The lavender mafia has only specious arguments.
You can will your entire estate to a dog after the governments slice.
The only time I witnessed problems with visitation of a gay in the hospital was when the current and former partner visited at the same time.
Please, Lord, let MY brand rating plummet like CFA's!
One further point is that once insurance companies have an avenue through which they can gather accurate information about disease rates and life expectancy of homosexuals, they will begin to rate their risks appropriately. I.e., when they see two male “spouses” on a family form, they will infer that this is a homosexual relationship and put their information into a special category.
It won’t take too many years to determine how much more it will cost the insurance companies to cover homosexuals. And they will charge out the wazoo. So to speak.
Good thoughts, whiskers. I also happen to think that about 80% of the demand of gays is for the purpose of grooming the next generation of gays by then forcing adoption of children to them and then subjecting the kids to deviant lifestyles.
OMG - that's great!
Or even worse, if it comes out that the treatment of a man divorcing a woman, is generally much worse than the treatment of a man divorcing another man, you just know some enterprising young lawyer is going to come along and demand that the laws governing heterosexual divorces get revised — and ironically enough, on the same equal protection grounds on which homosexuals are seeking marriage.
They can use gay marriage to totally revise the social contract of heterosexual marriage making it a downright harmful legal agreement to parents and children.
The push towards ghettoizing heterosexual sex relationships has come from homo activists. Sex with romance, love and commitment is taboo. Heterosexual sex is protrayed like homos experience it in the nearest bathhouse. It wrecks normal sexual expression and people like bathhouse behavior does to homos, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.