Fast-food franchise Chick-fil-A, known for its juicy chicken sandwich, has come under attack. Franchise head Dan Cathy made public statements in support of traditional marriage and has philanthropic connections to such alleged hate groups as Focus on the Family and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.
Although Cathy and his staff have affirmed their determination “to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect—regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender,” this statement, which reads like something from the Department of Education, is apparently a ruse. According to gay-advocacy organizations The Huffington Post and The New York Times, as well as leading Democratic pols such as Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, Cathy is trying to stamp out (you guessed it!) “tolerance.” Every time someone bites into one of his sandwiches, the customer promotes hate. Presumably if one bites twice, one gets cholesterol poisoning and causes a recurrence of Auschwitz.
I feel sorry for the multicultural left, which has triumphed so completely in the Western world that it doesn’t have any real enemies to fight anymore. Can one really take organizations such as Focus on the Family, which advocates heterosexual marriage, as a grave neo-fascist threat? Things aren’t looking up for the warriors against Christian bigotry because most of the opposition has now melted into putty. The only thing progressives can do these days is portray quasi-wimps such as Cathy as would-be Grand Inquisitors, even though he runs around oozing affection for the left’s protected classes.
Even more depressing from the standpoint of left-wing activists, the authorized “conservative” opposition concedes most of the left’s case before registering its tepid objection. The emphatically Republican editorial in our paper warned against new outbreaks of “religious intolerance” coming from gay activists. One might think that Rahm Emanuel was behaving like some crazed Christian fanatic during the Age of Religious Wars.
On Fox, GOP fixtures Bill O’Reilly and Laura Ingraham expressed concern that the liberal media was going after Chick-fil-A unfairly and that Chicago and Boston’s mayors were pulling out all stops to keep the franchise from crossing into their antiseptically leftist municipalities. According to Bill and Laura, this grim offensive was entirely uncalled for, because there was nothing to suggest that Chick-fil-A’s staff treated gay customers badly. In fact, Cathy was now going out of his way to hire gay workers as part of his outreach. Bill noted that Cathy, had he been asked, would have catered Barney Frank’s gay wedding.
According to people such as O’Reilly—who might be described as a mouthpiece for “the alternative left”—it’s OK to politically intimidate those who aren’t sufficiently sensitive to gays. But there was no reason to do so in the present circumstances because Cathy, despite his personal religious views, was making special efforts to be nice to gays and to hide his disapproval of their lifestyle. Is this a “conservative” approach? It sounds like something one might have read in The New York Times five or ten years ago, before the paper’s hysteria about intolerance toward gays reached its present pitch. If one wishes to know what the left believed until its latest flip or lurch, just check in on the “alternative left.” It’s simply what the left might have said just before it raised the ante.
The government social engineering that was congressionally approved in the 1960s for advancing blacks and women has now been extended to other victim groups, and there’s no way to stop the process. It just goes on and on, with ever more intrusive tactics being applied to bring everyone into line. This is not fascism, with due respect to my libertarian friends who insist that it is. Mussolini, for all his rhetoric about the state’s majesty, would never have engaged in the present insane attempt to stand society on its head by placing homosexuals beyond criticism and by pushing the private sector into showering them with jobs. The alternative left does not really object to such arrangements provided they can elect Romney as our next president and get on with important things such as carpet-bombing Iran and filling patronage jobs with party loyalists.
The alternative left has endorsed all the steps that got us here, from the 1960s onward. It would look ridiculous for these media Republicans, after having supported the campaign against “discrimination” up until now, to assert a right to discriminate against gays in favor of straights. Cathy should also be allowed to serve or not serve those who come into his business establishments, but since he clearly wants their money, it seems unlikely that he would snub gay customers.
Cathy should have the right to state what just about everyone accepted as the normative definition of marriage up until the 1970s. And he should be able to express that view without having Democratic political thugs come after him and try to ruin his business enterprise. In a decent society, fanatical ideologues like the mayors of Chicago and Boston would hold no public trust at all.