After the president of the chicken chain, "Chick-fil-A," Dan Cathy, made a recent comment in support of "traditional marriage," there has been "a firestorm of public debate." Those who support gay rights are supporting a boycott. The mayors of Boston and Chicago have expressed the desire for this restaurant to stay out of their cities. The Christian right, in making it a sacred cause, are stuffing as much Chick-fil-A down their copious gullets as they possible can. Even the Muppets are involved. Not surprisingly, as the media mouthpiece for the Christian right, Fox News is stepping into the imbroglio. As reported by News Hounds Ellen, Mike Huckabee is crusading for Chick-fil-A. And On last night's "Factor," Bill O'Reilly and Laura Ingraham dissed those who are dissing Chick-fil-A because saying that gay marriage is inviting God's wrath is no big deal. And in their attempt to defend Mr. Cathy, they left out some inconvenient truths regarding the extent of his homophobia. No spin zone, indeed!
Dan Cathy said this "I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say 'we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage' and I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about." Bill did not quote Cathy but rather minimized his comments: "He, I guess, has been critical of gay marriage." (Ya think?) He added that because of Cathy's comments, some folks, like Boston's mayor Tom Mennino, are "trying to ruin his business" because they disagree with Cathy. Ingraham feels that this story is "disturbing" and - wait for it - "we're supposed to be able to express our viewpoints without being called haters, horrible..." Remember that quote, sports fans, next time O'Reilly denigrates somebody as being godless or a liberal "loon." And then she said that she thinks that "the majority of Americans probably agree with" the president of Chick-fil-A. Bill and Laura seemed to think it was no big deal because he said, to a Baptist Minister, "look this is what I believe..."
When Bill said that if his hiring practices were discriminatory, that would be understandable, Ingraham validated his point by saying it would be "disturbing." When according to Bill, it's just an "opinion" that Cathy holds, Ingraham snarked that apparently you can't have that opinion and run a business and "you can't speak freely because if you do they demonize you..." (Like what RUSH LIMBAUGH tried to do to Sandra Fluke?). She added that the company takes great pride in welcoming and hiring gay people. Bill concluded by - ready for it - "it's trying to hurt people with whom you disagree." (Like when Bill demonized those members of congress who didn't vote for the prohibition of sex selection abortions or when he distorted the writings of a professor, with whom he disagred, who then received death threats? We all know what happened after he vilified Dr. Tiller.)
While I would agree that Cathy has the right to say what he wants and that officials should not be creating legal impediments to this restaurant chain, what is "disturbing" is Cathy's commentary. Do ya think if some atheist insulted Christians, in this way, that O'Reilly and Ingraham would be as sanguine? And while O'Reilly and Ingraham made it seem like it was just Cathy being Cathy, he has donated millions to radical, homophobic hate groups. Despite Ingraham's attempt to make Cathy look like the model employer, the company has a 0 rating on the Human Right's Campaign Corporate Equality Index as it offers no protection or benefit for LGBT employees.
As noted by Think Progress's Zack Ford, "With all of the facts at hand, there is no accurate way to portray Chick-fil-A as any kind of “victim.” There is also no accurate way to reduce Chick-fil-A’s words and actions to merely defending “biblical principles.” This is — in every way, shape, and form — a company proactively engaging against the interests of LGBT people, and that is the quite justified reason for outcry."
But it was spun very differently in the "no spin zone."
Yeah, BOR definity did some, as you said, “minimizing” of Cathy’s remarks. But, this is how BOR tends to roll when it comes to offering up defense for a fellow conservative, er, traditionalist. We can’t really expect “no spin/fair & balanced” when it comes to bringing up the often unpleasant truth about those with whom BOR agrees, can we? Pffft.
I listened to a fair amount of right-wing talk radio on the Chik-fil-a matter and all of them went out of their way to avoid talking about the donations to anti-gay groups. Instead it was being presented that poor Chik-fil-a was being persecuted for having a Christian viewpoint on gay marriage and that the evil gays were trying to shut down Cathy’s/Chik-fil-a’s 1st ammendment rights and ruin their business. I never heard a single discussion about how many people simply do not want to purchase the food at Chik-fil-a because they don’t want their hard-earned money to handed over to groups who desire to keep gay people from having the legal right to get married like the rest of us.
Naw, I’m messing with ya… I actually don’t mind other than not being able to resist.
That out of my system, Fox News as a whole has been whitewashing some elements, flat ignoring others. And not just on this story, they’ve been doing this for that company a long time running. Search them on the Fox News site, they’ve ran a rehab/ad campaign on them every time they just happened to be in hot water for something.
But King Solomon loved many foreign women, as well as the daughter of Pharaoh: women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hittites; from the nations of whom the LORD had said to the children of Israel, âYou shall not intermarry with them, nor they with you. Surely they will turn away your hearts after their gods.â Solomon clung to these in love. And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned away his heart.
Let’s ask Billdo and Rupert.
Have you invited the wrath of dog upon yourselves when you strayed away from the sanctity of marriage?
Let me clarify that.
My point here is good xtian warriors like Billdo, Ingraham, Beck, pastor fried squirrel, Limpo, and down the line always refer to their idiotic interpretation of “traditional marriage” being “one man and one woman”
In the Catholic Church there is no “divorce.” One can seek a divorce, er, annulment on different grounds and after years of holy bureaucracy.
I am going to leave my post short, since we have had this discussion before. In the end, those morons braying about the “sanctity of marriage” are either ignorant or hypocrites of how marriage has been defiled by their own defenders.
As a bonus question, will Billdo ever ask Mittens his position on gay marriage, “traditional marriage,” and polygamy?