Quaap home
Adventures of a stay-at-home, skeptical, homeschooling dad (etc.)


Live and let live?

I hope this is my last word on the Chick-fil-A issue, but I doubt it will be (see the previous article). I want to let it drop, but I keep seeing people who misrepresent the issue pretty badly. Many claim to want to find "the middle ground", and who basically say "let everyone be". That isn't really possible.

I would love it if I could ignore the issue and let everyone believe what they want to believe: I want to "agree to disagree", and leave it at that. It would be great if everyone for gay marriage could look at Dan Cathy and say "you know, I completely disagree with his views, but gosh darn it, he's entitled to his beliefs." Then we'd all live our lives as we see fit.

But it can't be that way. And it can't be that way for what I would hope should be a very obvious reason: He's donated millions (as in multiple thousand thousands) to organizations which are completely opposed to others living as they see fit, and work very hard at preventing them from doing so.

The Family Research Council, and other groups he sent millions to, not only oppose legalizing gay marriage, they attempt to repeal it in states where it's legal, and even work to prevent the repeal of "sodomy" laws, which effectively make being homosexual a crime. How exactly can anyone who "supports Chick-fil-A" claim, with a straight face, to want to "live and let live"? To support Chick-fil-A and love and support gays? Or claim to be "neutral" on that matter?

Here's the deal: I know you find homosexuality to be a "sin". That's your right, I suppose. I find it silly, but that's just my opinion. Dan Cathy, and everyone who goes to Chick-fil-A, is entitled to their opinions, and if they believe in the Christian god, and believe that this awesomely enormous, universe-spanning, all-knowing, omnipotent being is deeply offended when two dudes do it… well… I'll find it silly, but it's not like I'm going to go out of my way to worry about it.

So if these people want to use their freedom of speech to tell gay people "You're going to hell!", I'd be using my freedom of speech to tell them I don't believe that, but generally I'd ignore them.

But when you try to enact laws to prevent people from living the way they want because of that silly belief? Well, I'll call your belief silly, for one, but I'd also work to boycott and expose those trying to use the law in that way.

So, no: no one on this side of the argument can "just let them be", because those on the other side are not letting others be. The millions are spent specifically to prevent "letting it be".

Are there other, more important, issues? It depends on your point of view, but certainly this is not the top in my book. But unlike the national debt, military involvement in Afghanistan, or many other issues, this is something the average person can have a small say in simply by avoiding a restaurant. Me, I'd just be happy if the "Chick-fil-A supporters" stop pretending this was a simple case of "freedom of speech".