Chick-fil-A (again)

Well, I actually got a happy bit of news today: Chick-fil-A agrees to stop funding anti-gay organizations. To me, this is great news, and having started my personal boycott on my own terms, I am now ending it on my own terms, assuming they don't do something else to piss me off. Dan Cathy, that means no more attaching your God's name to your homophobic sentiments. Also, it of course means keeping true to the agreement of no longer passing our money on to anti-gay groups. I won't begrudge people of their rights to their personal beliefs... but I do expect them to return the favor. I'll respect their beliefs as much as they respect everyone else's, and talking about God's judgement if you're anyone other than God is disrespectful. Be honest and identify it as your own judgement. I know, it lacks the convenient excuse of passing your prejudice on to a higher power, thereby avoiding responsibility... but if you actually believe in any god, one would think you'd be afraid to take it upon yourself to speak for Him.

As one might guess, some of the more fundamentalist Christians (probably the same ones who went in and said, "I support your company, because your company hates the gays") are pissed. Take a look at their Facebook page: Chick-fil-A on Facebook. The same Christians who were saying the boycott was childish and anti-capitalism are now talking about doing their own boycott.

Me, I don't care about whether the motive for the change of heart was a financial or moral one. First of all, I think it was the right choice. While I doubt Dan Cathy's personal views have changed, he's realized that people who disagree with him matter, too. This move demonstrates that fact. Next, bear in mind that not everyone who works for Chick-fil-A has shared his views. He doesn't speak for them - he's buying their time, not their souls.

Anyway, to show my support for their change in policy, I happily went over to one of their restaurants and had a couple sandwiches. I did miss that tasty food!

Chick-Fil-A Doesn't Speak for its Employees

I linked this in the comments of my previous post, but I think that it may be worthy of its own follow-up post. The Chick-Fil-A anti-gay controversy is taking its toll on employees who don't necessarily agree with Cathy's stance.

According to the article, one of the biggest things that's hurting them is comments from their "supporters" today. I had vaguely anticipated this. When you put on a company's uniform, as far as most people are concerned, you ARE that company, not an individual who may or may not agree with the company's stance on any number of issues. It's also unfortunate that this issue goes both ways - those against Chick-Fil-A are also forgetting that those wearing the uniforms are individuals with their own opinions and are taking out their anger toward Dan Cathy on the employees.

Having worked for companies that I had little or no respect for, I searched on Google for stories about Chick-Fil-A employees that were more than a little disturbed by the comments of "support" they would likely be getting today, being Chick-Fil-A appreciation day. It didn't take long to find that above article. While Chick-Fil-A and its supporters may be considering today a huge success, I think there are many who would see things differently. It further polarized the sides. It made many of those who were trying to stay neutral pick a side. When you hear your "supporters" happily and unknowingly bashing yourself and/or your friends on the individual level, it does take a big toll. So, was this really a success for Chick-Fil-A? I kind of doubt it. Comparing this to a battle, the officers just pissed all over their infantry.

Boycott Starbucks?

This just in: if you love everyone equally, you hate god. Oh, and Jesus loves you, even if he does command everyone else in the world to hate you.

Call for a Christian boycott vs Starbucks.

You know, I don't really drink much coffee in general. I don't dislike it, just that I like other things better. After reading the above article, I'm inclined to join the hipsters, albeit reluctantly, at Starbucks more often. S'pose I'd fit right in, writing and blogging on my laptop while listening to my under-rated/obscure/outdated music. Scary thought.

You know what else? I've read through much of the Bible, and while I have a fair to decent memory, I don't remember who Jesus said to hate. Did he say to hate anyone?

No?

Then golly gee, I guess that means that people are making some shit up, then using Jesus' name to justify their own hate and prejudice.

I am not ignorant to the fact that the Bible is unkind toward homosexuality. However, it seems Christians have become perfectly well acclimated to picking and choosing what parts they want to follow. I suppose it makes sense, considering that the Bible is rather well known for its contradictions. Anyway, I'd equate worship of the Bible (to include believing its word as infallible) with idol worship. Otherwise, Christians would shun pork, along with shrimp, lobster, cheeseburgers - anything not allowed in the Jewish/Muslim diets. Not only that, but there would be public stonings (and I don't mean smoking pot in public) and the like for any variety of behaviors which is commonplace in the modern world. Even amongst evangelicals. Does anyone remember what the Bible says to do with false prophets?

This reminds me much of the Southern Baptists and their boycott of Disney. I'm not sure too many people even noticed, once the news reports died down. Then just a few years ago, after just about everyone had forgotten about the "boycott" anyway, they announced the end of the boycott, calling it a victory and saying they had made their point. How many people, other than Southern Baptists, even take the Southern Baptists seriously now?

Anyway, it always pisses me off to see people spreading hate in the name of their religion. I see it as arrogant, and were I more religious, I would call them false prophets, as they claim to speak for their god.

But I will say this now: even if extremists are right, I would rather burn in Hell with a clean conscience than serve a hateful god.

Prejudice and Hypocrisy

When talking about equal rights, it's generally very bad practice to make exceptions. In early America, there were several exceptions to the "all men are created equal" philosophy - basically anyone who wasn't white and/or Christian. Also, the "men" part of that philosophy was treated in a much more literal sense than it is today, as it was the accepted belief that women just weren't as important as men. And as for sexual orientation, forget about it. If you were anything other than straight, you were insane. In some cases, that would mean electroshock treatment, frontal lobotomies, etc. And that's just the institutionalized stuff, not the lynch-mob type of stuff.

Lately, bullying has been making the news a lot. The rather horrible consequences of it are becoming a lot more publicized where we are hearing about suicides and the like as a result of it. I realize I may be saying this phrase a lot on my blog, but "it's nothing new." When things like bullying, child abuse, domestic violence, sexual abuse, etc, become more publicized, there is a common misconception that it is new. Then the generation gets blamed, "ie, when I was that age, we knew to treat each other with respect, or we'd end up with a hot butt!"

But again, it's nothing new. In the older days, it was simply accepted that child abuse and domestic abuse, and sometimes even sexual abuse was "just the way things are." For a child to admit that they were being abused, especially if by a same-sex abuser, it would scandalize the whole family. So it simply wasn't talked about. Child abuse and domestic violence were "a family matter."

It's undeniable that huge strides have been made (though some still yearn for the days when they had the "right" to beat their kids and/or wives), and progress is still being made. As someone who has had to deal with a lot of bullying as a kid, I'm glad that more is being done about it.

But let's get back to why I titled this post "Prejudice and Hypocrisy," shall we? This is why:

OK to bully gay kids if you're Christian or otherwise philosophically or politically opposed

What's the fucking difference? Under this same hair-brained philosophy, aren't all bullies practicing free speech? "Now so-and-so, we know that he broke your nose and made you eat dog crap, but he was practicing his First Amendment right in free expression - he's philosophically opposed to wimpy kids with glasses, and you have no right to obstruct his First Amendment rights."

It's the same damned thing. It's a free country, but rights end where they begin to trample on those of others. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" - sound familiar to anyone?

Unfortunately, this seems to be a common tactic with the religious right, and they seem to see nothing wrong with it. They keep the rights for themselves to trample on the rights of others. If their rights become limited to the same as those of others, they scream about persecution. Sadly, it's human nature, though. It's not something that can be blamed on religion, only those who use it to justify their own hate and prejudice. Everyone wants rights, but few are willing to accept the responsibilities, even if the responsibility is as simple as respecting the same rights of others. But, with things like this, it is little surprise that so many are walking away from the church, and at times even becoming hateful of it.

I wonder... would these same lawmakers be supportive of an atheist bully's right to bully around Christian kids? Again, it's the same damn thing.