Why the Chick-fil-A Boycott is Really about Jesus

The Gospel Coalition ^ | 8-1-12 | Trevin Wax

[ReformationFan]

If you’re like me, you’re weary of the excessive politicization of nearly everything in American culture.

Can’t we just enjoy Oreo cookies without making a statement about gay rights? Or savor a chicken sandwich without fear of being labeled a hater or homophobe?

Though I’m weary of our culture’s tendency to politicize everything, I believe this Chick-fil-A boycott has revealed some fault lines in our culture that will lead to increasing pressure upon Christians who uphold the sexual ethic described in the New Testament. Furthermore, in listening to the mayors of Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco, it’s clear to me that – political posturing aside – this discussion may not be about the alleged homophobia of Chick-fil-A’s president but the actual Christophobia of the leaders of the cultural elite.

Christophobia? Isn’t that a strong word? Yes, it is. So let’s define our terms.

First, let’s define homophobia. According to the Anti-Defamation League, homophobia is “the hatred or fear of homosexuals – that is, lesbians and gay men – sometimes leading to acts of violence and expressions of hostility.”

Consider the comments made by Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy that triggered this escapade:

“We are very much supportive of the family – the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that. We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles.”

That’s it. Cathy said, basically, “We believe in the traditional family.” In context, it appears he was speaking primarily about divorce. (What’s next? A sit-in protest led by divorcees?) But this was enough to bring down the wrath of gay-rights advocates

[scottjewell]

Thank you for posting this piece.

[Popman]

Though I agree with the premise of the article....I do think this is a lot more about politics than religion

The Obama administration has a huge problem in the black church going community....they do not like his position on gay marriage....

The administration can’t attack fellow blacks on the issue but sure can attack a white guy over the issue....and he didn’t even mention being opposed to gay marriage just supporting traditional marriage

The “ message” was sent....

Just my two cents....

[Linda Frances]

I heard this on Janet Mefford today. It is so true.

[tractorman]

The liberals have painted themselves into a sinister corner.

[rusty schucklefurd]

I think the piece is excellent, until it gets to the end. That is where I disagree.

He writes: “So how should we respond? We’ve got to go beyond boycotts and political statements and feigned offense at perceived persecution. We’re called to love those who ostracize us, not boycott back. So let’s trumpet the message that Jesus is for all kinds of sinners, from the self-righteous deacon to the promiscuous transsexual, no matter what kind of vitriol comes our way.”

Now, I totally agree that Christians have an obligation to love all kinds of sinners, just as the writer states. But I get the feeling this guy thinks that Christians should just lay back and take it without so much as a whimper, believing that simply loving back will deal with the problem. If that is what he believes, I think he is naive. It sounds to me that he probably doesn't agree with any type of boycott or statement made, such as that made today all over the country where people have shown their support for Chick Fil A. Sorry, but I have a right to spend my money (what is left of it after it is taken by the government) to support stores and businesses I believe in. I also have the right to refuse to support businesses that funnel their money into anti-christian causes. I will take a stand while I can and not remain silent as the forces of cultural and moral destruction have their way.

[Venturer]

A lot of good chickens died for our freedoms today.

[onyx]

Please Support Pro-Life Free Republic.

America's Exclusive Site for God, Family, Country, Life & Liberty Conservatives!

[irishtenor]

But were they GAY chicken?

[Bratch]

.I do think this is a lot more about politics than religion

IMO, it's about both.

I'm convinced that one of the primary goals of "progressives" is to totally undermine the Christian religion and its moral teachings. It clears the way for their hedonistic base to enjoy all their hidden desires.

The addition of the gay marriage plank in the Democrat platform is just the latest manifestation of this sentiment.

[ReformationFan]

Agreed. Plus the secular communist left’s desire to replace worship of and obedience to God with worship of and obedience to the all powerful state.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Amen and amen.

[Salvation]

Meet S. Truett Cathy, The 91-Year-Old Billionaire Behind Chick-Fil-A

Some history and historical pictures at the source of this FR thread.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thanks for this, RF.

I do think, though, that the boycott is a just and exact way to express our faith, if it is done in a carefully targetted and truth-telling way. In other words, it is simply a matter of abstaining from putting money into something you don't believe in.

As a tactic, it is in a way legitimate even in the hands of our enemies, in the sense that they are just abstaining, and promotng abstention.

In contrast, boycotts can be based on lies (for instance, the lie that Chick-Fil-A is "hateful") --- and in that case, the boycott is evil. But strictly speaking, a "boycott" per se (if not contaminated with lying) is not an evil in itself.

I hope I'm not being too obscure...?

For instance, I'm boycotting those rainbow Oreos...