Supporters
of same-sex marriage have opened up a new front in America’s Culture Wars in
recent weeks – by targeting a chicken-sandwich restaurant. The call to boycott
Chick-fil-A over comments made by its CEO reveal how the debate about same-sex
marriage is moving in an increasingly illiberal direction.
Chick-fil-A, an Atlanta-based
fast-food restaurant chain with 1,600 restaurants in 40 US states, makes
chicken sandwiches that many rave about. When asked if it was true that he did
not support gay marriage, CEO Dan Cathy said he was ‘guilty as charged’. He
added: ‘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.’
In a recent radio interview,
Cathy also said: ‘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”.’ Critics note that Chick-fil-A, owned by the Cathy family, donates
millions to Christian and pro-traditional family charities, including Focus on
the Family, which they consider to be anti-gay.
In response to Cathy’s
comments, mayors in Boston, Chicago and San Francisco proclaimed that
Chick-fil-A was not welcome in their cities. Specifically, they asked their
city councils to deny Chick-fil-A the permits they need to open. ‘Chick-fil-A’s
values are not Chicago values’, said Rahm Emanuel, mayor of Chicago and former
chief of staff for President Obama. Joe Moreno, an alderman in a ‘hipster’ ward
in Chicago, vowed to block the restaurant, calling Cathy’s comments ‘bigoted
and homophobic’. Christine Quinn, leader of New York’s city council, said
Cathy’s remarks were ‘repugnant and un-American’; she urged New York University
to evict Chick-fil-A from its campus.
The reaction by these public
officials shows the authoritarian instinct behind many of those who support
same-sex marriage – and how such illiberal views are not limited to hardcore
activists but rather extend right to the top of the political world. In
defending his stance on Chick-fil-A, Boston mayor Thomas Menino said, ‘We’re an
open city, we’re a city that’s at the forefront of inclusion.’ But apparently,
in the name of ‘inclusion’, it is perfectly acceptable to be intolerant of
those who back traditional marriage.
As it happens, many liberal
pundits recognised that the mayors had overstepped their authority. Editorials
in the New York Times and Los
Angeles Times came out
against the mayors. Even the super-nanny mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg,
expressed opposition to his counterparts (although he won’t let Chick-fil-A
customers in his city have a large-size soda with their chicken sandwiches).
As welcome as it was to see many stand up for free speech, the focus on First Amendment rights missed the bigger picture. While making principled references to Voltaire, these critical liberals were still using the Chick-fil-A issue to expand the definition of what it means to be ‘homophobic’, so that it now includes the mere utterance of support for traditional marriage. It is noteworthy that Chick-fil-A does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation – it has gay employees and it serves gay customers. A franchisee in Chicago has held fundraisers for gay and lesbian groups.
Advocates for same-sex
marriage want expressions of support for traditional marriage to be considered
beyond the pale and unworthy of debate. It is amazing how fast this issue is
moving. Three months ago, Obama was against same-sex marriage – is anyone who
espouses that view today now anti-gay and ‘repugnant’? Obama launched his
political career in Chicago – was he out of line with ‘Chicago’s values’ until
his conversion to the gay-marriage cause 90 days ago? Same-sex marriage has
been voted down in all 31 states where it was on the ballot, including in
California – are these states filled with ‘bigoted and homophobic’ people?
Millions of Americans,
including many CEOs, do not agree with same-sex marriage. But it is clear that
Chick-fil-A’s CEO has been singled out because his restaurant chain fits a
Culture War stereotype held by many coastal liberals: a Southern-based
establishment led by Christians and frequented by ‘backward’ people. It is revealing
how pro-gay marriage protesters took the opportunity to condemn Chick-fil-A
customers for committing another of today’s sins – being obese. As the New York Times reported, some protesters held signs
with ‘warnings that those chicken sandwiches contain a lot of fat and
cholesterol’. Dan Turner of the Los
Angeles Timeshelpfully pointed out that ‘a fairly typical meal - a deluxe
chicken sandwich with medium waffle fries, a medium Coke and a fudge brownie -
contains about enough calories and fat to support a Tunisian village for a
week’. The ease with which commentators went from attacking a certain group of
people for their beliefs on marriage to attacking them for their eating habits
told us a great deal about the elitism that is fuelling the gay-marriage issue.
Same-sex marriage proponents
picked a Culture War – and that’s what they got. To counter the boycott,
Republicans Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum organised ‘National Chick-fil-A
Appreciation Day’ last Wednesday. More than 630,000 signed up to support the
event, and Chick-fil-A restaurants around America drew huge crowds, with
hundreds lining up for more than an hour. Many were no doubt happy to respond
to what they saw as northern liberals taking a condescending view of
southerners. Reports found the crowds generally good-natured. ‘I’m not against
gay rights by any means, but I think this guy is getting a bad rap’, said one
diner in California. ‘Plus’, he told the Los
Angeles Times, ‘the food’s pretty good’.
Two days later, pro-gay
marriage activists held a ‘National Same-Sex Kiss Day’. In the event,
relatively few took up the call to kiss their partner in a Chick-fil-A. By the
weekend, many onlookers were despairing that the United States had once again
fallen into a Culture War squabble. Both sides were now claiming that they were
victims of ‘hate speech’. As soon as battles descend to this level, debate is
out and posturing is in.
The campaign for same-sex
marriage claims it is a popular movement for equality, but it looks more like a
top-down attempt to impose a particular, non-traditional view of marriage on
all. Reasonable people, in good faith, have different opinions on same-sex
marriage, and the issue should be discussed openly. But many politicians and
media pundits who support same-sex marriage clearly prefer simply to denounce
and demonise those who won’t get with the programme. As New York Times columnist Ross Douthat writes: ‘The
gay-marriage movement isn’t just arguing with its opponents; it’s pathologising
them, raising the personal and professional costs of being associated with
traditional views on marriage, and creating the space for exactly the kind of
legal sanctions that figures like Thomas Menino and Rahm Emanuel spent last
week flirting with.’
Movements for equality have
historically sought to expand our notions of freedom, but as the case of the
Chick-fil-A boycott shows, today’s campaign for same-sex marriage is moving in
the opposite direction.
No comments:
Post a Comment