Stepping out of my comfort zone

When it comes to controversy I am prone to take the back seat, or better yet, hide under the back seat.  I am not good at debating anything, hence the reason I somehow made it through high school and college without taking a single public speaking class.  You do your thing, I’ll do mine.  Agree to disagree, I say.

So it is completely against my character that I am stating my opinion on the whole controversy surrounding Chic-Fil-A.  First, I read the article that started the whole thing.  I was expecting it to quote Dan Cathy saying hate-ridden slogans slamming the gay community.  That is the way it has all been hyped anyway.  This is exactly as it is written on http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271, the site where the article was posted.  Form your own opinion.

Some have opposed the company's support of the traditional family. "Well, guilty as charged," said Cathy when asked about the company's position.

"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 intend to stay the course," he said. "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."

And here, as they say, is the rub.  Rubbed like a cat that has been petted from tail to head:  “…thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles." 

Sorry, Dan.  Maybe our country used to be a place where we could freely express ourselves and live according to our religious beliefs, but those freedoms are slipping from us.   Because no matter what your opinion is or is not on the definition of marriage or family, the issue at hand hasn’t anything to do with these things.  This isn’t about the definition of marriage.  This isn’t about gay rights.  It is, however, completely about the First Amendment. 

Am I the only one who sees this? 

Dan Cathy, Elizabeth Shoemake, and (insert name here) have a constitutional right of free speech and to practice their religion.  We can give money to any organization we choose, regardless of the morality of the cause.  By the same token (insert name here) has a right to disagree with my speech I freely speak, or the church I attend, or the organizations I support.  Gay rights groups have the right to publicly show their affection outside of a Chic-Fil-A store.  Those of the opposite view have the right to spend their money at the same Chic-Fil-A store to show solidarity.  These freedoms are what make our country unique.  More than half of the world’s population does not have these same freedoms.  And we wonder why people will hide in car trunks and cargo bays just for the opportunity to live on U.S. soil.

If you disagree with Dan Cathy eat a burger.  If you agree with Dan Cathy then eat more chicken.  The fact that the mayors of Boston and Chicago are trying to block Chic-Fil-A from building in their cities because of the belief system of the corporation is wrong.  There is no right about it. Pun intended. 

Oh, and I’ve never received a letter or a phone call from Congress asking me if I agreed with the money they give (from my taxes) to foreign countries to support causes I oppose.

Am I the only one who sees this?