Official Chick-fil-A Thread

[fezzyfestoon]

After giving this bizarre turn of events some time to percolate, this is my list of things in order of how much they bother me:

1. That a f(Inks)ing fast food crap hole is taking a political stance that instantaneously puts all of their customers and employees in the uncomfortable, unfair, and unnecessary position of defending their eating habits with regards to politics.
2. That conservatives are ignorantly rallying behind Chick-fil-A as though there's some sort of moral power to this ridiculous action.
3. That there's more of a backlash against those that oppose Chick-fil-A than support it (in true conservative victimization tradition) by way of an argument for "free speech"
4. That gay marriage is still a political issue.

This is so utterly humiliating for American culture on so many levels, yet I find it ultimately appropriate. Ideally, politics and fast food would be about as far removed from each other as you could expect two entities to be. Upon a little critical thinking it's disappointingly apropos. Americans approach food and politics in much the same way. They believe only the loudest voices and consequently consume their product with vigor. Quality be damned, if you somehow manage to get Americans talking about your version junk, they'll eventually take a hard-line stance on it and you'll be set for life with the half that take your side. It doesn't matter what it is, if there's a division possible we'll find it and dig in as deep as possible regardless of our actual tastes for it. Because we don't have tastes beyond what we're told we love or hate.

[fezzyfestoon]

How is supporting traditional values homophobic? I'm sick of seeing that term thrown around and misused so often. Supporting 1 man 1 woman marriage =/= hating the gays. Get over it.

This coming from a fervent gay rights supporter.

Oftentimes, when you look past the surface of a conflict, you begin to delve into the roots of the motivations behind the positions people take. Sure, it's not a cause and effect, but it's hard to assert that the "traditional values" crowd isn't rooted in a strong preference against a certain group of people. Why else would a heavily anti-government chunk of the populace suddenly want the government to be extremely involved in something so unnecessary for it to have a position on?

The complete lack of any rationale behind the movement also begs the question of what the motivation is. Being pro-gay marriage is a manifestation of small government. Yet the anti-government, anti-gay marriage crowd relies entirely on the logical fallacy of an appeal to tradition. There's no reason to ban gay marriage other than the made up fact that it has to be between a man and a woman. Granted, Christian culture takes that fact as definitive, but you'd also think that a group of people evidently VERY concerned with religious freedom would recognize that not all peoples' religious beliefs are the same as theirs and that government should never mandate a religious belief.

But I expect you know this as a fervent gay rights supporter. So I'm not sure where there's any room to doubt that homophobia is the root of opposition to gay marriage.