A Christian-oriented major restaurant chain

James P. writes:

In connection with your story about the Boy Scouts of America affirming their long time policy of refusing to admit homosexuals as members, Chik-Fil-A, one of the biggest restaurant chains in the country, has publicly denounced gay marriage, but it is unclear whether or not they refuse to have gay employees.

LA replies:

Well this article says nothing about same-sex “marriage” or other homosexual issues. However, what caught my attention is that Chik-Fil-A (an awfully odd name for a corporation) closes its restaurants on Sundays. I remember how special Sundays used to be, even as recently as 20 years ago, with most activities and businesses stopping, and there was the sense that the world was at rest and closer to God. But now everything is 24/7. Sunday is no longer a special day.

I am very much in favor of returning Sunday to the way it used to be.

James P. writes:

Perhaps it is not clear, but this is the reference to their opposition to gay marriage:

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 operate as a family business … our restaurants are typically led by families; some are single. We want to do anything we possibly can to strengthen families. We are very much committed to that,” Cathy emphasized.

“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.”

LA replies:

This seems like a general statement in support of the biblical definition of family. I don’t see what this company is actually doing to oppose homosexual “marriage,” or how the issue of homosexual marriage would be relevant to them as a business.

Matt writes:

You wrote:

“I don’t see … how the issue of homosexual marriage would be relevant to them as a business.”

One reason might be that “sexual orientation” is not on the list of protected classes for many business transactions in many locales (including things like franchise ownership), while discrimination based on “marital status” is almost universally prohibited. So the company’s legal ability to restrict employment, franchise ownership and the like to people whose outlook is consistent with Christianity is put in jeopardy by gay “marriage.” Queer brownshirts will use anti-discrimination law with respect to marital status—much more established and pervasive than anti-discrimination law with respect to out-of-the-closet sodomy—to destroy comprehensively the company’s ability to discriminate (that is, to be consistently Christian).

Mind you, I think prohibiting discrimination based on marital status is already a liberal abomination. I am in favor of many businesses refusing to hire divorced people, for example, and a return to stigmatizing divorce, sluthood and the like with real material consequences attached to the stigma. But in terms of the present legal situation it is easier to destroy a company (or force that company to abandon its Christian roots in favor of liberalism) by attacking its practices with respect to marital status as opposed to its practices with respect to loud-and-proud sodomy.

Brandon F. writes:

I am 41 and I can remember a lot of things being closed on Sunday. I remember well when absolutely everything but hospitals were closed on Christmas day. Now a majority of businesses seem to be open.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 19, 2012 05:17 PM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):