I've gone on a bit of an odyssey with this one too. I first heard of this when somebody put the Boston mayor's letter up on Facebook and I thought hey, good for him, a politician with the guts to speak out for what is right.

Then I thought about is some more. My views on the whole subject of sexual orientation and gay marriage are certainly more "progressive" than our Enlightened President and have been since around when he was born was born, and I think Mr. Cathy is dead wrong.

( I incidentally find it interesting that Christians who make quite a point of the idea that Jesus ministry pretty much replaced Old Testament primitive "laws" are not impressed by the reports that Jesus was very big on non-judgmental fairy play for others and spoke not a word about the subject of sexual orientation and its ramifications )

But ... as you say one of our most treasured freedoms as Americans is the right to publicly speak nonsense and expose oneself as an idiot and to receive all the praise and condemnation that goes along with it. Mr. Cathy's statements deserve publicity so that people can decide to what degree the wan to make eating some kind of greasy chicken concoction ( or grapes, or lettuce or tuna or whatever ) a political act so they can can mark points on their internal scoreboard of being among the righteous or to feel they have marched across the bridge at Selma.

But ultimately people have a right to be ignorant or believe in witches or Scientology. They just don't have a right to control other people's happiness. Let Mr. Cathy express his beliefs which I'm sure are quite sincere and I'm sure are shared by a lot of people I otherwise find quite agreeable - humans, after all are the sum of their complexities.

And keep him and his like-minded arbiters of how other people should live away from positions of real power. ( one of which is not selling chicken )

And, better yet, strive to reduce all areas where individual happiness can be overruled by government in areas of personal choices that are primarily limited in impact to those making them.

>Here is my take on it. Although I certainly do not share Mr. Cathy's view, I think he has every right to express it. His religious beliefs are clearly important to him. Just because some do not agree with him does not remove his right to free speech. To me that is the holiest of holies in our country, if you will forgive the expression.
>
>Chick-Fil-A is privately held so he doesn't have to worry about shareholders. Surely he knew some would take his opinion as inflammatory and would be less likely to eat at his restaurants. I suspect he also knew that those who agree with him would be MORE likely to eat there. Given that most Chick-Fil-A locations are in the south that's probably not a bad bet. I think there are a couple of them in the Chicago metro area but none anywhere near me. The only time I have had one of their chicken sandwiches was at the Charlotte airport (and didn't see what the excitement was about).
>
>For some reason it strikes me as funny that such an old world guy is named Mr. Cathy ;-)
>
>Enjoy your weekend on the beach.
>
>>So even fast food can't avoid bible-thumper controversy. The CEO says he thinks all Americans should consider marriage only if its what the bible says marriage is.
>>
>>Ok so lets take a look at what the bible says about marriage:
>>
>>Exodus 22:16-17 NIV "If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins.
>>
>>Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NIV If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
>>
>>Deu 22:23-24 NIV if a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death--the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
>>
>>An arranged marriage—Genesis 24:1-4 (and many other passages)
>>
>>A levirate marriage (If a man died leaving no male heir, his brother was required to marry his widow and produce children)—Deuteronomy 25:5-10
>>
>>A polygamous marriage—1 Kings 11:3 (and many, many other passages)
>>
>>Not inter-racial—Deuteronomy 7:14; 1 Corinthians 7:39; 2 Corinthians 6:14
>>
>> Filled with sexual prohibitions—no intercourse during menstruation (The woman is unclean. Yet another degradation of women.) —The woman cannot withhold sex from her husband; she has to fulfill his desire for sex when he wants it. (And another example of the Bible’s misogyny)
>>
>>Not allowed to be dissolved, i.e. NO DIVORCE—Matthew 5:31-32; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18
>>
>>Except when the man wanted to because his wife had become ‘displeasing’ to him—Deuteronomy 24:1-4
>>
>>Between a rapist and his victim—Deuteronomy 22:28-29
>>
>>An arranged marriage by a slave owner for his slaves—Genesis 24:4
>>
>>Can be between brother and sister—How else do you explain where Cain’s wife came from!
>>
>>Intended to produce children—Without children a woman was:
>>Shamed—a barren woman was looked upon as cursed by God
>>Unable to be saved—1 Timothy 2:15
>>
>>...blah blah blah the list goes on. Heck I don't see what the big deal is anyway. The guy stated what HIS position was - what's wrong with that? Doesn't mean you have to agree with him - so what does this have to do with his chickens? And now you have idiot mayors jumping on TV saying they don't want his fast-food places in their cites because of that. Wonder how long it will be before they start back-peddling because they figured out you can't do that. Has the wold world gone mad? aaaahhh!