In continuation of my posts on the recent protests against Chik-fil-A...
It seems to me that the majority of gay rights advocates are exchanging one right for another based on what they agree with. They're denying Chick-Fil-A's rights as a private business by terming it a their protests a boycott and calling for change as apposed to just not spending money there because they don't agree with it. The business doesn't do anything illegal. It treats homosexual employees and customers equally. And as a private business, it has the right to stand up for what it believes in.
Obviously, we don't live under a theocracy and I don't ask that we strive toward that (although no one can make political decisions without some sort of religious or moral belief influencing them). If it were only my moral convictions as a Christian that led me to take my stance on gay marriage, I would be 100% for it.
But other things come into play, and when I consider that certain rights would be taken away in exchange for rights given to homosexuals, when I consider that the gay agenda does not just want tolerance and equality, but rather 100% acceptance equivalent to "brainwashing" (for lack of a better term) our children into believing homosexuality is good at an age when they shouldn't have to even think about what sex is (and such teaching would take away the Christian's right to speak up for what he believes in and to discuss that with his children) - when I consider all these things my position on gay marriage is not so solid and I cannot help but support CFA's rights as a private business and decisions as a Christian owned business.
Personally, I don’t think any business should be able to give proceeds to causes with more political inclinations like this. But if Oreo can stand up for gay rights, then CFA should be allowed to stand up for what it believes. As a private business, it’s their right. I know that the law puts certain restrictions on businesses, but this is not one of those cases, and to force CFA to change it’s policies is to take away its rights as a private business. I don’t ask that anyone who disagrees with them support them with their money, and I certainly see the negatives and positives of their decisions in terms of public relations, but when you go beyond just saying I’m not going to support these other causes with my money through CFA to the point where you’re protesting and trying to take away their rights as a private business, that’s where things get messy in my eyes.
And now we have the mayor of Boston threatening to ban Chick-fil-A from building new restaurants in the are because of its stance on gay marriage?