Chicken Gate – An Exercise in Media Induced Hysteria and Fascism…

… I’m eating a Chick-Fil-A sandwich as I type. I guess that means I hate the gays, or deserve to get cancer or something.

I… I… don’t even know what to say about this media induced fecal cyclone that is Chicken Gate. It’s so absurd it’s laughable. You got the mayor of Boston involved, and then… get this…Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel says Chick-fil-A has no place in the city of Chicago. Considering the homicide rate in Chicago is statistically worse than Kabul Mr. Emmanuel has much bigger problems.

The funniest part; the president of Chick-Fil-A, Dan Cathy, never even said he hates homosexuals. All he did was confirm that he supports traditional marriage and that he models his business ethic on Christian principals. But somehow, in the liberal mind, having a difference of opinions equals hate.

Fascist, all of them.

About Katrina Fernandez

Mackerel Snapping Papist

  • Fuquay Steve

    Well done – agree 100%. Now, about our bishops……

  • Sacredcrocheter

    Shut the Door-I’m going to get me one of those sandwiches right now-it’s a scientific fact that straight chickens are much tastier and more nutritional than gay chickens.

    • Katrina Fernandez

      Mmmmmm. Tastes like hate. 

      • Sacredcrocheter

        Well , I’ve never tasted hate myself but I’ve been told it really does taste a lot like chicken.

  • Christine Hebert

    Love the post, don’t really like the graphic.

  • Beth

    We seldom go out to eat, but last night,  my husband stopped and picked up some Yummmy Chick Fil-A for dinner. :) 

  • Michael

    To bad they don’t have a franchise near LAX, I’d drive thru every day. (They gave the gay folks about2 minutes on the news this AM, & a brief mention that other were supporting the company’s position.

  • Sacredcrocheter

     Rahm Emanuelle listen up- This would never happen if the Daleys still ran Chicago.

    • kenneth

      The most recent Daley would have said exactly the same thing, if in a much less articulate fashion. The gay community carries a lot of water in this town – votes and money. The red state “save the family” lobby carries squat. 

      • Sacredcrocheter

        It’s obvious you’re not from Chicago.

        • kenneth

          Lived here all my life – not downtown but about 20 minutes away. Never covered the City Hall beat, but I was never more than two degrees of separation from somebody who did. I had a chance to speak with a personal friend of Moreno’s last evening about the issue.  Richard M. Daley, the guy who just preceded Emmanuel, was an outspoken supporter of gay rights way before it was cool. He was grand marshal of the Pride Parade in 1989! He went on record for gay marriage in 2004, at least! 

          • Sacredcrocheter

            I live on Lake shore drive-lived in New town and Old town during the 60′s (my hippie youth), and Printer’s Row areas for over 45 years. The subtleties of Chicago politics are not easiliy understood . Things are not as they may seem in the papers or in a discussion with an alderman.
            There is a huge difference between pretending to support gay rights for political gain (Daley) and making a statement that a viable business chain that will bring jobs and city revenue along with it-is not welcome. The first thing is a smart Chicago political move and the other thing is a crude bush league rookie play. That’s the difference between Rahm & the Daleys among many other things.
            We were once at a party at my late husband’s family home in Winnetka when a Skokie man declared-”I guess everyone here is from the north shore”. My husband looked at him cooly for a minute and then said “Skokie is not the north shore”.
             You’re either “on the bus or off the bus”- nice effort though Kenneth.

          • kenneth

            He never said he’d block them. He said the values of the company’s top management are not the values of Chicago. I don’t see how that’s any less realpolitik than anything Daley did in that regard.

             Whether they’re sincere or cynical in their support of gay rights hardly matters. They can count, and they know that gay groups have clout in the city. Rush Limbaugh and Tony Perkins and the red state lobby have none. It’s also true that the support of the gay community, or at least avoiding its wrath, is vastly more important to a mayor than the jobs and revenue brought in by one more fast food franchise.

             You know as well as I do that everything is negotiable in Chicago. Rahm and Moreno will say what they have to to cover themselves, and they will work out a proper “tribute” with the Chick-fil-A people and life will move on. My guess is that the franchise owners will play up their independent ownership and distance themselves from corporate’s politics, and offer to make some donation to some Uptown program for bullied LGBT teens or somesuch along with something for whatever “widows and orphans” foundation Moreno may have. 

          • Sacredcrocheter

            All debate aside Kenneth-I should have known you were a Chicagoan and I mean that in a good way!

          • kenneth

            For better or worse, I’m a local. I’m not whacked/intense enough to be from New York, not discrete enough to survive anywhere in the Bible Belt, not “extreme” enough for the mountain states and not stoned, flaky or outdoorsy enough for California, Sedona or the Northwest, so here I stay…. The northern Californians all think I’m Canadian for some reason, but that’s a separate problem for me to work out with them, and Canada….

  • Pat Gohn

    Well stated. If Chick-Fil-A was refusing to serve customers or firing its employees with same-sex attraction, I could understand the media storm. In this exercise we’ve learned that Christian business leaders are no longer welcome to exercise their freedom of speech, even in non-business environments.

    I’m suddenly in the mood for sweet tea. 

    • kenneth

      There is much more to this than the personal opinion of a CEO who believes in traditional marriage. This is a company that has piped millions of dollars to groups like the Family Research Council, which is listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. This is an outfit that does not simply oppose gay marriage. It opposes ALL legal protections for gay and lesbian people – civil unions, housing, personal safety, you name it. This is a group that consistently equates homosexuality with pedophilia. It has advocated criminal punishment of homosexuality. Chick-fil-a and its CEO have exercised their freedom of speech, and so has the mayor.

      • Katrina Fernandez

        Then Mr. Emmanuel needn’t eat at Chick-Fil-A if he feels so strongly. But he cannot ban a company who practices legal and fair work ethic from setting up shop in his hood simply because he disagrees with the company’s president. Cathy is practicing free speech, Emmanuel is using his position as mayor to bully and practice fascism. 

        • kenneth

          Emmanuel never said he intended to block the restaurant. That issue will play out with alderman Moreno and the City Council. I don’t think Emmanuel will spend any political capital or time to block Chick-fil-a. He’s got bigger fish to fry and already covered himself politically with the gays by saying what he did.

           On the other hand, I don’t think he’d fight Moreno on the issue either.  Chicago is a very tricky place to do business. The aldermen control development much like a medieval craft guild. They have near-absolute discretion over development in their wards. 

          Of course its illegal to block them based on ideology, but the proposed site has plenty of technical issues Moreno could hang them on. My guess is it will get worked out one way or another. The company will issue some non-discrimination statement and make a contribution to the “right” charity, or else will be welcomed by some other ward which would be happy of the business. 

          I don’t support the use of official power to enforce ideological agendas, but there’s a bigger more longstanding issue of abuse of power in Chicago. I don’t have any problem with the mayor saying “this company doesn’t represent what Chicago is about.” 

      • Romulus

        It opposes ALL legal protections for gay and lesbian people

        Don’t be silly.  What it opposes is the extension of the privileges of marriage to those who only simulate marriage, especially in ways contrary to nature.  You are ridiculously, hysterically suggesting that Chick-Fil-A wants to strip sodomites of the vote, confiscate their property, and have them shot on sight.  Please get a grip. 

        • kenneth

          Their own people (Family Research Council)  are on record as advocating criminal prosecution of gays simply for being gay. That’s a fact. I don’t know if Chick-fil-A supports that explicitly, but when you give a group millions of dollars, that constitutes a tacit endorsement of its agenda. 

  • nitnot

    I think this is going to turn out well for Chick-fil-a … tried to eat there on Wed and couldn’t get in the parking lot … all parking spaces filled and drive-thru wrapped around 3 sides of the building … I’ll try again next week …

  • Guenevere Eckert

    Sane Libral (I know, right?) weighing in! Everybody can’t support everything all the time! Not financially supporting gay marriage doesn’t necessarily mean not supporting gay marriage. But as a private company, they get to decide what to do with their money. Just like you get to decide what color shirt you’re going to buy. (Or shall we start calling anyone buying red clothes communists?) And if you don’t like the rules, don’t join the club! I support gay marriage (ducks) and I LOVE chick-fil-a. (In fact, I had it for lunch! Along with a troop of Boy Scouts.)

    • kenneth

      Everyone should make their own decision what to support with their dollars and patronage and where to draw the line between a business’s products and its politics.  Personally, I’d rather not give my business to Chick-fil-A. Not because of the CEO’s personal views, but because of the company’s considerable financial support of organizations I consider to be ugly, and un-American and evil.

       I wouldn’t structure my whole life around not giving them business. If I was traveling or someplace where Chick-fil-A was the best dining option and I was hungry, I’d eat there. I used to go once in a while way back when I lived in Indiana, and it wasn’t  bad. Not outstanding, but not bad either. I try to live consciously by incorporating moral considerations into my personal economics, but I’m also pragmatic about it. 

      Back in my Chick-fil-A eating days, I was an ad salesman, as was my roommate at the time. He was forever launching a personal boycott against virtually every business in town because he had inside knowledge that many of the owners were rotten people, in some fashion. Many were. They were bad to their employees, stiffed their suppliers and contractors (and ad people) etc. One day I realized that if I only gave my business to ethical and decent people, I would be able to go to my gym and drink water in that town, and do virtually nothing else!

      At the end of the day you do what you can when you can. As I’ve said, elected officials have no business threatening to block businesses over personal or political beliefs. As a religious minority, I’ve been on the wrong end of that process. Emanuel should have made that disclaimer up front, but then it is perfectly fair game for him or any other politician to offer their opinion about a business and its values. 

  • Lynnbcarter

    You all have such astute political analysis, but I’m just writing in to say that your fabulous “fecal cyclone” euphemism made me choke on my lemonade!

  • Steve

    My sister-in-law’s friend contacted Chik-fil-a several years ago to open a Chicago franchise and was told that they weren’t really interested in that market. If you scratch the surface a bit, all the mayors who are coming out against Chik-fil-a are cities with little to no CFA presence–cities in which CFA is not interested in doing business—cities in which heavy taxation, corruption, and burdensome regulation are the norm. Just interesting, I think.

  • Espolon

    se está en contra del pecado no del pecador, pero el pecado de la homosexualidad es uno de los que claman venganza al cielo y a los ojos de Dios es aberrante ,, los perros les llama San Pablo, los afeminados etc no entraran al cielo y esto es tambien para quienes les favorescan y esten de acuerdo con ellos. cada uno decida de que lado está, el que está con Cristo junta el que no desparrama , con él o contra de él , no hay grises ni tibios , en el cielo solo hay cátolicos