Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Mire

Famished after a vigorous workout at the YMCA pool, we decided to momentarily break our regular eating habits and grab a quick bite – at Chick-fil-A.  We dined deliberately out of a sense of protest over municipal politicians’ reactions to Dan Cathy’s expression of free speech.  To our delight, the place was packed with people of all manner of unidentifiable persuasions.

That the other diners' beliefs were unknown to us is important to note, as we found later that we kept surprising company with the likes of New York City Mayor Bloomberg, the ACLU, the talk show The View, and more than a few news outlets who also cried ‘foul’ over responses to public denials of Cathy’s fundamental right to free speech and entrepreneurship in our country.

Ours has become a culture dominated by those who reject the notion of absolute truth – where those of us who believe in absolutes are increasingly seen as “intolerant” and even “bigoted.”  “Tolerance” is becoming the requirement to be regarded as a legitimate citizen.  However, this social movement makes “selective tolerance” the new absolute.  Now who is the bigot?

There is a great fallacy in the failure to distinguish between “tolerance” and “acceptance.”  Drawing from personal example, as followers of Jesus Christ we (the Ellises) tolerate – but don’t accept – the lifestyle of those who do not follow Jesus, yet we love and respect them as fellow bearers of God’s image.  We work, and have close friendships with scores of Christians and non-Christians of varying stripes who disagree with our lifestyle and beliefs.  More to the point at hand, we have entertained (and been entertained) by gay friends, both singles and couples, and will continue to do so.  They know our stance on the gay lifestyle, and we are aware that may or may not accept our Christian lifestyle as a valid.

We don’t avoid discussion of the matter, nor do we presume to know each others’ opinions before they are expressed.  When dealing with issues that are core matters of the heart, we listen intently, tread gently, and speak honestly.  They naturally try to persuade us, and we try to persuade them.  They likely support organizations that promote their values, and we support those that promote ours.  We navigate the difficult waters as mature adults, engage respectfully, make our choices at the voting booth and at the cash register, and then… well then, we enjoy each others’ company.  We share common outrage and grief over cases such as the gay Nebraska woman who was recently mutilated by cruel assailants, and those who suffer global persecution as Christians; acts such as these are true crimes of hate against a person’s humanity. 

To President Obama, whose daughters’ friends helped propel his ‘evolution’ on same-sex marriage, we ask would the parents of these friends have respected him equally if he hadn’t ‘evolved?’  We question whether healthy friendships must remain one-sided on deeply held issues of passion and conviction; mutual care at the most human level should transcend lifestyle acceptance.  Perhaps this should be the next step in our culture’s so-called ‘evolution,’ to enjoy mutual grace among friends without compromise in conviction.  We would fight for the most basic of human rights for all of our friends, and we believe that, having demonstrated mutual rationality in discussing their core humanity, they would fight for ours.

In this current climate of social media firestorms, however, there appears to be little public understanding of, or toleration for the Bible believing community’s values in return.  As seen in the response to Dan Cathy’s personal statements, there is great outrage as “support for traditional marriage” instantly morphs linguistically into “hate speech, anti-gay marriage and homophobia” – and all at the speed of a click.

In the midst of the public din, ‘Christo-phobia’ seems acceptable, and true tolerance evaporates like so much water.  It’s for this reason that we felt the need to eat at Chick-fil-A.

In this age of “tolerance” and “relativism,” from where does Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel draw the authority to state in absolute terms, "Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago values.  They’re not respectful of our residents, our neighbors and our family members.  And if you’re gonna be part of the Chicago community, you should reflect Chicago values.”  

The irony here is not lost: Mr. Emanuel campaigned for Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, both of whom publicly opposed gay marriage at the time.  And as one Twitter contributor eloquently observed, Chick-fil-A’s values may not be Chicago’s values, but “⅓^rd of Chick-fil-A management hasn't been charged with corruption.”  Indeed – Chicago’s political values are clearly shown in what some consider to be a $500 million corruption tax on citizens who bear the cost of their top politicians’ bad behavior — police brutality, bogus contracts, bribes, theft and ghost pay rolling to name a few — and the costs needed to prosecute it.  To endure decades of the imposition of criminal values certainly seems disrespectful to Chicago’s residents, neighbors and family members.

Compare this to the values espoused by Cathy as he leads Chick-fil-A – a company famous among fast-food restaurants for being closed on Sundays, a move that stands as a silent reminder of the value of rest regardless of religious persuasion in shopping malls across the country, and one that (according to the Wall Street Journal) has cost it hundreds of millions of dollars over the years.  This is a company who gives generously to many other charitable organizations that stand outside of politics.  Mr. Emanuel is right – the differences in values, on these levels alone – is staggering.

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino went on to say that “Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston. You can’t have a business in the city of Boston that discriminates against a population.”  

Yet Chick-fil-A asserts "The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect – regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender."  Where is the discrimination in that Mr. Menino?  Does non-discrimination require a business to promote a political ideology that violates its core values?  Such thinking is reminiscent of the plight of many Afghans under the Taliban.  Will the current feeding frenzy swell into an attempt to ‘wipe Chick-fil-A off the face of the earth?’  Cooler heads must prevail; we all have much to lose.

Our culture is forgetting that the push for “social justice” requires a pre-existent and transcendent basis for justice, for which the God of the Bible is uniquely qualified.  Without such a basis the concept of justice becomes merely a matter of personal opinion.  If justice does not transcend human opinion, then "might makes right," and thought control tyranny is the end result.  Though they have backed off from some of their comments, the anti-Chick-fil-A sentiments of Misters Emanuel and Menino have already done violence to the very “tolerance” they claim to champion.

As we wade through these murky cultural waters, we recall Friedrich Nietzsche:  “The values of the weak prevail because the strong have taken them over as devices of leadership.”  In other words, the power-greedy (“the strong”) make use of controversial ideas to gain power for themselves.  They subvert a culture that denies them power and push for an alternative culture that gives them power – stripping power from those of the original culture.

In the final analysis, LGBT rights may neither be the root issue any more than tolerance. Much like the Muslim Brotherhood is hijacking the “Arab Spring,” there remains in this country a power-greedy elite that cares nothing about human rights.  They seek to use the LGBT agenda to their advantage, putting all of us at risk of losing our rights and freedoms.

Politics makes strange bedfellows, indeed.  As more and more surprising sources spring to Chick-fil-A’s defense, we breathe a sigh of relief; yet the words of German pastor Martin Niemöller keep those of us who hold the First Amendment dear from fully exhaling into complacency:

“First [the Nazis] came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.”

Karen Angela Ellis, multidisciplinary performing artist and educator.

Dr. Carl Ellis, Jr., author and theological anthropologist.

The Ellises lecture together globally. Follow them on Twitter: @CarlEllisJr, @KarAngEllis