Learning to Speak: Chick-fil-A & our Inability to Dialogue

The culture wars wage on. It seems just about everyone has an opinion on Chick-fil-A these days. The “Do you like their chicken sandwiches and waffle fries?” discussion has been traded for asking whether or not you’ll be boycotting the fast-food-chicken chain for their stance on gay marriage.

From the maker of The Muppets to the Mayors of Beantown and the Windy City, the list of folks cutting ties with the chicken chain is growing. The culture wars are in full swing, complete with protests, blog posts, name-calling and threats of glitter bomb violence.

 As you probably know, a couple weeks ago, Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy made comments in an interview with the Baptist Press that have brought some attention from groups advocating equal rights for same-sex couples. 

This, on the heels of a report from LGBT equality group Equality Matters, which stated that Chick-fil-A had donated over “$2 million to anti-gay groups in 2010.” Newsy politics picked up on the interview and made this video, and that’s when things started to really heat up.


 Roughly 6,000 people have signed a pledge to boycott Chick-fil-A, while others rallied behind former Arkansas governor and one-time presidential candidate Mike Huckabees’ declaration of August 1st as “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day.” Christian opinions emerged all over social media networks and the blogosphere.

As often happens, these voices led to a flurry of other voices from both sides of the aisle. Some reasonable and well-intentioned. Many not. Unfortunately, the discussion has brought out the worst in American Evangelicalism. Clear, balanced conversation has been traded in for simply shouting past one another. Even the most helpful dialogue starters seem to be inevitably overrun with hate-filled comments slung back and forth across perspectives.

In short, this thing blew up.

If only Jesus had said something specifically regarding how to treat people who think differently than we do.

Untouchables

Imagine the scene. Jesus just finished what is now his best known teaching—the Sermon on the Mount—a practical manifesto for this new Way. He’s just touched on nearly everything, and their heads must have been spinning as they tried to make sense of it all. Key phrases still lingered in the ears of the listeners, now making their way down the rocky path.

“Treat people the same way you would like to be treated.”

“Don’t just love those who look, act and think like you—love your enemies, too.”

As the Great Teacher led the way down the mountain, perhaps in an effort to put skin on his words, Matthew in his gospel describes a leper approaching. One who is unclean. Rejected. Perhaps even sinful. From beyond the borders of community the outcast approaches, asking if this “christ” would be willing to make him clean. And what does the rabbi do?

He touches him.

This leper’s dying flesh was literally eating away at him, and Jesus breaks Jewish custom and law, reaches out his hand and touches the man. In front of the crowds who followed him, watching. His contact immediately brings healing and restoration—life to that which was dead.

Related: An Open Letter to Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy by Bert Montgomery

What did his followers think? Did this encounter change how they viewed the next leper they saw, shunned by the masses as he crawled through the streets declaring, “Unclean! Unclean!”?

Does it change us?

The last time the church’s dirty laundry got aired with this type of excitement was in 2011 when Rob Bell was just about to release a book and let a teaser trailer slip in which he asked the now infamous question, “Ghandi is in hell? He is? And someone knows for sure, and felt the need to let the rest of us know?”

That question unleashed a slew of blog posts prior to the book’s release declaring that Rob Bell was a heretic, claiming he doesn’t believe in hell. For many within Christendom, Rob Bell became untouchable.

It was an interesting debate that certainly got people thinking about an important subject, but it too often devolved into bickering and line-drawing. Interestingly, the same week western Christianity was abuzz about whether or not Rob Bell is a universalist, a 9.0 earthquake and devastating tsunami hit Japan, killing over 25,000 people and injuring some 10,000.

But we wanted to talk about Rob Bell.

And it seems, in the midst of worldwide pain and heartache in recent weeks—the tragedy at the premier of The Dark Knight Rises, the Colorado fires, the Penn State abuse report, the Syrian massacres, unrest in the Middle East or even the drama surrounding the Olympics, that Christians would have plenty to not only talk about, but plenty in which we have an opportunity to participate with God in his redemptive plan for the reconciliation of all things.

But we want to talk about Chick-fil-A.

This begs the question—if Jesus were leading us down the mountain today, where would he be leading humanity?  Probably not into the ring to fight each other over this issue. The seeming inability of many Christians to appropriately engage the LGBT community is merely symptomatic of a much deeper issue—how we view “the Other.”

The Other

The issue is not homosexuality. We do the same with Muslims and Hindus, with Atheists and Agnostics. We do it with Christians that think differently regarding heaven and hell, baptism or remarriage, or those who get a little too charismatic when their favorite worship song is played. We do it with anyone who we view as “the Other.”

The real issue is us. 

We struggle to “put skin” on the words and message of Christ with anyone who thinks differently than us. Too often, we demand conformity prior to connection. When we approach one another as brothers and sisters—image bearers of the God we claim to serve—and celebrate what we have in common, we better position ourselves to helpful dialogue in the midst of disagreement. 

We carry divine potential for healing and restoration. We have an opportunity and responsibility to allow our words and actions to surge with the power and energy of a life of love.

Here’s a question: what it would look like if we, instead of taking sides in the Chick-fil-A debate, simply stretched out our hands and touched the Other?

—-
Michael Kimpan is the author of the WayWard follower blog, a site designed to inspire thoughtful conversation and movement among followers of Jesus Christ.  Michael worships and serves on staff as the Communications Director at Richwoods Christian Church in Peoria, IL.

This post originally appeared at RELEVANT

Print Friendly

About the Author

Michael Kimpan

Michael KimpanMichael Kimpan is the author of the WayWard follower blog, a site designed to inspire thoughtful conversation and movement among followers of Jesus Christ. Michael works with The Marin Foundation in Chicago, a non-profit organization which works to build bridges between the LGBT community and the Church.View all posts by Michael Kimpan →

  • http://twitter.com/brucearmstrong1 Bruce Armstrong

    What would it look like? Much the same as if Red-Letter Christians would start appropriately engaging evangelical Christians instead of looking at us as “The Other” – to be shunned and avoided as unclean.

  • http://www.facebook.com/sam.edwards.376 Sam Edwards

    Hmmm. You’ve been reading Star Trek novels. “The Other” is a major part of Vulcan religion :-) This is a great well thought out post, and I appreciate it. God bless.

  • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

    Ok folks. Let’s get something straight: Having an opinion is not uncivil, unloving, divisive or un-Christian. (Calling people names probably isn’t nice but really, does anyone need to be reminded of that preschool level lesson?)

    “Neutrality in a situation of oppression always supports the status quo. Reduction of conflict by means of a phony “peace” is not a Christian goal. Justice is the goal, and that may require an acceleration of (non-violent) conflict as a necessary stage in forcing those in power to bring about genuine change…Can people who are engaged in oppressive acts repent unless they are made uncomfortable with their actions?” Walter Wink

    Some things should not be “tolerated” – racism, sexism, heterosexism, etc. I can no more tolerate those opinions than i can “tolerate” the practices of the KKK.

    • http://twitter.com/ericaslens Erica

      Amen!

    • tarl_hutch

      I am just finishing up Wink’s Jesus and the third way, which I think you quoted here, and it has really given me a lot to think about regarding this issue. I respect and even applaud certain peoples choice to boycott based on their beliefs, but wondered if there was a ” third way” here.

      Maybe the third way could look like this: instead of a boycott that represents simultaneously a flight and fight response, the lgbt community and all the equality supporters should instead visit Chic-fil-a twice as much. By being present and turning the other cheek you regain your dignity while standing up to your “oppressors”. Show up, eat, hold hands, be a family, wear supportive tshirts, and talk to other people. In this way you say, I will not be cast aside, I will not be ignored, instead i choose to love and form relationships to change hearts and minds. Much like turning the other cheek, it causes other people to see you and deal with you on an equal level. It shows love and a desire to build relationships. Be vocal about whi you are, but never forgetting the humanity and Christ in your oppressors.

      Maybe there are better ways than that, but it struck me as an idea. The same applies to the arguments Christians find themselves in, unsteady of drawing up battlelines, we truly dee and respect each other and deal with our issues in love. What do you guys think?

      • http://www.mjkimpan.com/ michael j. kimpan

        i had a conversation with one of my gay friends last week that had similar sentiments. i do think it’s helpful – or at least a start. thanks for sharing.

        also, you mention wink’s ‘jesus and the third way’ – i’m not familiar with it. a good read? i certainly like the title…

        • tarl_hutch

          I highly recommend it. Very challenging, sadly short, and less than $5 for kindle. Nice post by the way. God bless.

      • Anonymous

        Good thoughts, again!

    • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.olson.522 Daniel Olson

      And yet the new testament is full of instances where Christ and his followers (more often than not) suffered injustice quietly and with great meekness. Even Stephen blessed his murderers as he was stoned.
      I’m not neutral, but I prefer to take spiritually motivated actions that promote peace and reconciliation. “…insomuch as you are able, live at peace with all men.” If I must break peace with men let me still keep my peace with God.
      “Forcing those in power to bring about genuine change” is not a principle of the Gospel, whether employed by Christains or gays. I’m intrigued by Walter’s life and teachings, but wonder if this passage might easily be taken out of context in this situation.

  • Anonymous

    “The issue is not homosexuality. We do the same with Muslims and Hindus, with Atheists and Agnostics. We do it with Christians that think differently regarding heaven and hell, baptism or remarriage, or those who get a little too charismatic when their favorite worship song is played. We do it with anyone who we view as “the Other.”
    The real issue is us. 

We struggle to “put skin” on the words and message of Christ with anyone who thinks differently than us. Too often, we demand conformity prior to connection.”

    Amen! Lived it and hope to never be a part of that type of community again.

  • KTroop

    I think I messed the star thing up trying to show approval of this post. I think this may be the first response to this whole issue that points to both sides as the problem. We all need to recognize the division among us and find that place to get on our knees together and look to Jesus. Well said.

    • http://www.mjkimpan.com/ michael j. kimpan

      thanks for reading.

  • 21st Century Episcopalian

    If I boycotted every company or product whose owner, president, or management had personal OR corporate views that were NOT 100% in line with mine, I’d not go anywhere, buy anything, drive, cycle, eat, wash, drink, gas up, read, nothing.

    Fact is I am not in 100% agreement with my wife, kids, boss, parents, even my previous self as I’d held views that I’ve changed position on. I can’t think of one person or company I’m in full agreement with. None.

    Chik-Fil-A boycott is nonsense and, frankly, hypocritical. Those who boycott CFA should look into the personal views and business practices of each and every organization and company they support by purchasing products. Gas for car? Oil for heating? Beef, pork, chicken? Geez, c’mon.

    • http://aredemptionofhope.blogspot.com Ally C

      It’s not just about his opinion, it’s that he and his organization give to anti-gay organizations. So if you’re gay, of course you’re not going to give money to a business that will subsidize groups who think you’re a blight on society. Neither will you want your friends and family to do so.

      • 21st Century Episcopalian

        So stop buying gas. You KNOW that money is used for MAJOR oppression of peoples across the globe. And stop paying taxes. You KNOW that money is paying for drone attacks, bombings; death and oppression of people worldwide.

        Be consistent. Enjoy the choice of NOT eating at Chik-Fil-A if that’s what you individually choose, but don’t be hypocritically and overtly vocal about it because it only brings out the lack of thought and reason.

        • http://aredemptionofhope.blogspot.com Ally C

          So because we cannot be fully consistent with our actions in regard to what we believe, we shouldn’t even try? What a terrible way to live.

          • 21st Century Episcopalian

            I didn’t say that. Maybe I wasn’t clear enough. I said if you want to boycott, you should feel free. But, when you are vocal and public (and judgmental against those who disagree), you run the risk of hypocricy. Do you agree with that?

          • Frank

            Sadly they do not understand your truth. They boycott selfishly not because of any principled stand.

          • http://twitter.com/hermyslilsis Meredith B

            That’s not a very nice thing to say, particularly when commenting on such a well reasoned article. No one can know the true reason for any one person’s actions, but many who are boycotting do so because it is something they can do to make a stand against hate groups. Surely Christ would not support hate groups no matter what they oppose?

            It is nearly impossible to lead a hypocrisy-free and fully principled life; abuse of power and corruption are so wide-spread in today’s world that in order to live entirely separate from it, one would have to isolate themselves entirely from all aspects of society. The boycott of Chik-Fil-A may seem hypocritical, but CFA is a much easier thing to avoid than gasoline or mass-produced clothing. I believe this level of hypocrisy is acceptable and even necessary for people to try to live moral lives; if we restricted our actions to doing either nothing at all or absolutely everything by strict moral principles, we would never be able to do anything. All we can do is what we can work into our lives.

            Setting aside these complicated and contentious moral compromises we all make with ourselves, your statement is harmful in a much simpler way: when we dismiss the actions of those who disagree with us as having no legitimate basis, it becomes impossible for us to even attempt to understand others, which only deepens the divide between us.

          • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.olson.522 Daniel Olson

            But a boycott is so coercive. And I beleive that “Hitting them in their pocketbook” requires embracing feelings of selfrighteousness, malice, and vengefullness. No peace there.
            Such an attitude affects us adversely, and to a lesser extent, those innocent employees of the company who have NOTHING to do with the policies of CEOs. Rather I think an attitude of do good to those who persecture you is more biblical (see MAT 5:44, ROM 12:14, Luke 6:27)
            Think of the company you or i work for. How do the owners spend their money? Unless they send all their profits to missions work…. there is room for improvment. should we consider ourselves too worthy to work for them? Truly there is a point to where we might have to say no to an industry we believe does more harm than good (liquor stores, tobacco companies), but God can lead us away from such peacefully and with good conscience.

          • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.olson.522 Daniel Olson

            But a boycott is so coercive. And I beleive that “Hitting them in their pocketbook” requires embracing feelings of selfrighteousness, malice, and vengefullness. No peace there.
            Such an attitude affects us adversely, and to a lesser extent, those innocent employees of the company who have NOTHING to do with the policies of CEOs. Rather I think an attitude of do good to those who persecture you is more biblical (see MAT 5:44, ROM 12:14, Luke 6:27)
            Think of the company you or i work for. How do the owners spend their money? Unless they send all their profits to missions work…. there is room for improvment. should we consider ourselves too worthy to work for them? Truly there is a point to where we might have to say no to an industry we believe does more harm than good (liquor stores, tobacco companies), but God can lead us away from such peacefully and with good conscience.

          • Frank

            You are right we cannot truly know motivations but we can look at the words spoken or written and the actions to determine motives.

            The motives for many are rooted in their selfish quest to live how they please. You can tell by the words they use. When you hear the words hate and bigot and intolerance thrown around haphazardly with no truth behind them you know exactly where that person is coming from

          • http://aredemptionofhope.blogspot.com Ally C

            Were the 1960′s protests and boycotts hypocritical? Why would i not be vocal about a cause i believe in?

          • 21st Century Episcopalian

            Fair point. If you truly believe in a cause, you should have every right to be vocal about it.

            Now let’s afford Mr. Cathy the same right.

          • http://aredemptionofhope.blogspot.com Ally C

            Mr. Cathy may say what he wants to say- he may face criticism, but there may be counter-criticism. As i said earlier, it’s not his words that many of us take issue. Our issue is that profits from CfA go to organizations like the Family Research Council, and our issue with such groups is their use of blatant false information to further their cause.

      • Ben

        Some people attracted only to the same-sex remain celibate.

        Don’t lump everyone together and say “If someone is BLANK they will do BLANK.”

        • http://aredemptionofhope.blogspot.com Ally C

          If this was in response to me, i’m not sure what your point is– no one in the LGBTQ community i know,
          , whether they are celibate or in a relationship, supports Chick-Fil-A, or the organizations they donate to…would you prefer i qualify my statement to: Most gays will not give money to a business that will subsidize groups who think you’re a blight on society. Is that better?

          • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.olson.522 Daniel Olson

            Hi, Ally….
            I’m gay. I’m a Christian. I had lunch at CFA today, but it was to support the employees and show them that just because I completely disagree with the CEO, I wont take it out on them.
            I didnt just “give them money”. I purchased a tasty spicy chicken sandwich. If .00001cents of that purchase goes to a group that’s politically unjust and thinks I’m scum, I consider that a fair trade for the impact I made when I identified myself and the reason I was there.
            You’re right: “Most gays wont…. ” And most Christians wont either. And thats exactly the point Tony is trying to get at. As a Christian, I prefer to build the bridge, not dredge the canal. and I have peace about that.
            Blessings.

          • http://aredemptionofhope.blogspot.com Ally C

            Huh… kudos, Daniel. That takes real courage. And i do support your choice.

            But this gay Christian couldn’t go to Chick-fil-A. She couldn’t even drive by without a deep sense of hurt and bewilderment. What did this prove? Who did it help?

            i heard Jon Foreman’s song Instead of a Show today and it made me think of this controversy… i agree with Michael, i believe God would rather we reach out and touch the Other than buy a sandwich or make out at said sandwich place out of spite for the “other” side.

          • Benjamin

            Why would they admit that to a group of angry people?

            Obviously Chick-Fil-A doesn’t hate gay people.
            And obviously you don’t know the inner thoughts and attractions of every person. And obviously if you are going to frown on anybody who doesn’t fit into your stereotypes, people may not be so open in discussing these things.

          • http://aredemptionofhope.blogspot.com Ally C

            Admit what to who?

            i never said CFA hates gay people, nor did i suggest that i know the inner thoughts and attractions of everyone. What i wrote minutes ago was: “i believe God would rather we reach out and touch the Other than buy a sandwich or make out at said sandwich place out of spite for the “other” side.” i believe that suggests i do not frown on anybody who doesn’t fit into my stereotypes. So… come again?

          • Benjamin

            Well then I must of misread it.

  • http://aredemptionofhope.blogspot.com Ally C

    Michael-
    As always, i appreciate your thoughts. It’s crucial that we learn to talk to and with each other rather than at each other, no matter the subject. Christ didn’t come to exclude others, he came to include everyone into the Kingdom, and as his followers, we ought to do the same.

  • http://ricbooth.wordpress.com Ric

    This post communicates the need to change our perspectives from a Christ-Pharisee viewpoint to a Christ-Leper/Other viewpoint. Yes, I have a tough time doing this. However, when I’m marginally successful at it, I do have some *seemingly* helpful conversations. It is very hard to gauge how helpful though. I don’t want us to simply achieve a polite, respectable level of discrimination.

    • Tommie

      Ric, you point is well taken but until the Spirit brings revelation and opens the heart, those living a LGBT lifestyle will not see themselves as the leper and will reject any assertion that they are in need of healing.

      • http://ricbooth.wordpress.com Ric

        Except that that is not my point nor the point of the blog post.

        I think the challenge being presented is for us as Christians to approach those on the other side of the fence (Christian or not) with the same love and compassion that Jesus approaches the leper. Whether or we or anyone identifies as ‘the leper’ is irrelevant.

      • Bdub

        It sounds like you are essentially pointing your finger at the LGBT community and saying “you’re a leper and you need healing.” Might it not be the other way around? How does the analogy work if you’re the leper?
        Furthermore, being gay isn’t a “lifestyle.” Spending the winter in Boca Raton is a lifestyle. Let me tell you a little bit about my life… I’m living a Christ-centered life, loving my spouse, taking care of our son and family, worshipping in church every Sunday, teaching Sunday school, working hard at my job every day, mentoring the students with whom I work, watching over our elderly neighbors, buying groceries, cooking dinner, cleaning house, mowing the lawn, and the list goes on to include a litany of “boring” day to day essentials… and I happen to be gay. I bet lots of people can relate to some of that “lifestyle.”
        No one needs healing because they are gay or lesbian. Gays and lesbians need healing because of the brokenness and damage done to them by so many others who turn them away, spit on them, mock them, and wish for them that they could be something other than gay or lesbian (not to mention healing from the damage done to themselves as a result of self-hate).
        Rather than seeking out an “other” to call “leper,” perhaps we should consider that, in one way or another, we’re all lepers.

  • http://ricbooth.wordpress.com Ric

    This post communicates the need to change our perspectives from a Christ-Pharisee viewpoint to a Christ-Leper/Other viewpoint. Yes, I have a tough time doing this. However, when I’m marginally successful at it, I do have some *seemingly* helpful conversations. It is very hard to gauge how helpful though. I don’t want us to simply achieve a polite, respectable level of discrimination.

  • Not Obvious

    By saying ‘what would Christ do here’ we may fail to recognize that what Christ did then was appropriate then. What he would do now would be appropriate now. Boycotts weren’t appropriate then, maybe they are now. The real issue for me is whether this the case of the adulterous woman about to be stoned who needed Christ’s compassion or the case of the vendors in the temples who needed Christ to flip their tables. Is this about the homosexual agenda attacking a God given institution as the vendors defiled the temple or is it a case of an outcast needing to see real compassion. By always jumping to the “other” side I think we can be a little lopsided, and it appears agenda driven then really thoughtful.

    • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.olson.522 Daniel Olson

      And interesting to note that Jesus told her to go and sin no more, knowing that such was not possible for her.

  • Paul

    There is nothing wrong with line-drawing when there is a line to be drawn, but it is hypocritical to boycot this company and not boycott all Apec derived fuel at the same time.

  • Paul

    There is nothing wrong with line-drawing when there is a line to be drawn, but it is hypocritical to boycot this company and not boycott all Apec derived fuel at the same time.

  • Pinky

    Thank you, thank you! Just because I am a Christian does not mean I need to buy overpriced chicken today. Will I continue to go to Chick Fil-A occasionally about the same rate I already do. Slap a Christian message on something and so many will buy it. I am just so tired of seeing Christians buy into an economy of what you support and buy proves your Christianity.

  • http://www.facebook.com/writingmother Heather Atton Cook

    How many of God’s laws should we now deem inappropriate @09a974e21ea718db34e728312c5ab4e5:disqus? Where do we stop? Who gets to decide? I’m not talking about Moses’ laws… or all laws in the bible… I’m talking about the ones God specifically put in there and said if we follow Him, we follow these laws…

    I believe there are two major rules that I will spend my whole life trying to work on, in Jesus’ words: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’

    We spend so much time fighting against someone else’s agenda… what would have happened in Jesus’ time? We would have probably boycotted and stopped his crucifiction. Yeah, that would have been awesome. Not.

  • Brendon Pennington

    Here’s what I think about this whole issue:

    EAT MOR CHIKIN!!!

    High five for Dan Cathy!

    And high five for marriage! … and yes, I’m talking about the one between boys and girls.

    Oh no … I guess that makes me a homophobic, fundamentalist, hate-mongering, intolerant bigot.

    Oh well … EAT MOR CHIKIN!!!

    • http://www.mjkimpan.com/ michael j. kimpan

      unhelpful.

    • tarl_hutch

      No that just makes you obnoxious. It makes me sad, because it would have been nice to hear what you really had to say, instead of trying to piss off anyone who doesn’t agree with you. Anything helpful to share? Some of us would really like to know why you feel the need to act this way.

      • tarl_hutch

        Secondly, I was looking back over some of your previous posts and some discussion we have had and am more confused than ever by the tone of your comment. I imagine you must be sick of hearing people tell you what to think, but I miss the thoughtful logical scope of your previous post. You are better and smarter than this. Room for dialogue?

      • tarl_hutch

        Secondly, I was looking back over some of your previous posts and some discussion we have had and am more confused than ever by the tone of your comment. I imagine you must be sick of hearing people tell you what to think, but I miss the thoughtful logical scope of your previous post. You are better and smarter than this. Room for dialogue?

        • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.olson.522 Daniel Olson

          Perhaps it was a different “guest”?

  • http://www.facebook.com/joe.richards.313 Joe Richards

    My Favorite of the Day! Rahm Rahmbo “Dead Fish” Emanuel — a putative Jew — declares Judeo-Christian Values NOT Chicago values but Farrakhan’s anti-semitism and White Hatred are!

    The Windy City Loves Chick Fil A

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=4482839988728&set=a.1247528587965.2038630.1221949455&type=1&theater

  • http://www.facebook.com/joe.richards.313 Joe Richards

    Dining at Chick Fil A is a great and Godly act of love. Love for God, His people, His Word, His Godly business people, His institution (sacrament) of heterosexual marriage — the only marriage gift He bequeathed us with. There is NO SIN nor shame in Christians saying, “I am showing up and showing solidarity with my brothers and sisters who ECHOED God when they declared, ‘I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say ‘we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,’ and I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about.’”

    That is a Biblically TRUE, orthodox, reverent, and Godly statement to make. No Christian should EVER have to apologize for standing in solidarity with this unassailable Biblical Truth stated over and over in many ways throughout both covenants.

    IN short, since God loves sinful people and hates our sins, we, too, are to love sinful people and HATE sin. The cross makes no sense otherwise. The cross exhibited in the most powerful way God’s utter Love for us and His utter hatred of and wrath toward sin, and ONLY this TRUTH can partially explain why God would virtually insist His ONLY BEGOTTEN SON suffer for hours and hours an excruciatingly painful and horrific death on a wooden cross at the hands of sinful men.

    If Christ did NOT shy away from suffering and dying for horrific sins via His horrific death we Christians can NOT shy away from calling sin horrific and utterly sinful AND still be obedient. To do otherwise is to deny Christ.

    Christians are to love homosexuals, sodomites, bisexuals, transgenders, the androgynous and everyone else confused about their sexuality with the same love we have for one another, and hate their sins with the same hatred we have for our own sins, whether they be lying, stealing, cheating, sexual immorality, divorce and adulterous remarriage, tax evasion, blasphemy, idolatry, etc.

    God never asked us to denude sin of its utter sinfulness and to preach this possibility, but to declare the power of sin to usher in death countered and quickened only by Christ’s horrifically painful death as atonement for ALL sins coupled with His resurrection from Hell vouchsafing our salvation from sin both now and for eternity.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175587/Chick-fil-A-President-fast-food-chain-Dan-Cathy-OUTS-company-ANTI-GAY–proud-it.html#ixzz22LoKy5Oj

  • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.olson.522 Daniel Olson

    What a well thought out article. If i am to boycott or sever ties with a business over ANYTHING not directly related to the immediate service they provide, I will be forever assessing everyone elses “worthiness”. And that with only a finite mind which has access to only part of the information. Rather I should consider that those individuals and the unfathomable different aspects of their lives are far too complex for me to judge. Only God sees the whole picture.
    Would I mourn for the stance of the company I boycott? Or would I harbor an attitude of self righteousness.
    When it comes right down to it a COMPANY has no PERSONAL views. Thats like saying a car has an opinion.

  • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.olson.522 Daniel Olson

    What a well thought out article. If i am to boycott or sever ties with a business over ANYTHING not directly related to the immediate service they provide, I will be forever assessing everyone elses “worthiness”. And that with only a finite mind which has access to only part of the information. Rather I should consider that those individuals and the unfathomable different aspects of their lives are far too complex for me to judge. Only God sees the whole picture.
    Would I mourn for the stance of the company I boycott? Or would I harbor an attitude of self righteousness.
    When it comes right down to it a COMPANY has no PERSONAL views. Thats like saying a car has an opinion.

  • http://www.facebook.com/lmoore03 Leigh Ann Moore

    I think it destroys the attempt to reach out to the Other when you first talk about the Other being hypocritical. How does that count as reaching out? All it does is push the other away. That’s my two cents.

  • Stephen

    Perhaps the Supreme Court ruling that corporations are persons has confused us. Corporations are not persons. They are organizations that are run for the benefit of the owners / shareholders.

    In that regard, my opinion is that corporations should never give to a political cause for purely political reasons. If the owner wants to, then he / she should do so from his or her personal income — whatever the tax penalties are. The company should only give to what furthers the company’s own business ends.

    So what about Microsoft giving in support of gay marriage in WA? WEll, this is a corporation acting to further its business agenda. Very simply, it does not want high-level employees moving to rivals in CA or somewhere else that has a more favorable attitude to gay marriage.

    In this sense, Microsoft’s position makes business sense. My understanding of Chick-fil-A’s is that it does not have this logic. It is purely an expression of the owner’s personal views.

    As a result, I think Mr. Cathy would have been in a better position if he had kept these donations off the corporate books, and made them from his personal wealth. This would also have had the effect of ensuring that employees and customers could enjoy working at and eating at his restaurants whoever they are — Christian or not, gay or not. And it would have kept the witness of this this operation which has done so many positive things (where would you want to work — Chick-fil-A or McDonalds?) one which Christians and non-Christians alike could appreciate.

    Personally, I will eat there when I want to. Just as in the same way I buy gas for my car that originates in the Middle East, buy clothes that are made in China, and write this blog comment on a Microsoft OS laptop.

    (On the latter, should we as believers switch to Linux to avoid supporting liberal MS and Apple? Now that’s an argument for open source software I haven’t heard before …)

  • Anonymous

    What is so upsetting from both sides is that no one is listening to each other. Focus on the Family (one of the allegedly anti-gay organizations that CFA supports) is not anti-gay. I have a lot of issues with Focus on the Family but I don’t understand why everyone is taking the word of the media that they are in fact anti-gay. Can we stop throwing that term around so loosely. Thinking that homosexuality is a sin based on a person’s interpretation of the Bible does NOT make them anti-gay. Focus on the Family has a program that supports homosexuals who want to turn away from that lifestyle. My understanding is that the program is run by men who once were homosexual and now are not (whether you believe that is possible or not is not the point). I get that homosexuals would not support such a program but for the love that doesn’t make Focus on the Family anti-gay. I’m beyond tired of people jumping to conclusions about people being anti-anything. My name is Casey and I do think homosexuality is a sin but I love and respect gay people as much as I do heterosexual people. I don’t condemn homosexual nor judge them. Quit calling people that share my views bigots, close-minded, haters, and discriminators.

  • Anonymous

    While I ate at Chick-fil-a last night with my family, I did it more out of a desire to say “I don’t like the dirt being flung at the owner.” It wasn’t meant as a way of trying to stigmatize the other.

    But Michael’s post here is well written and thoughtful. We should always be mindful of how our actions are being viewed by “the other.” But instead of taking side in the Chick-fil-a debate, what would reaching out to touch the other look like? And can’t the two things be done at the same time?

    I think the reason that controversies like this one, and the Rob Bell book, supposedly get so much blog space and ink compared to something like the Aurora shootings or Penn State scandal (and I’m not even sure that’s truly the case) is that the former things are things that people disagree on so there are varying opinions so there are points and counterpoints. While I actually think there’s been a lot written about Penn State, Aurora, Japanese tsunami, etc. it doesn’t get as much attention because there’s nothing to disagree with. Everyone agrees Aurora was tragic and awful. End of story. I just don’t think it inherently says anything bad about Christians that we have a lot of differing opinions about Rob Bell or Chick-fil-a.

  • Tommie

    Mr. Kimpan, I appreciate the tone of your article but it seems that the LGBT community (in general) is often intolerant of others simply holding a belief system or a set of values contrary to theirs. Anyone that took the time to listen to “the interview” with Dan Kathy heard a man with strong convictions lacking hatred or guile. After all, what would you expect a follower of Jesus to say when discussing “alternative lifestyles”? Before there can be dialog that touches one another each side must respect the other’s freedom to believe and practice as they please.

    • joss

      “This isn’t about mutual tolerance because there’s nothing mutual about it. If we agree to disagree on this issue, you walk away a full member of this society and I don’t. There is no ‘live and let live’ on this issue because Dan Cathy is spending millions to very specifically NOT let me live. I’m not trying to do that to him.” http://www.owldolatrous.com/?p=288

    • Dave

      Before we look at the splinter in the eye of the LGBT community, we need to remove the log from our own. The Christian community is just as intolerant, if not more so, of those who hold beliefs different from our own. It seems disingenuous to hold the other side to a standard we don’t follow.

  • Christlover

    A friend sent me a link to this RLC site and have skimmed 3-4 blogs mostly about heteros and gays etc…now with this CFA issue in the media…everywhere we turn or look or hear is about straights/gays, anti-gays , hetero’s and ‘that’s not okay’ etc…we need to look at human history and ‘see’ what hollywood & the media do to influence this ongoing issue that doesn’t need to be…in the last 15 yrs to present, it seems like there are more and more people that are gay, but this is not the truth…the % is approx from 3-7% of the population(so let’s say median is 5%) and from the beginning of time, with the history of man, this has also been true(much can be read about it during the roman times) …i try to tell people that the % is not increasing and is a sateday rate since the beginning of man! And yes in Christ’s walk, there were homosexuals and i am quite confident Christ encountered and maybe even knew some and was friends with them…bu the bottom line is the %(around 5) is the same yesterday today and will be ongoing, but because of the agendas of certain groups, hollywood, and the mainstream media, with more shows, movies, etc…promoting, it feels/seems like there is an increase to a lot of people…yes as the population grows overall, there is an increase but not in percentage…we as humans act like this is a ‘new thing’ for society and God??? Of course it’s not… i was hoping this RLC site would have more beneficial, thought-provoking articles and knowledge…oh well…i will continue onward bearing my cross to follow His Cross…God bless

  • Brett

    If you are getting life from your rightness ABOUT God, you aren’t getting life from God.
    I support Gay rights, I’m not sure if I’m right, and I don’t care if im right. Free speech in this case is excused homophobia.

  • http://twitter.com/jlmartin256 Joan Martin

    I believe that people are born with their sexual identities. According to the Bible, all sexual relations outside of marriage are sinful. But, I have heard nothing about anyone trying to make it illegal for heterosexuals to have sex outside of marriage. It’s also sinful, according to the Bible to divorce, unless for very specific reasons. But, there are no laws against heterosexual divorce. I just find it odd that Christians single out gays as the “most sinful” group of people, and try to enact laws to control only their behavior. Counseling gay people in an effort to help them abandon their lifestyle, when they are only attracted to those of the same gender, means telling them to live a celibate life, because they aren’t physically attracted to those of the opposite gender. How many heterosexual people would accept being told to live a celibate life?

  • http://www.facebook.com/joe.richards.313 Joe Richards

    Dr. Robert Jeffress gives one of the BEST, most theologically correct, apologetics for WHY Christians refudiate HOMOSEXUALITY, love HOMOSEXUALS, and WHY we exercise our Creator Endowed natural right to SPEAK Truth and Prophesy as God taught us to!

    BRILLIANT. I will be echoing much of what he taught me in other venues. I hope you do the same!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBPOzbB_CYc&feature=player_embedded

    No theology of God is complete WITHOUT a simultaneous finite understanding of BOTH His love for us and His utter hatred of ALL sin within us as exhibited on the cross. Christians are fond of, and rightly refer to, the demonstration of God’s love for us through the cross. But to deny the simultaneous exhibition of the terrible wrath of God toward every sin ever committed which He finds abhorrent, detestable, and vile is to remake God in our own image — what Dr. Campolo has on occasion referred to as “totem pole” theology.

    Christians MUST embrace the many paradoxes of God — the characteristics and attributes of God that to our finite minds seem incongruous and impossible to simultaneously coexist. But they do! Too many of us resolve the paradoxrs by jettisoning one side of the “God coin” in favor of the one we like best or appreciate most – hence building our own totem pole god with ourselves at the head. Why Christians and non-Christians alike can lust after 50 SHADES of Grey and not embrace the many, many shades of God that coexist in INFINITE harmony is beyond me.

    When we hear someone speak only of the “love of God” one of us should be quick to point out the simultaneous HATRED by God of ALL OF OUR CONTEMPTIBLE sins. When we hear someone else speak only of the wrath of God — “sinners in the hands of an angry God” — we should chime in, “And don’t forget about the amazing love of God He showers upon us.”

    This tension DOES require a fairly mature and well developed mind/brain that confesses its own finiteness and limited ability to wrap itself around paradoxes. But this is one element of Christian maturity: to know a finite amount of the infinite wisdom of God and dutifully hold this in tension without diminishing either the LOVE nor WRATH of God. This is similar to the tension of the “Already but NOT yet” aspect of the INAUGURATION of the Kingdom of God by Jesus but not yet the FULFILLMENT of His Kingdom.

    It really is a BOTH/AND, and mirrors truths of the universe discovered by quantum mechanics, such as light simultaneously behaving as a particle and a wave, and actually being influenced in its behavior by our own observation of it!

    Theological obedience to a Loving/Wrathful God requires embrace of both without denying either.

  • Jim Fields

    We are called to follow Jesus not Chick-fil-A or anybody else.

    Which way did Jesus go?

    Follow the path of love, Jesus is up ahead somewhere comforting
    those who mourn, laughing with those who laugh, interacting with those who
    others look down on…

    Follow the way of Mercy, we’ll find Jesus washing the feet of
    sinners, feeding 5,000 somewhere, welcoming children or giving spiritual
    healing to those who show faith.

    Follow the way of Grace, Jesus will slow down a bit as he
    forgives for the 147th time…we will find him in prayer interceding
    for the likes of us, or walking along opening the Scriptures for someone who
    finally sets their mind on finding out for themselves who this Jesus actually
    is.

×

TRENDING: Remember Guantanamo Bay? Day 102 of the Hunger Strike >>