Custom Search

Monday, July 23, 2012

Anti-Heterosexual, Anti-Marriage, Think Progress Misrepresents Chick-fil-A Owner

By Susan Duclos

Pet Peeve number... well hell, I lost count, but suffice it to say, a pet peeve of mine is when someone declares their support for "the biblical definition of the family unit," meaning marriage, by definition is between a man and woman, and gay activists suddenly declare that those people are "anti-gay."

Might as well simply declare Think Progress as anti-Heterosexual and anti-marriage.

 Example: Chick-fil-A’s president Dan Cathy, when asked about reports that he was against same-sex marriage, said "Well, guilty as charged,” adding, "We are very much supportive of the family — the biblical definition of the family unit … We intend to stay the course. We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles."

Cathy reiterated his position in a radio interview, where he said “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.

Think Progress automatically takes Cathy's support of marriage as between a man and a woman refers to it, mulitple times as "anti-gay."

Now, let's look at how Think Progress "reported" this:

Headline : "Chick-fil-A Seeks To Distance Itself From Anti-Gay Owner"


On Monday, a Baptist Press story quoted Chick-fil-A’s president Dan Cathy admitting his company’s anti-gay ideology...


In his interview with the Baptist Press, Cathy admitted that the company indeed has an anti-gay political agenda......

I will not pretend to know what Cathy thinks or believes or if he is or is not "anti-gay", but his statements are quite clear that he is talking about the definition of marriage in those instances, which for now, is legally defined as between a man and a woman.

So, let me use myself as an example.

I believe marriage is between a man and a woman and civil unions are a form of relationship recognition that gives same-sex couples access to state created rights and obligations of civil marriage.

Not being religious, I have no religious objection to who people decide to be with as long as they are happy.

 I also firmly believe that those engaging in civil unions should be granted the same benefits offered to couples married. To me, that is what gay rights should be all about. If a couple is going to be together, they should be entitled to every benefit that a full partnership demands.

With that said, idiots like those over at Think Progress, would still mislead their readers and call someone like me "anti-gay" simply because I believe marriage should be between a man and woman and civil unions are specifically set up to provide all the rights inherent to marriage and apply them to same-sex partnership.

For gay right's activists, fighting for equal rights, meaning the full benefits inherent to marriage, is not enough, they want more than just equal rights, they want their legal definitions to replace the law, they want their rights to be put above others.

Example: We see the Gay Pride Parade every year and no one calls them anti-heterosexual or anti-marriage, yet when, in response, organizers set up a Straight Pride Parade, then it became controversial.

That is anti-marriage and anti-heterosexual.

The double standard is appalling and it appears that those showing those double standards aren't even aware of their own hypocrisy.

(Changes have been made to this post)