Deluge: Four Things We Can Learn From The Chick-fil-A Win
I just wanted to make certain that all of us can see and understand what’s under our noses from the past week’s fun.
To recap, Chick-fil-A experienced what can only be called an outpouring of support all over the country. Even as a conservative who’s quite aware that the progressive activists are a tiny minority of the country’s population, I was astonished at the display on Wednesday of last week; I never expected the level of involvement, engagement, and passion that we saw. All around the country—not merely in the good old South—people stacked up, stood in line outside, and flooded the counters of Chick-fil-A.
On Friday, the gay activists were going to have their parallel outpouring of non-support. . . only it didn’t turn out that way at all.
What can we learn from last week’s demonstration? Or rather, of what can we be reminded, since I expect that most of the readers here already recognize these four principles from the past?
First, the fascists are the progressive activists. They want a country—and in The Episcopal Church, a denomination—that bullies others into silence, forces others to support them with their money, redefines morality, and forces redefinitions of words, without protest from those who don’t want that. If they ever gain the power, they’ll make laws that won’t allow you to voice your opinion, support what you believe, build your own businesses, claim any social power or credibility, and refuse to support what you do not believe in. If they could, they’d send you to prison for refusing to support their agenda.
I think many—many—more Americans recognize this today than they did two weeks ago. These people are not “tolerant.” They’re bullies, they hate those who do not support their agenda, and they will do all in their power to hurt you, try to embarrass you and silence you, and force you to capitulate on your values and your morality.
This is who they are—and that’s demonstrable from the actions and the on-the-record statements of the last several weeks.
Second, no surprise, but the supporters of traditional marriage are in the large majority. We all know this—including, I should add, the gay activists.
Remember, their rhetoric is designed to imply that the vast majority of Americans are in support of redefining marriage to include one particular, currently-faddish-amongst-progressives, sexual attraction. They spend a lot of time and money cultivating the “inevitability” meme, so as to discourage organized resistance.
As I pointed out in a recent post:
“...what gay marriage activists want to foster—in fact, a time-honored tradition on the part of liberal activists—is the perception of “inevitability” which, if such inevitability is accepted, means that opponents will cease the effort of resistance. But there’s a big difference between attempting to promulgate the vision of “inevitability” and that inevitability actually being reality. Gay marriage approval is not inevitable at all, and I don’t think Americans are buying it either.”
Only—it’s not inevitable. Not at all. And their supporters are not in the majority—not even close.
So it may be time for them to wheel back from that line of rhetorical spin and return to their “pity us, give us a few bones, we’re being oppressed by a cruel majority of bigots” meme.
Which brings me to point three.
Third, the progressive activists have so misused language that fewer and fewer who are opposing them are ashamed any more.
Part of the strategy on the part of progressive activists—after asserting droningly that only a tiny minority of savages would actually dare to believe that marriage should not be redefined in order to accommodate one particular minority sexual attraction currently faddish amongst progressives—is to attempt to shame people into being quiet. Whatever else happens, progressive activists can’t afford to have people saying out loud what they believe, since the more people say these things out loud, the more others recognize that they have allies and are not, after all, in the minority, but quite the opposite.
That’s the big shift I’ve seen over the past 9 years, since 2003. In those days there was a bit more shame or fear involved in saying out loud “I don’t believe that marriage should be redefined to include one particular minority sexual attraction just in order to make them feel better about themselves. And furthermore, I don’t think sexual acts between two men or two women is a good thing at all, in fact, it is harmful and wrong.”
Now, there’s just a whole lot less shame in being public and open about one’s traditional beliefs and values. On Wednesday, August 1, many thousands of people said it. And they felt good saying it, and they’ll continue to say it more and more.
Nobody cares any more if they’re labelled a “bigot” by gay activists—it’s a badge of honor, and there’s no shame in it.
I sense that difference now—a big shift in the willingness of people to step up and say out loud and publicly—“nope, we don’t agree and we’re not going to support it.”
I was struck by one local radio call-in commentary on the support—the commentator, who is, I believe, a Baptist, stated [and I paraphrase] “in the parking lot here I see stickers from all the churches . . . Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Episcopalian, and so many more. Everyone’s out supporting Chick-fil-A.” He took care to note the myriad of denominations, and had no special need to note “Episcopalian”—he just noticed it.
Truth is, the majority of Episcopalians don’t want marriage redefined either. And in the past, they’ve been too quelled and fearful to say that out loud. But the tide is turning, and more of them now are saying “uh, no—we don’t want this and we won’t support it and you can’t make us.”
And folks, the current TEC leaders cannot make parishioners support it either. They can’t make us write checks, and they can’t keep us from redirecting money to more worthy charitable endeavors. And we can do that just fine and remain Episcopalians, because the current TEC leaders don’t get to redefine what being an Episcopalian is, no matter how hard they try.
That’s why Episcopalians who are staying in TEC all around the country need to Write The Letter, and continue on worshipping happily at their chosen parishes. You’re in the majority, you need to state what you believe, and let the progressive activists squeal and try harder all they like. They can own the national instruments of TEC, and they may even own your diocese—but you own your checkbook, and you own your voice, and you get to say what you believe and what you support.
We’ll see more of this around TEC, of that I’m confident. More Episcopalians distancing themselves from the stances of our leadership, and shutting off more and more money.
Fourth, symbolic action counts.
The actions of Wednesday not only heartened the majority of American citizens, they deflated the tiny minority of progressive activists—and I think that’s one reason why The Great Kiss-In was such a flop. When people recognize just how outnumbered they are, it’s harder to get them out there engaged in childish demonstrations.
They—and their willing allies in the media—will certainly make every effort to discount and “forget” what happened on Wednesday.
It’s up to us to make certain we don’t forget and that those symbolic actions transfer to more meaningful and substantive actions.
But don’t let people—either conservatives or progressive activists—try to tell you that “symbolism doesn’t count.” It does, even if you can’t point to something “real” accomplished from those symbolic actions. There’s a reason why opponents go for the flag-bearer, even when the flag-bearer doesn’t engage in the active part of the battle. There’s a reason why taking down statues in town squares is meaningful, even though technically what does it actually accomplish in the progress of the battle? There’s a reason why Puddleglum’s stamping out of the fire and speaking strongly about the lies that the powerful queen was telling to the children was a powerful symbolic action, even though they were defeated, lost, and afraid.
Symbolic actions matter, especially when they evolve into more.
Hopefully they will.
Share this story:
Recent Related Posts
- Sam Allberry - Is God Anti-Gay? [video]
- TEC Minnesota gives local option for same sex marriage
- Gay Marriage is to Govt. as is Study Hall to Academics
- Andrew Wilson and Rob Bell on Unbelievable
- Don’t Sign the Letter
- Methodist Minister Defies Church in “Deeply Personal Act” of Politics (UPDATED)
- Religions Not Accepting of Everybody
Comments
Facebook comments are closed.
23 comments
I know I keep posting this video that was initially designed to promote the Wilberforce Weekend this year, but its simple point is key in this ongoing cultural battle and illustrates Sarah’s ideas above in a thoughtful way. The weekend’s theme was BREAKING THE SPIRAL OF SILENCE.
I’ve shown it to my students (at a Christian school) and had great discussions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMWlSeZfyRY
[1] Posted by cityonahill on 8-5-2012 at 11:37 AM · [top]
We also need to acknowledge that the modern Democratic party and the man occupying the White House is part and parcel of the gay fascists. They are the political arm of those people and NPR is their mouthpiece.
[2] Posted by Br. Michael on 8-5-2012 at 11:46 AM · [top]
I have a big question that has been roiling up inside of me for quite some time: the church, an organization who for quite some time now has put the quality of “nice” high on its list of theological qualities the church should adopt, does not push back. It avoids, it cowers, it surrenders, it justifies.
But here’s the question: The Gay Machine does things like making death threats; closing down adoption agencies; vandalizing; supporting unhealthy sexual behavior, and drug and alcohol abuse, why, then, doesn’t the church stand up, get a back-bone, and assert, when you begin to behave like Christians, then, and only then, will we sit down and discuss this marriage issue? Because this is, in the end, a Christian issue.
Just putting that onerous responsibility on its shoulders ought to keep them busy for a few centuries.
And, well, here’s another question: isn’t the fact that there is no public dissension (disagreement, disputation, and any other “dis” word you can come up with to fit here) within the gay community a massive sign that something is very, very wrong with its members? In what group of humans does one find complete consensus at all times? Do gay people who disagree with what is going on remain silent because they don’t want to be at the receiving end of harassment, like being publicly outed or physically threatened?
That’s the silence I would like to see headlined as proof of The Machine’s complete lack of health: the severe oppression of its own members.
[3] Posted by JuliaMarks on 8-5-2012 at 11:55 AM · [top]
Words fail me.
[4] Posted by Ralph on 8-5-2012 at 12:26 PM · [top]
Similar sentiment from : Iowahawk on twitter
Also loved the comment,
[5] Posted by paradoxymoron on 8-5-2012 at 01:45 PM · [top]
Not totally sure if this is the best place to put this, but here goes…
Almost 20 years ago, I ran into a fellow college alum (I’ll call him Tom) in my hometown. We didn’t know each other in college, but we discovered we had a mutual friend (I’ll call him Brad).
Tom basically insinuated that Brad was gay. I’d never thought about it, mainly because Brad was completely girl crazy when I knew him. I thought Tom was off base both for his comment about Brad and for bringing it up in the first place.
Tom and I never really developed a friendship mainly because we drove each other crazy, and so we learned to stay on opposite sides of the church fellowship hall until he moved away. Years later, I found out Tom moved back to town and came out of the closet. He is now partnered and living in one of the nicest, most expensive, snobbiest, and gay-friendly parts of the city.
In the meantime, I have come back into contact with Brad and we’re Facebook friends. Brad finally got married this year. Brad and Tom also reconnected through Facebook (though I have no idea what they may or may not have talked about…)
Last week, Brad and his wife went to the closest Chick-Fil-A to their home. Afterward, they posted a photo of themselves kissing, with a Chick-Fil-A cup in full view, in support of Chick-Fil-A, traditional marriage, and their own marriage. I couldn’t help but smile knowing where Brad is in his life now, while also thinking of Tom’s exercise of judgment (or lack thereof) many years ago.
[6] Posted by Reformed Wanderer on 8-5-2012 at 01:55 PM · [top]
All the more reason the Republican party, if it has any wisdom at all, will run ads, put up billboards, and scream from the roof tops 24/7, “government didn’t build this, I did”.
I see the Chick-fil-A bullying by the left in the same light as Obama’s “you didn’t do this on your own, others did it for you”. It’s a gut punch that the average, everyday, hardworking American knows if just plain wrong and needs to be labeled as such in very plain words.
Sorry, if this is too much off-topic.
[7] Posted by Capt. Father Warren on 8-5-2012 at 02:09 PM · [top]
paradoxymoron:
Well, it was a safe bet that the Kiss-Ins were going to provide people with the near occasion of sin in more ways than one. What I’d like to know is, how many conservative supporters of Chick-fil-A went back that day just to watch, armed with binoculars and a vivid imagination?
Now that Mr. Cathy has had his due, I’d like to organize special “Kiss A Chicken Goodbye While There’s Still Time” events at slaughterhouses around the country. My confessor assures me that a few pecks on the cheek will be morally licit under the circumstances.
Those who wish to eat at Chick-fil-A afterwards may do so, but if it’s held on a Friday, I’m going to Long John Silvers. Who’s with me?
[8] Posted by episcopalienated on 8-5-2012 at 03:07 PM · [top]
Sarah:
Some of the left wing blogs are already trying to make much of the fact that Chick-fil-A’s YouGov BrandIndex score fell from 65 on July 16th, the day of Mr. Cathy’s Baptist Press interview, to 47 on July 20th.
The report posted at the BrandIndex site itself is entitled Chick-Fil-A takes a hit with fast food eaters.
Now, this report came out on July 27th, obviously prior to the tremendous success of Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day and the record breaking sales it generated. The graph posted below the report covers the period from June 1st through July 25th. I think it will be very interesting to see where the trend goes from here and whether or not conservative support for the company in its present situation will be sustained long term.
[9] Posted by episcopalienated on 8-5-2012 at 05:56 PM · [top]
Good piece, Sarah.
Going to Chick-fil-A on Wednesday with two other couples had very much the feel of the summer of 2010 when (with these same couples) we went to our Congressman’s town hall meeting. This has the feel of polite defiance—the sense among us regular folks that resulted in the November 2010 election rout.
[10] Posted by hanks on 8-5-2012 at 06:05 PM · [top]
Des Peres, MO CFA vandalized:
http://www.ksdk.com/comments/331329/5/Dont-Hate-spraypainted-on-Des-Peres-Chick-fil-A
Don’t you haters cross the Tolerance Gestapo!
[11] Posted by Jeffersonian on 8-5-2012 at 07:19 PM · [top]
The girls and I went on Friday for lunch—could not get near the place on Wednesday. It was very busy and the police were there to keep the peace, but really it was so peaceful they had nothing to do. Friday night we drove by again—only 5 or 6 protesters with one rainbow flag and a couple of signs. Unfortunately there was also one counter-protester—complete with a “You’re going to burn in Hell” t-shirt, a double high sign with damnation Bible verses on it, and a personal sound system which he used to harangue at the protesters.
Otherwise it looked pretty quiet and nicely full.
[12] Posted by Summersnow on 8-5-2012 at 10:44 PM · [top]
Heh, heh, I learned something from our Chick-fil-A visit. As one who has met parishioners and others at Starbucks down the road, I learned that meeting at Chick-fil-A in the future for these discussions will be much better; brighter area, wider variety of food and drink, and just a pleasant atmosphere from those working there. Yep, pastorally speaking, Chick-fil-A wins hands down!
[13] Posted by Capt. Father Warren on 8-6-2012 at 07:28 AM · [top]
Sarah,
Spot-on assessment. I’d like to add a supporting point.
Many of the progressive activists claim that now, a “majority of Americans support gay marriage”. August 1st evidence offers compelling reasons to doubt that, but there’s more. I suspect that of those who do support gay marriage, it’s not quite that they support gay marriage, but that they oppose anyone in power “going after” any cultural group or type of behavior. They suppose that if we don’t oppose “them” (orthodox, conservatives, Republicans, Tea Party, etc.) and prevent “them” from “going after” gays, then a precedent will have been set, and next thing you know, they’ll be coming after us, because we engage in (fill in the blank). Pretty soon, “they” will “go after” porn, prostitution, gambling, and before you know it, we’ll be forced to live in a decent society. Nothing could be worse than that, so, even if we don’t particularly care for gays, it’s better to let them have their way than to be enslaved in a Norman Rockwell world.
[14] Posted by DaveW on 8-6-2012 at 09:26 AM · [top]
I hated to be called a ‘hater’ or ‘bigot’ years ago. At first, it was because I was hurt. Later, it wasn’t because I was hurt, but because I felt insulted and I was going to give as good as I got. Now I see their name calling as just a bunch of hot air from a frothing waterbuffalo.
[15] Posted by All-Is-True on 8-6-2012 at 12:34 PM · [top]
Sarah,
Thanks for this great post. I think it’s also important to note that many, if not most, gays are NOT activists intent on silencing the free speech of others.
We have a couple of partnered gay friends who are not in support of the attempted lynching of Chick-Fil-A.
The activist gays only pretend to speak for all gays as they try to suppress freedom of speech and association among those who disagree with their lifestyle.
[16] Posted by Capn Jack Sparrow on 8-6-2012 at 01:13 PM · [top]
Sarah, your four points are spot on. The issues are bigger than chicken, but it took something like this to wake the public. As of Saturday, they were still packing them in in the Coulmbia, SC Chick-fil-A. I went to Popeyes instead. They were busy too.
The cows must be pleased.
[17] Posted by Undergroundpewster on 8-6-2012 at 02:16 PM · [top]
While the support for Chik-Fil-A has been amazing, it would be wise to not conclude so quickly that the outpouring of support was only about support for family values.
When I went to Chik-Fil-A for lunch on Wednesday, I overheard a conversation between a young man and two young women. The young man stated that he was gay, and he felt it was important to show his support for free speech on Wednesday.
It was very encouraging to hear 20-somethings converse about the constitutional right to free speech, whether or not they agreed with what is being said.
[18] Posted by Charles Maggs on 8-6-2012 at 02:47 PM · [top]
Sarah, you were the first to call it. The hererosexuals have come out of the closet. PC has failed and a sleeping giant is stirring. Gentlemen, start your engins. Roooommm, rooomm, grwolll, Whoooooooeeeee!!!!
[19] Posted by PROPHET MICAIAH on 8-6-2012 at 05:27 PM · [top]
From what I understand, Chick-Fil-A has continued to have larger than before business. I am not sure what the figures Episcopalianated gave mean, but an unscientific poll has CFA with an increase in sales. I would love to part of that increase, but in New England, the nearest one is over an hour away. I will get there at some point, but it is not just a spur-of-the-moment decision to eat there. I know several people from here who did make that pilgrimage last week, though!
[20] Posted by AnglicanXn on 8-7-2012 at 03:48 PM · [top]
Apropos of AnglicanXn’s and Episcopalianated’s comments-
One doesn’t have to eat the chicken nuggets or fried chicken strips at Chik Fil A. The chain has grilled chicken options, which are quite healthy. I enjoy the grilled chicken salad and cool wrap, myself, with an unsweet iced tea. Hardly “heart attack” material.
[21] Posted by sophy0075 on 8-8-2012 at 04:51 PM · [top]
Forgot to mention the yogurt and fruit parfait (or the alternative version which also contains granola), which is offered for breakfast, and which my college-aged daughter likes. Another rather healthy option.
John Stoessel ran an episode on Fox about a year ago in which he pointed out that Chik Fil A (and McDonalds, among other fast food chains) do offer inexpensive, healthy food choices, contrary to the attacks of the left’s food police.
[22] Posted by sophy0075 on 8-8-2012 at 04:54 PM · [top]
sophy0075:
Oh, I’m not the least bit worried about having a heart attack. I’m not even a vegetarian.
What I am is a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips, especially after we’ve been to a fast food joint. Eating meat is one of those things I do without really believing in it.
When I finally make it to Chick-fil-A (haven’t yet), my free coupon is for a Spicy Chicken sandwich and that’s exactly what I’m going to have, right after I suspend disbelief some more. I just hope they’re still giving out free water so I won’t feel compelled to not believe in having a soft drink, then pay for one anyway.
[23] Posted by episcopalienated on 8-8-2012 at 06:01 PM · [top]
Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.
Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.