(I should add that Ike was not nearly as thrilled about the experience as I was, but it was still a pretty good date night in my book!)
Although I love Chick-fil-a’s food, there is much more behind my affection than the menu. I love that Chick-fil-a always has incredible customer service. I love knowing that I will be greeted with a warm and welcoming smile as soon as I approach the counter. I love that the employees go out of their way to ensure that you have an enjoyable dining experience. I love that the stores are always clean and hospitable. I love that Chick-fil-a is constantly full of small children because parents know it’s a safe place to bring their kids. I love that Chick-fil-a is intentional about being a positive influence in the community, and that it organizes family friendly events each week. I love that many of the store managers are some of the very best people I know. I love that Chick-fil-a goes out of its way to support the marriages and families of its employees. And I love that its employees are fiercely loyal to the company, and its patrons, as a result.
Perhaps most of all, I love that Chick-fil-a is pro-family, and not in an empty, hypocritical way that merely judges certain individuals while ignoring the sins of others. I love that Chick-fil-a is pro-family in an edifying and fruitful way: they are taking active steps to help the men and women in their company be better husbands and wives, and they are providing the families in their communities with kid-friendly activities designed to encourage family togetherness. And they do all this, not as a marketing gimmick, but as an expression of the company’s Christian values.
Chick-fil-a is not a perfect company because it is not led or employed by perfect people, but it is certainly a good company. It has worked hard to serve whatever community surrounds it–not just the Christians, and not just the traditional families, but everyone in the community. I wish more companies were like that.
For all of these reasons and more, I was frustrated by the debate that erupted after Chick-fil-a CEO Dan Cathy voiced his now infamous support of “traditional marriage.” In response, many Americans have sworn never to eat there again. Here in the Chicago area, a couple politicians have publicly condemned the company and have vowed to block its entrance into their jurisdiction. Still worse, many are labeling the company as “anti-gay” and a “hate group.”
To me, the way this whole conversation has played out is symbolic of why dialogue feels nearly impossible in our country today. Yes, ideas have consequences, a truth that Christians should weigh heavily and soberly when speaking on the topic of homosexuality. Opposition to the gay lifestyle or gay marriage, when expressed in the wrong way, can result in persecution of the weak and marginalized, and Christians cannot ignore that reality (a subject I wrote about here).
However, ideas can also have positive consequences. In the case of Chick-fil-a, the company’s pro-family position has led them to invest in the families they employ, serve the communities in which they are located, and as Jonathan Merritt pointed out in his article for The Atlantic, fund foster care programs, children’s camps, and scholarships for employees to attend college. Based on my experience with the company, its employees, and its leadership, Chick-fil-a isn’t anti-ANYONE, but it has a long history of pouring into the institution of marriage for the betterment of society.
Unfortunately, we seem to exist in a cultural moment when, on this particular issue, words apparently speak louder than actions. It doesn’t matter what kind of person you are, how you live your life, and if you have staked your existence on loving people well. If you believe that God designed marriage to be between a man and a woman, you are often labeled a hate monger. To me, that logical jump signifies a major conflation of very different issues, and doesn’t serve the conversation at all. It only breaks it down.
That is why this Chick-fil-a explosion has been so discouraging to me. It makes me wonder if Americans can ever disagree without name calling. Even within the church, can Christians hold different positions without accusing one another of vile acts or fueling hate? Do we even have a category for that kind of discourse?
Some days it sure doesn’t seem like it. But before Christians throw up their hands and despair that no matter how hard they try to be loving, and no matter how wisely they choose their words, they are still accused unfairly and labeled inaccurately, Christians must also remember that they are still without excuse. Followers of Christ are still called to respond in patience, kindness, and love.
When discourse is so uncivil, it is tempting to respond tit for tat, to cry foul, or to cite our religious freedom with all the indignation in the world. But Jesus taught a different way. In passages like Mark 13:13, Luke 6:22, and John 15:18, Jesus tells Christians to anticipate hatred from the world. But he exhorts us not to respond in kind. Instead he teaches, “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you” (Luke 6:27-28).
It is so easy to get mired down in the politics of these debates and to forget that simple teaching. But it is a crucial one. In a culture that slings insults back and forth with no possible end in sight, love is a different kind of way, and a very different witness. What’s more, as I think the example of Chick-fil-a reminds us, love is a fruit that validates the integrity of our ideas.
In Luke 6:44 Jesus reminds us that a tree is known by its fruits, which means that the world is right to criticize Christians when the fruits of our ideas are hatred. When our teaching results in the oppression of others, then something is deeply amiss in our teaching. Here I think Christians can learn a lesson from a company like Chick-fil-a. As much backlash as the company is receiving right now, and as much as its positive fruits are being completely ignored, the fruits are still undeniable. The fruits of their pro-family stance is the up-building of families, not the perpetuation of hatred.
That said, when Christians claim to be pro-family while the families in our churches fall apart, our fruits betray us. Something is missing, and we need to pay attention, because the culture certainly is.
Again, I am not claiming that Chick-fil-a is perfect. It is just a company full of imperfect people. But I appreciate the fruits of the company’s values. So today when I drive across town for an appointment that happens to be down the street from one of the few Chick-fil-a’s in my area, I am going to eat there. Not simply because I love their food, and most certainly not because I hate gay people ( I don’t!), but because I appreciate the ways in which Chick-fil-a has served our communities indiscriminately. I even think Chick-fil-a can teach us something.
Thanks for writing this Sharon! Well written and much appreciated from those of us who are a part of the CFA family!
Sharon, thanks for this post. You certainly have a great way with words. I always look forward to reading your blog.
Pro-family? Why should I, as a Christian, care about this? Also, you have to know that to many, including myself, this sounds like “well, she isn’t perfect, but she’s one of the kind slave owners,” a designation which I agree isn’t without some weight. But with ten other reasons not to eat fast food, from factory farming, to nutrition, why go out of your way on this one for some waffle fries? Love you tons.
Dan, love you too.
A couple thoughts. First, I don’t think the slavery comparison is even remotely the same. A lot of Christians disagree with same-sex marriage but wouldn’t vote for government imposition of that belief, nor would they mistreat their gay family and friends or withhold from them their constitutional rights. I don’t know if Dan Cathy is among that crowd, but even if he does believe that traditional marriage should be enforced by law, limiting marriage to a man and woman is not the same as slavery. Making that comparison is, to me, not only a monumental overstatement, but one that belittles the atrocities of slavery.
Second, I’m not saying I eat all my meals at Chick-fil-a. I don’t, nor do I think it is wise and healthy for anyone to eat all their meals at a fast food restaurant. I agree that Christians need to be stewards of their money, and that includes how and where they spend it–ie. does the company treat animals well, pay its employees fairly, use goods made in sweat shops, etc. Ike and I do our best, though imperfectly, to spend our money with companies and services whose values are honoring to God by honoring the values I just described. However no company is perfect, so we always risk honoring a company’s good values while giving money to aspects of the company we dislike. I think it’s fair to say that that is true of Chick-fil-a. As I mentioned a couple times in the post, Chick-fil-a is not perfect, and I don’t want to excuse its shortcomings by any means, but I think this is sort of a red herring argument (unless you are among the few who are so removed from the world that your money touches nothing that is corrupt or unclean). The backlash seems to be more political than it is fair or proportionate to the critiques leveled at other companies. If people are going to take a strong stand against a company like Chick-fil-a, that’s fine, but the loudness of that opposition should be equal to that of opposition to other companies whose vices are equal in nature, or often worse. I don’t see that happening.
I don’t think there is anything inherently sinful about eating unhealthy food from time to time. God gave us food to enjoy in moderation. The real issue for me is that Chick-fil-a seems like an arbitrary object of media wrath, one that politicians are lapping up to accrue political capital while knowing almost nothing about the company itself. The level of the criticism seems more appropriate for a group like Westboro Baptist, and while some people might argue that the ideology is all basically the same, that is a vast over-simplification of the discussion, one so sweeping that it makes no attempt at mutual understanding and destroys any possibility of dialogue. I don’t see how writing off an entire group of people as bigots who are genuinely doing good in the community and trying to listen to God and love their neighbors (a category under which I would classify their pro-family stance) is a productive way of moving forward. We can disagree, and we can even disagree passionately, but much of the language of this debate seems thoroughly unhelpful to me.
Great post Sharon!
Great post Sharon. As a non-believer, I often read your posts with interest because of your artful,logical, and poignant approach to topics that interest all people regardless of affiliation. I see your point about chick fil a’s philosophy toward family and respect for a more balanced lifestyle. I respect your high opinion of their company. The part that troubles me is that there is no recognition of that there is hypocrisy is the “pro-family” label when it excludes families that don’t fit a given mold. I consider myself strangle pro-family. Nothing matters to me more than the bonds between me and my parents, brother, aunts, uncles, cousins,etc. And,now, as an adult, I’ve married the love of my life and we are planning a family of our own. My in-laws are like my own family at this point. We have plans to move closer to home so that we can raise our children near my parents,and involve them in our lives more fully. Family – in all its forms – is a cornerstone of who I am.
I’m gay. My wife is gay. There is a rhetoric in the popular culture that defines “pro-family” as a label that belongs only to people who support traditional marriage. This is where my sadness is borne. It is that rhetoric that nullifies me and my family, and the millions just like me. I recognize that rhetoric is often just that – hyped speech designed to excite people into supporting or rising up against a given idea. But for a person or company to identify as “pro-family” while clearly excluding those who value family – to me, is hypocritical at best, and hurtful/hateful at worst.
What heartens me, though, is that there are millions of people out there who do recognize that family can take many forms. Each is legitimate in its own right. And although each is entitled to his or her own sense of right and wrong, there is a slow and steady push forward to truly respecting all members of a community, even through deep-seated disagreements. I, for one, wish it was a bit faster,but I’ll take what I can get for now.
The “kind slave owner” was only meant to highlight that the real question which you’re not really meeting head on is the comparative weight given to “the kindness” and “the evil.”
It seems like in to order to write your post, you have to assume the good that the company does in communities outweighs what some would consider bigoted behavior.
Just to the extent that you can write a post saying “Today I Am Going to Chick-fil-a,” you’ve already seemed to say either:
1. The good outweighs the bad.
2. The company is imperfect, but the present issues surrounding homosexuality don’t bother me that much, at least not to an extent that it’s going to keep me from championing the good they do. It can’t be that atrocious.
3. I agree with those who would boycott Chick-Fil-A but just don’t care. I’m from the South and I like waffle fries.
4. Oops, I just wanted to provide a counterpoint, and didn’t think about how it sounds in context.
My problem with you going out of your way to write this is that:
Because you’re writing it amidst a conversation, it is hard to take it as simply that you want to support the good the company does. You may not, but you know some people view this as a human rights issue on par with (or at least a continuation of) civil rights movement. To them, your post will sound trite. “Well, they plan family events so what if human rights aren’t respected.”
If you disagree, you might be more explicit in your disagreement, which is really the crux of the issue (the relative weight ascribed to the good they do vs. the cost of their practices and beliefs). If you disagree, you might just eat your waffle fries and write nothing or a one sentence post: “I would like to honor the good Chick-Fil-A does accomplish.”
For better or worse, this post because you’ve gone out of your way to voice your support for the company makes it sound like you’re taking a stand in the present conversations, but without actually having to take an explicit position.
==========
Whatever. We agree that the language isn’t particularly helpful.
Curiously, I’ve often thought that Christians don’t have much stake in pro-family stances (and/or family values) other than to be neighborly. I’d never make a good Catholic, since I think Jesus subverts and makes relative the family’s importance. Other people may need the social structures of families (and as such it may be neighborly to support them), but I’m not sure Christians do. Of course, under this rubric there should be no problem also supporting the families of homosexual partners.
Beth, thank you SO much for sharing your story and your thoughts. Your honesty and vulnerability is so valuable for there to be true communication between people with different viewpoints. Those who disagree with gay marriage need to hear your pain and your input and allow it to shape their thinking and their rhetoric. I hope that, likewise, those supporting gay marriage can know that Christians are listening and that they can feel that they are heard. This is a deeply difficult and personal issue, but it is my sincere hope that, even when there is disagreement, we can do a better job of loving one another. As a Christian, I am afraid the church has failed in this regard. For that I am ashamed, but like you I also hope for change.
Dan, don’t you feel like you are assuming that everyone in the company is bigoted? I don’t know Dan Cathy, so maybe he is, but I do know a LOT of other Chick-fil-a employees, none of whom I would describe that way. That’s why this whole thing seems so off base to me–the accusations being leveled at Chick-fil-a have absolutely no resemblance to any person I have ever known to work there. I don’t think Chick-fil-a is creating the kind of culture that people are assuming based on Cathy’s comments. Isn’t that distinction one worth making?
Not really. Once companies are given the status of humans and money is considered political speech (and further that money is highly concentrated at the top), your appeal to the employees you know seems politically naïve. [The tenor of your argument, focusing more on employee piety than structures and powers does not surprise me, is perhaps what I'm pushing back against.]
Further, your post puts you in the camp of Billy Graham who is also showing his “support by visiting Chick-fil-A” in the name of a so-called “biblical definition of marriage.”
I’m more than happy to go toe to toe with Billy Graham or Dan Cathy on biblical grounds and say their reading of scripture is simplistic and difficult to defend. Billy Graham always said that he wished he had studied and trained more. On that point, he and I agree.
I would, however, like to honor your candor, your ability to listen, and willingness to respond with care. You have a wonderful heart and it is to your credit that this comes through.
Dan, I will end on that note, since it is a gracious one. Thanks.
“If you believe that God designed marriage to be between a man and a woman, you are often labeled a hate monger. To me, that logical jump signifies a major conflation of very different issues, and doesn’t serve the conversation at all. It only breaks it down.”
You’ve hit on something I’ve noticed as well, but never articulated nearly so cogently. Another area where I’ve seen this has to do with gambling. Indian gaming is big in California. Nevada style casinos have sprouted up all over the place. But if someone speaks out against them based on a belief that they bring harm to the gamblers and to the community (beliefs that may or may not be supported by evidence, but that’s not important at this juncture), the person is shut down as being anti Native American: “Why would you want to take the tribe’s only revenue source from them. Don’t you know how poor they would be without gambling revenues? Either you don’t know any better or you are a bigot.” That response, of course, belies another “logical jump [that] signifies a major conflation of very different issues.” But it’s what I read in the paper whenever someone is trying to put up a new casino (with its multi-million dollar profits) and anyone speaks against it.
It’s a funny way to engage in publisc discourse, to assume that disagreement or opposition is always based on hatred or stupidity.
Tim
I also went out to support Chick-Fil-A on Wednesday. I think it was completely unfair and intolerant for the company to be targeted that way because of what Dan Cathy said, and I also believe that despite our best intentions and the sincere yearnings of Beth and those like her for acceptance of their heartfelt and committed unions, the widespread equating these to marriage will have a range of negative effects on the country as a whole. I won’t go into them here as we’ve already touched on them in previous comments.
With that said however, I do have a problem with something that Dan Cathy said, and I do believe that he owes the gay community an apology, or at least a clarification of what he meant to say.
From his statement he made it seem as though nationally legalizing and hence normalizing gay marriage would be the last straw that would exhaust God’s patience with us and bring down judgement. When you consider however that current American culture has already normalized pre-marital sex (even amongst believers), one-night stands, stealing (cheating on your taxes is stealing from the government), divorce, and the murder of the unborn that is Abortion, pointing the finger at homosexuals and making it seem that their sin is THE biggie that will trigger God’s wrath is very unfair. We have no clue regarding where God will draw the line, and I would think it would be the cumulative result of everything, not just same-sex “marriage”.
I hope at some point he will rethink what he said and maybe be brave enough to issue a clarification and an apology for going a bit too far.