There has been a lot of clucking surrounding the comments Chick-fil-A COO Dan Cathy made on my radio show on June 16.
While discussing fatherhood with me, Dan Cathy expressed the following thoughts that have contributed to the media firestorm:
"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,'" Cathy said. "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."
Listen to the entire interview with Dan Cathy.
In recent days activist bloggers, opportunistic politicians and the media have brought the culture war over re-defining marriage to a boil, inciting boycotts, protests and rallies of support.
I have no desire to join the debate over the definition of marriage. However, I ask questions for a living and I am quite comfortable asking the necessary questions to provoke a public conversation about civility in our public discourse.
I have observed and been engaged in the reaction on both sides of this story. I have come to the troubling conclusion that the uproar is not fueled by the debate on same sex marriage, rather the primary issue has become the tension between conviction and tolerance.
Lost in the media sound bytes and bumper sticker accusations is the question we should all be asking. Has tolerance been re-defined? It seems to me that there is a double standard on tolerance.
In a war of words, the words we use should matter. A search in the dictionary for tolerance is helpful. Tolerance is defined as a "fair, objective and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, differ from one's own."
Increasingly, we see a well-oiled publicity machine that is redefining tolerance as, "either you agree with me or you need to button your lips." Those who throw the labels of intolerance and bigotry at those who share an opposing opinion are ironically modeling a glaring lack of tolerance.
Who among us would disagree that what we believe and how we see the world are indeed very personal? Each of us get to choose what we believe. Does our opinion hold greater value than those we disagree with?
How then should we as members of a civilized society react when someone says something we passionately disagree with or find personally offensive?
It is natural to allow our emotions to get the best of us and hurl nasty names and accusatory monologues in the media or from behind our computer monitors. It is easy to vilify another on Twitter and post snarky comments on blogs and Facebook. These actions are lazy and irresponsible. We can do better.
There is a great divide between strong convictions and hateful actions. A civil society can and must discern between the two.
I believe that true tolerance can only exist in the tension of civil disagreement and dialogue. Stand for what you believe in and engage in the public discourse but do so with civility and true tolerance for those who see the world differently.
What would happen if we engaged in conversations with those we passionately disagree with?
It is time for those engaged in contentious debate to put the pitchforks down, pick up some coffee cups and have some messy conversations. Messy conversations lead to healthy conversations. Healthy conversations lead to understanding. Understanding those whom we disagree with leads to pure tolerance.
Times have certainly changed yet America's melting pot DNA has not. Our future as a great society depends largely on our ability to live alongside those who believe and act differently than us. The world will continue to change but Americans right to express their beliefs will not.
I am highly skeptical that either side in the marriage debate, or any other social or political debate for that matter, will change the others position. However, I am quite certain that it is difficult to be angry with or accuse one of bigotry while conversing over coffee.
To those who would join me in the messy middle, I take my coffee with cream and sugar.
Follow Ken Coleman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kencoleman
Chez Pazienza: I'll Miss You, Chick-Fil-A
Lorraine Devon Wilke: Chicken With a Side of Bigotry: Chick-fil-A's Ungodly Business Plan
Rabbi Laura Geller: On Tisha B'av, Move Beyond the Place Where We Are Right
Melissa Browning: Chicken Nuggets and Family Values
The company also blatantly lied about why the partnership with The Jim Henson Company ended. Not exactly biblical values there, people.
These are how things should go. The valley is messy, but that is where the food grows.
K, bye
I'll admit I am not 100% tolerant because I honestly believe people who think that being gay is wrong are completely ignorant and have a lot to learn, but I am working on accepting them as people though I will not accept their beliefs. After reading this article I will say it may be more productive to have an actual conversation with someone like that rather than spitting out accusations and saying "I'm right and you're wrong."
The problem is that we already know their reasons, & they ARE wrong. They won't listen to any reasoning, respectful or otherwise. We are just going to have to fight them & beat them down. It's the 50's & 60's all over again, & this time, we shouldn't make the mistake of trying to respect the feelings of those who have no sense.
Yeh, a bit different there.
Truett Cathy believes leadership is vital to the success of our country. Developing future leaders among youth has been one of Truett's chief priorities throughout his more than 60 years in business.
Nothing demonstrates this commitment as well as the WinShape Foundation. Created in 1984 to help "shape winners," the foundation supports a variety of programs, including a long-term foster care program, a summer camp for more than 1,900 children each year, a scholarship program in conjunction with Berry College and marriage enrichment retreats.
Hmm, nothing anti-gay there. Checked their marriage retreats....preparing for marriage, strengthening a marriage, saving a marriage...nope, nothing anti-gay there either.
This band you refer to, does it have a name or haven't you made one up yet?
Have any reputable links (not WikiPedia) to back up your claims?
And who are you to judge? Don't all Americans have civil rights whether you approve of their sexuality or not?
I am highly skeptical that you even understand the issue. The issue isn't a "war of words". The issue is that your religion can't void my civil rights and my religion can't deprive you of yours. Or shouldn't. That's the Constitution.
What in the world is so hard to understand about this ? It's not about "convincing" the other side. They don't have to agree. It's about "the Constitution supersedes religions (all and any of them) in secular matters". And this is a secular matter, since we are talking about marriage licenses, not about forcing priests to bless those marriages.
Why has someone else's religion or belief a say in how I pay my taxes, for example ? Can you answer that, please ?
I'm pretty sure there were a lot of former slave owners who were very vocal and disagreeing when slavery was abolished. Did that have an effect on the former slaves' civil rights ? Apparently not. That's the whole point.