Questioned about the opposition his company, Chick-fil-A, has received on its position supporting the so-called "traditional family," CEO Dan Cathy quipped, "Well, guilty as charged." In a recent article appearing in the Baptist Press (July 22), he continued that "We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that."
Chick-fil-A's charitable division, WinShape Foundation, works with and supports such groups as the National Organization for Marriage, the Ruth Institute, the Pennsylvania Family Institute, Focus on the Family and Exodus International, among others, all fighting to ban marriage for same-sex couples and some advocating to "cure" homosexuality.
Cathy, who rules over a dominion of more than 1,600 Chick-fil-A restaurants nationwide, argued that "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."
Well, Mr. Cathy, one does not have to be a biblical scholar to know our society does not and has not followed many of the principles the Bible dictates on issues of marriage. Let's look at some of the religious teachings, many pointing out that the institution of marriage was constructed very differently from what some today consider as "traditional."
Approximately 4,000 years ago, Abraham (commonly referred to as "the father of the Jewish and Arab people" and patriarch of Jews, Christians and Muslims) was a distant ancestor of Shem, son of Noah. When his wife Sarah (who in fact was his half-sister having a common father) was unable to conceive, as it is written, Sarah told Abraham to conceive a child with her Egyptian maidservant Hagar, who birthed a son, Ishmael. Soon afterward, Sarah also conceived a son, whom she and Abraham named Isaac. After Isaac's birth, Abraham banished Hagar and Ishmael into the desert.
In Deuteronomy 25:5: "When brothers live together and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the deceased shall not be married outside the family to a strange man. Her husband's brother shall go in to her and take her to himself as wife and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her." And in Deuteronomy 25:6: "And it shall be that the first-born whom she bears shall assume the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out from Israel."
And what about biblical injunctions on husbands and wives engaging in sexual intercourse during a woman's period? Leviticus 20:18: "If a man lies with a woman during her menstrual period and uncovers her nakedness, he has made naked her fountain, and she has uncovered the fountain of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from among their people."
Furthermore, I would think that many women today, of all sexual and gender identities and religious backgrounds, may find difficulty in Ephesians 5:22: "Wives, be submissive to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body and is himself its Savior."
And, Mr. Cathy, do you really promote the commandment to women in 1 Corinthians 14:33-35: "As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."
I wonder how many parents actually subscribe to Exodus 21:15 and 17, which dictates: "And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death."
Actually, some biblical scholars interpret the relationships between David and Jonathan and Naomi and Ruth as romantic love. In1 Samuel 20:16-17: "So Jonathan made a covenant with the house of David, saying, 'May the Lord require it at the hands of David's enemies.' And Jonathan made David vow again because of his love for him, because he loved him as he loved his own life." Jonathan also made a covenant with David. When Jonathan was later killed, David bemoans his death with these words in 2 Samuel 1:25-26: "How have the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! Jonathan is slain on your high places. I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; You have been very pleasant to me. Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women."
Naomi and Ruth likewise loved one another romantically. In Ruth 1:14: "And they lift up their voice, and wept again: and Orpah kissed her mother in law, but Ruth clung unto [Naomi]." The word for "clung" in Hebrew is "dabaq," the very same word in Genesis 2:24 to illustrate Adam's feelings toward Eve. Interestingly, the vow Ruth made to Naomi is the vow exchanged in many marriage ceremonies for different-sex couples: Ruth 1:16-17: "Do not press me to leave you or to turn back from following you! Where you go, I will go; where you lodge I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die, I will die -- there will I be buried. May the Lord do thus and so to me, and more as well, if even death parts me from you!"
In light of Chick-fil-A's statements and connections to organizations opposing the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, college and university students throughout the country have organized boycotts and petition drives to terminate their schools' relationship with Chick-fil-A. In addition, mayors in a number of cities, including Boston's Thomas M. Menino, Chicago's Rahm Emanuel and San Francisco's Ed Lee, are discouraging Chick-fil-A from opening new branches in their cities, at least until they pledge to sign non-discrimination statements in the areas of hiring and public accommodations in keeping with their cities' policies.
On the other side, evangelical leader Rev. Billy Graham issued a statement praising Chick-fil-A and Dan Cathy for taking a "bold stand for the biblical definition of marriage between a man and woman in a culture that has grown openly hostile to the Christian faith and its followers." Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum (both past presidential candidates) are calling for a "National Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day" on Aug. 1, and Bishop E. W. Jackson Sr., Founder and President of STAND (Staying True to America's National Destiny) has appealed for a "Buycott" of Chick-fil-A, in support of the company's defense of marriage, and protection of family and Christian values.
I would ask Mr. Cathy and his supporters, to which biblical marriage values and principles are you referring? Do you prefer that men engage in polygamous relationships like Abraham? What about marrying your half-sister? I'm not hearing any so-called "Judeo-Christian" leaders calling on men in childless marriages to take on mistresses, and once they conceive, to exile them and their children from their towns, or for men to marry the widows of their deceased brothers, even when the men themselves are already married. When was the last time we banished a married couple from our communities for having sexual relations during the woman's period? Should we really kill recalcitrant young people? Was this how we do and should define "traditional marriage" and "traditional families" today? And should we simply block out the verses recounted about David and Jonathan, and Naomi and Ruth?
With the recent actions taken by Chick-fil-A, a critical question must be addressed. While the executives of private companies like Chick-fil-A most certainly and clearly have the right to say what they wish and support organizations and causes of their choice, should municipalities and public tax supported institutions such as universities maintain connections with those companies that expressly violate non-discrimination policies, many which now include sexual identity and gender identity and expression as enumerated categories? By opposing the basic civil rights of LGBT people, Chick-fil-A and its allied organizations clearly fall under the definition of discrimination according to these policies.
Matthew 24:11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.
Hilarious how bible thumpers don't even read their own holy books.
Are these municipalities and tax supported organizations going to refuse the sales , property and income taxes of Chick-fil- a and their employees? I doubt it.
That would be a true severing of ties and strong testament to what they so vehemently appear to be disturbed by. Better yet, does chick fil a get to decide which public institutions their tax dollars support?
Chick-fil-a did not discriminate in its hiring practices. For a company CEO to state his beliefs is his choice, no different than the LGBT folks whom extol their beliefs in public and private forums. What idiot people say, is what idiot people say. Some people dont like homosexuals. Some dont like musicians, some dont like soccer players. Some people dont even like themselves. Everyone has a right to their own feelings, opinions and beliefs, whether agreed to by the majority or not.
PS..great publicity stunt by the CEO. He read the pulse of the nation and made a statement that he knew the media would run with, along with every left-leaning politico that wants press time. Smart guy that has put his company in the limelight for free.
The LGBT community wants the same access to the protections of the Full Faith and Credit clause and the 1st, 5th, and 14th Amendments to the Constitution. Arguing with people about religious beliefs is like wrestling with a pig, you get dirty and the pig enjoys it.
What's next, are the pedophile community going to rise up in indignation for not being able to boldy pursue their lusts of the flesh for hurting children.
Make no mistake here, this is a fight against the very fabric of marriage and a race to destroy our beloved country.
Rome was not destroyed by outside, but by their inward, de-evolution of sin and sexual imorallity. Rome only fell after they were weakened from within by every deceitful sin they pursued. Then the enemies stormed the gates of Rome. Every society has rise's and falls. Today we are in the Dark Ages of America, where sexually deviant people violently contest for their right to step upon the very backbone of America. I am very proud of those that would PEACEFULLY tell the truth about this heinous cancer running rampant in America today.
It's so amazing how people quote Old Covenant scriptures without studying and seeing who it's talking to, what it's about, & if it even applies to the covenant that Christians have via the blood of Jesus.
Genesis 2:18-25 shows God design for marriage. In Ephesians 5, Proverb 12:4, 18:22, & 19:14....it shows God only desires that a man marry a woman. Christians aren't who you have to give an account to. We are just sharing the words of our Lord. You are the one who has to give an account for these choises. With the scriptures stated to you.....you are held accountable even more so because knowledge is given to you.
You are sharing the thoughts put in your head by parents and priests and other people who CLAIM to know and understand the meaning of these books.
Tell me exactly where in the Bible, in the original text, that homosexuality is condemned.
Marriage is a secular civil and legal contract and has always been. In fact, a marriage is NOT even legal unless/until it is registered with the state after having a license fromt he state being granted for it regarless of what, if any church officiated at the ceremony.
The Gospel is neither old or new Covenant/Testament....it's the transition period between the two. And even in the Gospel marriage is shown and taught to be only for ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN.
Even on the secular side people know that homo union is wrong. Homosexuality in itself is wrong. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Atheist, etc. agree. In the sight of man you are correct about the paperwork, but God considers marriage as a Covenant which requires no paperwork.
It is true, many Christians have divorced. We often do not live up to our own expectations. However, to say that we should just give up on the Word of God because of this is like saying that a baseball team should just quit the field because the pitcher walked someone and the third baseman errored, leading to a home run by the other team.
Just because the vessels of God's message are flawed does not mean that the message is. We cannot achieve perfection, nor ever be free completely of sin and temptation. But we can continue to strive for it, helping our brothers and sisters along with their own crosses, whatever they may be. But to simply tell everyone to throw down their crosses and give up just because the load seems heavy at the moment is to not trust in Christ to help us with that load; it is to abandon the Word of the Lord.
Brilliant, if you ask me.
This HAS to be true for most, if not all religions, particularly because of the marked differences among them (e.g., Orthodox Jews and Catholics, according to their own rules, cannot both go to heaven, as Catholics believe that you have to recognize Jesus as your savior to go to heaven and Orthodox Jews don't believe in Jesus as Christ). Even religious people will acknowledge/argue that some religions are made up (ask Evangelicals about Mormonism).
If there is a God, I am sure He likes some of these rules ("thou shall not kill" seems like a winner here) while He probably laughs about others (don't eat shrimp).
Bottom line: I can't believe an all powerful all knowing God would create some of us with an innate behavior (e.g., homosexual, which I am not) and then require the rest to have those with the behavior killed (see Leviticus 20:13). It just doesn't make sense. And if that is how He wants things, I don't know if I want to be with Him.
As Cicero commented, "To not know what happened before you were born is to remain forever a child."