Over the past few weeks, Chick-fil-A has met a poignant voice of opposition to their anti-gay policies and their outspoken opposition to the civil equality of homosexuals.
They have also supported various “ex-gay ministries,” organizations whom the American Psychological Association have repeatedly and universally condemned for their ineffectual and, in most cases, deleterious techniques, and their lack of medical authenticity. Dan Cathy (Chick-fil-A president) and Truett Cathy (Chick-fil-A Founder) have both made their opposition to gay rights vocal, in recent weeks.
So, it should be apparent where there is a hefty opposition to Chick-fil-A, by the LGBT community and those who value their equality. Unsurprisingly, however, many right wingers, who sympathize with Chick-fil-A’s homophobic views, have labeled this opposition as “bullying,” “leftist intolerance,” “an affront to Christianity,” and “an attack on Chick-fil-A’s free speech.”
They say this as if boycotts are a new phenomenon, or as if they are an exclusively “leftist” tactic.
Through various email campaigns, One Million Moms (in reality, less than 50,000 based on their Facebook supporters) routinely attempt to intimidate the sponsors of any and all TV shows that dare to include such things as gay characters, with threats of mass boycotts.
In their exact words, they plan to “clean up the trash in media” (yeah, that’s not ominous language). This is an organization that has undertaken the expressed mission of purging the American media of all lifestyles and values that are in conflict with their religious views.
This is a group that doesn’t simply boycott politically active companies. They actively work to censor any and all media that even acknowledges the existence of groups they don’t approve of.
So, tell me something, conservatives. Do you consider that to be an affront to free speech or to religious freedom? Is that what you would define as “bullying and intimidation?” No, of course not. That’s just “good old family values.”
In the eyes of conservatives, spreading disdain for minority groups, funding campaigns against their equality, and seeking to marginalize them in every way possible in the media and public sphere are all examples of civil and respectable behavior.
However, if someone (say, for instance, a member of the minority group in question) seeks to oppose such groups, either through vocal opposition or their active avoidance of their businesses, than that is an example of militant bigotry and intolerance.
Once again, we are faced with the ass-backwards conservative narrative in which the degradation and suppression of a minority group is a hallmark of civil discourse, while any and all opposition is extant of intolerance and totalitarianism.
It is disheartening that people, living in the year 2012, still push this socially incoherent narrative. However, their endless grasping at straws demonstrates that their crippled ideology is on its last legs. Their disingenuous pleas for sympathy are reminiscent of the indignity and petulance of individuals like George Wallace in wake of desegregation.
There is nothing more pleasing to me than the wounded ego of a bigot, forced to endure the “tyranny” of equality.