Here’s disgraced former Governor of NY Eliot Spitzer on the idiotic calls by the “tolerant” left to boycott the Chick-fil-A fast food chain over their Biblically-based support for traditional marriage (bolded emphasis added by me):
Chick-fil-A makes a great chicken sandwich, and I used to like getting one—with a cup of their amazing lemonade—whenever I was in the South. In fact, before I knew more about Chick-fil-A, I used to joke about helping to open one in New York.
Then I found out the company, according to the LGBT group Equality Matters, has donated millions of dollars to groups that oppose gay rights, and Chick-fil-A’s president, Dan Cathy, told a Baptist newspaper that he supported the “biblical” definition of family. That’s why former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas has asked that folks who share the company’s principles stop by a Chick-fil-A on Aug. 1 to show support for the company’s conservative values.
And that’s fair enough.
If you really don’t think gays and lesbians should have the same rights as everyone else, and you oppose same-sex marriage, stop by Chick-fil-A. If you truly believe gays and lesbians should be second-class citizens, and if you sincerely don’t want them to marry the people they love, stop by Chick-fil-A.
But the same goes for those of us who support same-sex marriage and have what we consider to be a broader view of civil rights. We should boycott Chick-fil-A. These are our consumer dollars—and they’re part of our voice. We should use them for products we like—to support companies we like and to back causes we like.
Spitzer is right on the issue of the consumer having the right to spend their hard-earned money where they so choose (the money they have left after the government confiscates an obscene amount from their checks, anyway), but the stench of religious intolerance towards Christians who believe differently than him and other leftists on the issue of alternative forms of marriage is pretty strong, isn’t it? What Spitzer is saying here is that if, as a Christian, you’ve correctly interpreted the Bible to understand that God promotes man/woman couples and disapproves of homosexuality, then you deserve to lose business. He’s also stated categorically that any Christian who believes this also thinks gays are “second class citizens” who “don’t deserve the same rights” as straights.
While it’s true that some misguided Christians do indeed, unfortunately, “hate gays” rather than taking the correct attitude that you are to “love the sinner and hate the sin” (as we are supposed to do with ALL sinners, since we are all sinners ourselves), there are many more who don’t “hate gays” at all but who DO believe that the definition of marriage should be that it consists of one man and won woman only. Some Christians base their beliefs solely on Biblical scripture (while God is not tolerant of any sin at all, the Bible makes it clear that He is the judge when it comes to sin, not anyone here on Earth). Others use secular arguments to justify their position. And others base it on a mixture of both. But the important thing to note here is that it is a non-violent religious belief grounded in scripture and for the Cathy family of Chick-fil-A to change their stance on the issue in order to become sufficiently “tolerant” to Spitzer and the liberal Gay Gestapo (and to avoid further political blackmail, which I’ll get into in a minute) would mean violating their religious principles.
Ironically enough, it was Spitzer himself who said two years ago that religious intolerance had no place in a modern American society …. but in this instance he was talking about the controversial “Ground Zero mosque” in a broad-based discussion on so-called “Islamophobia” in general. Matthew Balan at Newsbusters transcribed Spitzer’s remarks at the time (bolded emphasis added by me):
[ANDERSON] COOPER: There’s- you know, we’ve seen these incidents now moving away from just this mosque, but to opposing- some oppose the building of any new mosque in the United States, or some expose just the expansion in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. And those who support it say, ‘Look, this is Islamophobia.’ Do you buy that?
SPITZER: I think there’s a big element of Islamophobia, but I think this is also part of our history, and we need to be careful that we appeal to our better angels, as Lincoln said.
COOPER: This is just the newest group?
SPITZER: This is (unintelligible)-
COOPER: From Catholics to Jews to the-
SPITZER: Precisely, the newest incarnation- and, in fact, before I came on the show, I dug out George Washington’s letter to a synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island in 1790, where he addressed this and he said the wonderful thing about this nation, a new nation at that point, three years old- 220 years ago, he wrote this- is that we are tolerant, and we need our political leadership to speak to tolerance. We need to go back to those values, so that everybody can do what the imam wants to do and what David Gergen spoke to, which is to get people together and say, ‘wait a minute, let us not’-
COOPER: But that’s not what our political life is about now.
[KATHLEEN] PARKER: But we keep hearing this, ‘they’re going to do this, if you let them get in.’
COOPER: Pat Robertson saying that (unintelligble)-
PARKER: You let them do this, then they’re going to demand, demand. Who is the ‘they’? I mean, these are Americans, too, and it makes me wonder how many people out there watching tonight actually know someone who is a Muslim? You know, there seems to be- I just feel like this has become a misunderstanding on a broad scale. And while- absolutely, when you talk to people whose families died in this and- you know, on 9/11, you can’t not take that seriously. I mean, that emotion is real, and it’s still raw. But I think we’ve got to stop thinking of Muslims as being ‘them.’
OTOH, when it comes to Christian conservatives, that “tolerance” rule Spitzer promoted just a couple of years ago doesn’t apply. This is especially interesting, considering the high degree of INTOLERANCE promoted by the Koran itself – as noted by my co-blogger at the time the Ground Zero mosque debate was raging:
[…] Muslims have the right to practice their faith in over 30 mosques in New York City, alone, and can build more. And it is not about private property rights (which is funny coming from you, given your treatment of property rights in the GM and Chrysler bailouts), for no serious critic says property owners do not have the right to do what they wish with their property within zoning laws.
It is, however, about the location chosen and the inappropriateness of exercising those rights at that place. Ground Zero is where a Muslim jihadist organization launched a razzia (“raid”) against the kuffar(“infidels”) for the sake of Allah (“jihad fi sabil Allah“) and in accordance with the Qur’an, chapter nine, verse five:
Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
And, at the same link, verse 111:
Lo! Allah hath bought from the believers their lives and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs: they shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain. It is a promise which is binding on Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. Who fulfilleth His covenant better than Allah? Rejoice then in your bargain that ye have made, for that is the supreme triumph.
That act of war, done in the name of Islam and in accordance with Islamic law, killed 3,000 of our people and foreign guests. And you think it’s a good thing to build a mosque there? Muslim spokesmen and their liberal and libertarian apologists demand we be tolerant and sensitive. Tell me, sir, why shouldn’t they (and you) be tolerant and sensitive toward the nearly 70% of Americans who opposebuilding that mosque on that spot?
And, oh – here’s another irony alert: How interesting is it that the “pro-gay rights” Spitzer promoted “religious tolerance” of the Ground Zero mosque and Islam when Islam is decidedly anti-gay to the point that it mandates the public judgment, stoning, and murder of gays by fellow Islamists? In other words, whereas the Bible teaches that the ultimate judgement for all sin, including the sin of homosexuality, will come when you die and have to answer to God, Islam directs its followers to be the judge, jury, and executioners of those who do not strictly adhere to Mohammed’s teachings. Gays (and women and “infidels”) are not merely “second class citizens” in the Islamic community, they are the lowest of the low who “deserve” the violent persecution and punishment meted out to them by “true” Islamists. This, friends, is factual in nature and is what Eliot Spitzer, in effect, told us to “tolerate” in the name of “religious freedom.”
But the privately-owned Chick-Fil-A’s announced and financial (and very much non-violent) support of traditional marriage as based on Biblical scripture? Forget “religious tolerance.” Not only should you not “tolerate” Chick-fil-A’s stance on marriage, but you should avoid their stores at all costs – even if it means putting them out of business. According to the Spitzers of America, we should “tolerate” a religion that promotes savagery towards women, gays, and non-believers, but NOT tolerate in any way shape or form a PRIVATE business due to their Biblically-based non-violent beliefs on traditional marriage.
Then again, hypocrisy has become Spitzer’s stock-in-trade these last few years, so should we really be surprised at this latest instance?
Sadly, some liberal politicians are taking their hypocritical “religious tolerance” stances even further, and chillingly so – actively encouraging the blocking of Chick-fil-A’s from opening in their cities and states. Michelle Malkin has much more. Where’s Mr. “Religious Tolerance” himself President Obama when you need him? Don’t expect him to make any big statements on this anytime soon – if ever. Right now, he’s too busy kissing the a**ses of liberal gays during an election year. Not only that, but promoting private business aka capitalism has never been in his political playbook (hello?). Thirdly, “religious tolerance” in his view is only for those expressing religious viewpoints that are politically correct – like the ones he espouses.
Never, ever, ever, ever EVER let the left convince you they are in any way, shape, form or fashion “honest purveyors” of tolerance, religious or otherwise. In reality, liberals are some of the most bigoted people you will ever meet in your life. They’ll tell you that they simply do not “tolerate” hate, but as this post has clearly demonstrated, that is another one of their infamous -and easily debunked – lies.