This is quick post before work and will contain many grammatical and typographical errors…
1. My more liberal leaning friends have often been known for thinking it is a problem that Christians are defined by what they are against instead of what they are for. In this case, the head of Chick-Fil-A sai he was FOR traditional marriage and was thus vilified for being AGAINST gay marriage. The problem is that if you are for something you are against something else. It’s a distinction without a difference and is supposed to be clever. But if you stop and think, it’s not.
2. A lot of people – pastors and other Christians – are worried today’s appreciation is not a good idea and a mistake. They think it furthers the culture wars and forfeits an opportunity to be compassionate to those we disagree with on the gay-marriage issue. Let me get this straight – the head of Chick-fil-a says he supports a view of marriage everyone supported 5 seconds ago, the left goes nuts, politicians tell Chick-fil-a they are not welcome in certain cities (violating fundamental laws of the land) and people who love the chain (including many non-Christians) want to show their support to a succesful, quality company in a down economy. The criticism of those who want to support the business today just sounds “above-it-all” and snobbish to me.
3. Lastly, this is way bigger than gay-marriage and Chick-fil-a. And all the social justice people need to think long and hard if they really care about social justice or are they just wanting to support all the hip causes and be seen as a with it believer.
I have to disagree with point #1. It is absurd to reduce this conversation to a binary decision.
I love my wife, but that does not mean that I despise all other women.
I have lots of Beatles albums, but that does not mean that I am against the Rolling Stones.