tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post2027846825723510480..comments2024-03-24T07:56:33.811-05:00Comments on Allan R. Bevere: Some Thoughts on the Chick-Fil-A Food FightAllan R. Beverehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07903011101108437513noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-82359227077856722672012-08-11T07:47:52.601-05:002012-08-11T07:47:52.601-05:00Morven,
Thanks for your comments. It was not an e...Morven,<br /><br />Thanks for your comments. It was not an easy post to write. I have friends on both sides of this issue and I knew that I would disappoint some of them, on both sides. But the critical issues we face are not are not furthered by playing a back-and-forth game of gotcha.<br /><br />And I agree with you-- Jesus would not participate in such acts.Allan R. Beverehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07903011101108437513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-40491023973758504482012-08-09T17:24:15.135-05:002012-08-09T17:24:15.135-05:00Allan,
I am a little late in joining the conversa...Allan,<br /><br />I am a little late in joining the conversation, but I wanted to thank you for putting my feelings into words. Yes, I agree that we should be sitting at the table together, literally, neighbor to neighbor, getting to know one another as friends and family. I have a real problem seeing Jesus boycott or support this whole mess, but I can see him bringing people together and helping them hear one another.Morven R. Bakernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-83843771369823052932012-08-05T06:47:46.296-05:002012-08-05T06:47:46.296-05:00it's that somehow we have learned from the wid...<i>it's that somehow we have learned from the wider culture to not be charitable towards one another. We are wrapped up in not getting "dissed" and in turn we diss each other.</i><br /><br />Well said.Allan R. Beverehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07903011101108437513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-19431706749960430132012-08-04T23:37:15.082-05:002012-08-04T23:37:15.082-05:00I don't believe much in "third ways"...I don't believe much in "third ways" anymore, especially when it comes to sexuality. But I do think the church has to be salt and light in the world and we should be able to be different than the larger political culture around us. <br /><br />As to the boycott, I have to wonder what the objective was. Were we expecting a boycott would change Cathy's mind? It just seems like folks just wanted to boycott because we didn't like them. Boycotts can be effective, but they have to have some objective and this didn't really have any.<br /><br />No, there isn't a middle ground here. But speaking as a gay man and a Christian, I do worry that we let our moral certitude override our call to love each other-including our enemies. <br /><br />I think sometimes the problem with the church is not that we aren't more welcoming or more faithful to Scripture, it's that somehow we have learned from the wider culture to not be charitable towards one another. We are wrapped up in not getting "dissed" and in turn we diss each other.Dennis Sandershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06115504318620722199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-4228813373969095152012-08-04T20:19:00.761-05:002012-08-04T20:19:00.761-05:00Pam,
I've been thinking about the issue of th...Pam,<br /><br />I've been thinking about the issue of the money going to support the Uganda initiatives. I think what might be more helpful than a boycott that just gets everyone riled up, is perhaps an open letter sent to Mr. Cathy by Christians on the matter asking him if he knew about where some of his money is going and does he support the criminalization of homosexuality. Here is where you can get Christians together on both sides of the gay marriage issue. I do not have one friend who opposes gay marriage who supports what is going on in Uganda.<br /><br />Do we have an opportunity here as the church to hold Mr. Cathy accountable?Allan R. Beverehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07903011101108437513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-56200496961998282462012-08-04T19:16:43.096-05:002012-08-04T19:16:43.096-05:00Some of my gay friends have noted that at least on...Some of my gay friends have noted that at least one of the organizations to which Dan Cathy is donating has been actively supporting the initiatives in Uganda to make being gay an offense punishable by death. If that's the case, then Marcus' comment is not at all "extreme". <br /><br />I'm rethinking the boycott as my gay friends have been pointing out that, in a discussion about whether or not they should have the rights in civil law that others have, they can't see a middle ground.<br /><br />I don't approve of doing violence to Chick-Fil-A or anyone we disagree with, but they have made a compelling point. And I certainly believe that anyone has the right to not patronize an establishment for philosophical reasons and not solely reasons of consumer preference.PamBGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11324370506889227234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-14489404849806810852012-08-03T07:29:03.472-05:002012-08-03T07:29:03.472-05:00"rather an alternative way for the church to ..."rather an alternative way for the church to stand in our culture and offer something other than the lowest common denominator of the angry politics of boycotts and anti-boycotts."<br /><br />I am with you there. I am unconfortable with how our secular political processes carry over into our in house church debates. <br /><br />I am not accusing you of using the term homophobe but that term is now in play and is too freely used in my opinion. <br /><br />I am surpised that you admit our church is going to break over this issue. Most folks seem to be in denial about that.Kevinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-79710505301380021512012-08-02T19:03:31.048-05:002012-08-02T19:03:31.048-05:00Allan, Thank you for writing that. I have been m...Allan, Thank you for writing that. I have been moved to write something about this because I am sick and tired of the hate campaigns that erupt when someone disagrees with someone else. I didn't quite know how to express what I was feeling (which is unusual for me!) but you expressed it beautifully! I am glad I have access to your writing. LynnLynnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-19686360776522192762012-08-02T18:52:55.584-05:002012-08-02T18:52:55.584-05:00Allan,
You said: "The problem here is that w...Allan,<br /><br />You said: "The problem here is that when it comes to buying things, people are always selective about what they decide not to buy when those products have ramifications for their hot button issues."<br /><br />Sure, I agree. And nothing in my earlier comments contradicts the fact that people will be selective. This is, however, a pragmatic issue that you have now raised. What I was addressing was a metaphysical issue. That is, the issue isn't whether the average person is consistent in his/her choices, but rather what he or she ought to do to be a consistent, well-integrated and moral person. Of course, moral living should be possible, but that doesn't imply that many people will be moral. But perhaps that's an old fashioned view.<br /><br />"And yes I can say it-- anyone who makes judgments about my values from what I eat and drink is ignorant of me and my values."<br /><br />Well there are, of course, several senses of 'say'. I meant it in the "you can't expect this to pass for an argument, right?" sense and not in the "those words came out of your mouth/were typed" sense.<br /><br />I'll bow out of the conversation at this point, since it seems we're talking past each other. Interesting points, though, and thanks for discussing.<br /><br />MarcusMarcusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-38946631239327765692012-08-02T17:00:45.613-05:002012-08-02T17:00:45.613-05:00Kevin,
I have been a part of the Methodist debate...Kevin,<br /><br />I have been a part of the Methodist debates on this issue for many years. I am not so naive to believe that there is a third or alternative solution to the issue. It is indeed a make or break issue on both sides, and it will eventually break us as a denomination in some way.<br /><br />But if you read my post carefully, I was not advocating for an alternative solution, but rather an alternative way for the church to stand in our culture and offer something other than the lowest common denominator of the angry politics of boycotts and anti-boycotts.<br /><br />And I never said that everyone who ate at Chick-fil-A yesterday was a homophobe. that's your word, not mine.Allan R. Beverehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07903011101108437513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-48929106482048973362012-08-02T16:54:48.426-05:002012-08-02T16:54:48.426-05:00Marcus,
The problem here is that when it comes to...Marcus,<br /><br />The problem here is that when it comes to buying things, people are always selective about what they decide not to buy when those products have ramifications for their hot button issues. Of course, people are free to choose not to buy certain things for moral reasons, but it will always be selective. So, when someone gets on her or his "high horse" about boycotting something for moral reasons, one can inevitably point out to that person that there are buying things that are in some fashion morally questionable. So, we can pay our money and take our choices, but none of us is free from purchases that do not have moral implications.<br /><br />And yes I can say it-- anyone who makes judgments about my values from what I eat and drink is ignorant of me and my values.Allan R. Beverehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07903011101108437513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-90476435924306933732012-08-02T13:19:53.236-05:002012-08-02T13:19:53.236-05:00“those Christians who purposefully went to Chick-f...“those Christians who purposefully went to Chick-fil-A on Wednesday sent a loud and clear message to the gay community-- "Don't bother attending our churches. You're not wanted."<br />While this may be true of some of the participants I refuse to accept that this applies to all. The people eating chicken sandwiches could have been doing nothing more than endorsing free speech or using this to show their support of traditional heterosexual marriage. That does not make them homophobes or unwelcoming. You comment simply illustrates how unbending the two views really are. During an election year people are spring loaded to polarize around various issues. This is one of them. I also believe election year campaigning carries over to General Conference in an unhealthy way. The delegates bring their politics with them every four years. Social media make it easier to rally people over one thing or another in a hurry. This is the world in which we live and worship. <br />Why can’t the church do better? What is it you want the church to do? Within UMC this issue has been debated, prayed over, cried over, voted on and adjudicated for years. The heterosexual view has always been upheld. What more do you want? <br />Lot’s of smart people have looked for a middle way without success. This is a make or break issue for too many members.Kevinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-74856685172881729132012-08-02T11:45:51.540-05:002012-08-02T11:45:51.540-05:00Allan,
You said: "But using extreme examples...Allan,<br /><br />You said: "But using extreme examples is not helpful carrying the discussion forward. We don't construct an ethic based on the exception, though the exceptions are not unimportant."<br /><br />Right, of course the last example was extreme and really more tongue in cheek than anything else (even though it does seem a consequence of your general view). But I don't take the Cadillac example to be extreme or to be an exception at all. We live in a society where there are many options for many of the necessities and luxuries that we purchase. In such a situation where dire need (i.e., survival) is not the driving force that has us choose to buy something, larger concerns must play a role if we are to be well-integrated people. <br /><br />You can't simply say "Anyone who concludes what I think about any issue by what I am shoving in my mouth has an ignorance rate higher than my cholesterol level". <br /><br />That is just avoiding the issue. Now, of course, eating ONE sandwich isn't enough to infer what you think or believe, but really these choices on average should be impacted by our broader views on what a good society is, what right actions are, etc. If someone continues to eat Chick-fil-a sandwiches or buy Cadillacs, it seems perfectly reasonable to infer one of two things: 1) either that person is largely un-reflective when it comes to the impact these choices have on the larger scheme of things beyond that person's stomach or driving comfort; or 2) that person supports the decisions of the company in question and has no problem with the broader implications of that choice.Marcusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-74644154471618136512012-08-02T10:59:19.498-05:002012-08-02T10:59:19.498-05:00Marcus,
I think you are clouding the issue here. ...Marcus,<br /><br />I think you are clouding the issue here. Yes, eating and drinking are not just for consumption purposes only, and, of course, everyone will draw the line somewhere. But using extreme examples is not helpful carrying the discussion forward. We don't construct an ethic based on the exception, though the exceptions are not unimportant.Allan R. Beverehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07903011101108437513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-17563311386582717182012-08-02T10:48:28.605-05:002012-08-02T10:48:28.605-05:00"I refuse to allow people to turn what I eat ..."I refuse to allow people to turn what I eat and drink into a political statement. If I want a Chic-fil-A chicken sandwich, I am going to eat one regardless of the company's views on marriage. If I want a Starbucks coffee, I am going to get one regardless of their views on marriage, which are very different from Dan Cathy's perspective. Anyone who concludes what I think about any issue by what I am shoving in my mouth has an ignorance rate higher than my cholesterol level."<br /><br />I agree that what one eats and drinks shouldn't be automatically considered a "political statement", but when there are options about WHERE and WHAT one eats and drinks (i.e., no one MUST go to Chick-fil-a) then other, broader considerations should play a role in a well-integrated person's choice about what/where to eat. For example, if Cadillacs were the only cars available to drive and we had to get places then there wouldn't be anything wrong (not saying that there necessarily IS) with driving one. However, once there are more efficient or cheaper cars that get one from one place to another available, other questions should arise. What sort of effect does owning such a vehicle have on the environment? Could I help poor/hungry people with some of that $65K and be happy with a $30K vehicle? And on and on...<br /><br />Now you might say that having to consider such larger ramifications for one's purchases/choices is not, strictly speaking, morally required. On some moral views, there are only prohibitions (don't murder, etc.), but positive obligations are another story. This is why I use the term "well-integrated" above. Being well-integrated involves not seeing what one eats as getting mere sustenance and fuel for one's body. It also doesn't merely go beyond such a view for gustatory pleasures, e.g., fine food (which, of course, are beyond mere sustenance). To be well-integrated one must also consider the societal, environmental, etc. impacts that one's choices (food or otherwise) will have. This view of being well-integrated, I think, holds whether one is religious or not (but, it might be argued, it holds <i>a fortiori</i> if one is a Christian).<br /><br />Notice that I'm not arguing for one view or another when it comes to whether one should have supported/boycotted Chick-fil-a. What I am arguing is simply that it is wrong for you to reject that such choices should be part of a system of views and choices that a well-integrated person should hold (the view I took you to be rejecting with "I refuse to allow people to turn what I eat and drink into a political statement").<br /><br />Another way of making my point, in <i>reductio ad absurdum</i> fashion, would be to imagine someone saying something like this: "I don't care if that business donates money to 'child-loving', i.e., pedophile lobbying organizations, I love their cup of coffee." Really? Whether you frequent their establishment, when there are plenty of other coffee-serving places with decent coffee, should not be in any way influenced by what they do with their money?<br /><br />MarcusMarcusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-29761117701910758682012-08-02T08:54:15.737-05:002012-08-02T08:54:15.737-05:00Thanks Allen! We Christians need to be salt and li...Thanks Allen! We Christians need to be salt and light and not salt in a wound. I'm disappointed when we have to respond with "tit for tat" like 8 year olds but alas we do, especially when we see the TV news trucks rolling up to "cover" the story.Keith Tysonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12635687453173626205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-78915863439432084862012-08-02T08:42:31.620-05:002012-08-02T08:42:31.620-05:00If you are right, and I agree your argument has me...If you are right, and I agree your argument has merit; how is this ever going to happen? Who are the leaders that will call the church to a 'third way' of more Jesus and less politics? I'm a social conservative who does know (who doesn't these days) a number of homosexual people, and dialogue with them from time to time..I think I understand there feelings. But should we arrive at a third way approach--and it doesn't seem likely we will at this point--where will this bring us? I may come off as argumentative; I am asking a question; are we in danger as a a church of arriving at a place where everyone is affirmed and no one is right with God? I'm sure my questions reflect my age and political leanings. Such may keep me from being objective; to be sure. <br />I don't think that bigotry motivated the support of Chick-fil-A, not conscious bigotry, anyway. I have seen on my facebook page a number of comments from those who honestly seem to think the church has failed; friends, young adults who grew up in the church I am pastor of, some relatives, many who are homosexual or who are very sympathetic to the 'gay rights' movement.<br />I tend to ramble.....but back to my original question: if social conservatives are wrong, how do we get them (us, I really lean that way, though I think I am open to dialogue and sensitive to the real feelings of others) to a place of really living as Jesus would be pleased? <br />You pointed out, fairly and clearly, that liberal leaning Christians can be just as myopic; so the question applies; how can we bring the church to love of God and love of neighbor and end the culture wars? I don't see it happening any time soon; in fact I think things may ratchet up.John Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00060404930391236792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-66001482222065060972012-08-02T08:03:04.624-05:002012-08-02T08:03:04.624-05:00Thank you Allan for putting into words what I have...Thank you Allan for putting into words what I have been feeling about this subject. I love the last sentence too, "This is my body, broken 'by' you." Ouch, that cut to the heart.revjimparsonshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05325772868412506330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19733180.post-45730345158396129722012-08-02T08:02:03.052-05:002012-08-02T08:02:03.052-05:00Very well written! Now how do we get this message...Very well written! Now how do we get this message out there?Lori Lowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09983769855016980122noreply@blogger.com