Chick-fil-A - 9/26

Samuel Truett Cathy, the founder of Chick-fil-A, was always a humble and loveable man. He was a Christian and ran his company like a Christian would, with respect to his beliefs. Chick-fil-A started as a single restaurant, and has grown into a chain. Chick-fil-A closes on Sundays and shows a higher standard of customer service than most fast food establishments, saying “My pleasure” when they serve you. Anyone would agree that Chick-fil-A is a great environment.

        Recently, Chick-fil-A has come under fire regarding some of the beliefs that the company supports, mainly the support of traditional marriage. Cathy supported organizations that promoted against gay marriage. When this news was made public, supporters of same-sex marriage all across the globe protested their delicious sandwiches. After all of this opposition, the company stopped supporting the organizations against gay marriage, but Cathy still held his beliefs.

        Now that Cathy has died, people are ridiculing him for being bigoted and intolerant. The people that are saying that are just looking for something to be upset about. Cathy’s policies were a reflection of his beliefs, which is not something that you can get mad about; that’s the “thought police” in action. Like the banning of Christian clubs on college campuses, this is an infringement on the right to freedom of religion. Cathy’s religious views did not affect his company in any negative way, unless you had a craving for chicken on a Sunday.

Some companies have had more questionable pasts, like Nestle’s unethical marketing for baby formula or Nike’s sweatshops (both topics of which I am not an expert on), but that doesn’t really change my attitude towards chocolate milk or shoes. Everyone has their own beliefs that you cannot change, and that should not make it so that you don’t eat at a fantastic restaurant. A restaurant should just be a restaurant, a brand a brand, or a shoe a shoe, not a social statement of your beliefs.

 

“Luv mor peeple. Eat mor chikin.”
          Noah’s Chick-fil-A slogan idea

Christian Club Bans - 9/12

        California State Universities are banning Christian clubs that do not allow gays to be in leadership positions. If the Christian clubs were to allow gays to be in leadership positions, that would contradict Christian doctrines. Christians believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, not a man and a man or a woman and a woman. These clubs are being banned basically for holding their own standards and sticking to them.

        If Matthew Hadley, an anime enthusiast, for example, were to start an anime club at Faith Christian, then I would not expect myself to be in a position of leadership in that club as my personal beliefs directly conflict with that which regards anime. (I just don't like it!) In the same way, someone whose personal beliefs conflict with Christianity should not be in a leadership position in a Christian club.

Of course, not electing a gay person as a leader doesn’t mean that gay people are being shunned from Christianity. While we accept divorcees into the church with open arms, many Christians reject gay people, and that is certainly a problem. Christians need to not let a “holier than thou” attitude get in the way of spreading the gospel to all people. As Bill Clinton said, “We all do better when we work together. Our differences do matter, but our common humanity matters more.” Even though Bill Clinton may not be the best moral example, this quote can be applied to Christianity. We need to realize our differences with other people groups and address them appropriately.

Gay marriage, for example, is not directly addressed by the Bible, but it is implied that it is not God’s will in Leviticus 18:22: "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; It is an abomination." Personally, I think gay marriage is okay --- as long as it is between a gay man and a gay woman.

P.S. to Mr. Bicknell – Computer lab wasn’t working, and I forgot to submit my post when I finished after school. :)

Abortion - 9/5

“Abortion” is the general terminology for “when the pregnancy is ended so that it does not result in the birth of a child” according to the British Pregnancy Advisory Service. There are different outlooks on the procedure, such as “termination” or even “murder”. “Termination” is the word most people with liberal beliefs use to dehumanize the process of abortion while “murder” is what most conservatives would use to humanize the fetus.

The case Roe v. Wade first brought light to the legality of ending a pregnancy in order to not have a child. 22 years later, Roe, who was for abortion and won the case, later changed her stance on abortion saying “American women have literally been handed the right to slaughter their own children.” This just goes to show that even the person who first strongly believed in abortion can have a change of heart.

  When a woman wants to have an abortion, the father has no legal say in whether or not to keep the child, because he isn’t bearing the child himself. However, after the child is born, the father is legally and financially responsible for that child. Even if the couple gets divorced, he will still be required to pay child support.

If a cow is killed while pregnant, the party who killed that cow will owe the owners the equivalent price of that cow and its foreseeable calf. This means that the legal system sees a cow as a cow at the moment of conception; however humans are not human until around 24 weeks of pregnancy.

In Utah, a woman was charged with homicide when she refused to have a caesarean section for the delivery of her twins. She was warned that complications may occur, and one of the children was born dead. The state of Utah sees homicide as the “intentional, reckless or negligent killing of a human being."

What do all of these seemingly independent and disconnected points have in common? They all point to the corruption of the judicial system when it comes to all matters regarding abortion. Double standards are not uncommon in today’s society, but the legal system should be fair and just at all times. If a cow can be considered a cow at the moment of conception, then why aren't humans? Well, they are sometimes. Here, here and here, but not there or there. There needs to be a federal standard regarding abortion so that there may be at least some continuity.