Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dave Austin on 8th mo. 1, 2012 at 8:58am

I too get nervous when government threatens a private business in the way that happened in a couple places as a result of this case .  That sort of knee-jerk reaction does nothing to further dialogue or understanding.   What a couple of these hyperventilating mayors are proposing is probably illegal as well.

I also get nervous when a businessperson - or anyone else - claims to be speaking for God and seems to think s/he knows what will or will not "invite God's judgement."  I get nervous when someone claims that a private businessperson's right to freely espouse her/his interpretation of Biblical principles  somehow trumps the rights of others to counter that speech.  I get nervous when some folks (no one here) tells me I can't counter what I believe to be less-than-loving speech with my personal decision not to patronize that businessperson's place business any longer, to exercise my right to "vote with my dollars" and spend my money elsewhere because MY interpretation of Scripture runs counter to what that businessperson is putting out there.

And frankly, as a Holocaust educator, I get really, really nervous when anyone compares a spat like this to the Holocaust by once again quoting Niemoller's powerful but too-oft-abused poem, which is about indifference to genocide, not about threatening to change zoning laws.  It's a poor analogy at best.    

But by all means, let Mr. Cathy open as many stores as he wants.  That way, folks who are so led can picket outside them or just avoid them completely, as I and my family will.  I make my own chicken at home.  And it's good.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marianna Boncek on 8th mo. 1, 2012 at 9:23am

Dave, thank you for speaking my mind!

Dave Austin said:

I too get nervous when government threatens a private business in the way that happened in a couple places as a result of this case .  That sort of knee-jerk reaction does nothing to further dialogue or understanding.   What a couple of these hyperventilating mayors are proposing is probably illegal as well.

I also get nervous when a businessperson - or anyone else - claims to be speaking for God and seems to think s/he knows what will or will not "invite God's judgement."  I get nervous when someone claims that a private businessperson's right to freely espouse her/his interpretation of Biblical principles  somehow trumps the rights of others to counter that speech.  I get nervous when some folks (no one here) tells me I can't counter what I believe to be less-than-loving speech with my personal decision not to patronize that businessperson's place business any longer, to exercise my right to "vote with my dollars" and spend my money elsewhere because MY interpretation of Scripture runs counter to what that businessperson is putting out there.

And frankly, as a Holocaust educator, I get really, really nervous when anyone compares a spat like this to the Holocaust by once again quoting Niemoller's powerful but too-oft-abused poem, which is about indifference to genocide, not about threatening to change zoning laws.  It's a poor analogy at best.    

But by all means, let Mr. Cathy open as many stores as he wants.  That way, folks who are so led can picket outside them or just avoid them completely, as I and my family will.  I make my own chicken at home.  And it's good.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adria Gulizia on 8th mo. 1, 2012 at 9:55am

Thanks for your responses! I quickly want to clarify that I was not analogizing to the Holocaust, but using a well-known quotation to preemptively address a natural human impulse to say, "Not my problem! I disagree with Cathy - who cares about his right to speak about his religious beliefs!" This is obviously not the Holocaust. (I wonder, though, if you or others get equally nervous when some Liberal Friends talk about "letting their light shine" (Matthew 5:15-16) but reject the idea of a heavenly Father...)

Dave (and, it seems, Marianna), you said, "I also get nervous when a businessperson - or anyone else - claims to be speaking for God." How is that different from what Friends - rather audaciously in other Christians' view -  do in Meeting for Worship? We are called Friends because we know our Master's business (John 15:15).

I submit that we should lovingly consider what Cathy, along with the many, many Friends who don't believe that homosexual relationships are part of God's plan for humanity, have said and believe, and labor together about it (Exhibit A: Ohio Yearly Meeting). If someone expressing his beliefs about God's will ("I think we are inviting God's judgment...") makes you nervous, how do you tolerate being a Friend? This is not a question meant to insult you, but just to clarify. Also, if you actually hear the words spoken (I heard it replayed last night on Tell Me More), there is no anger or lack of love - it's just a Christian sharing his honestly held beliefs. I am saddened that that makes you nervous.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William F Rushby on 8th mo. 1, 2012 at 10:56am

Thanks, Adria, for your thoughtful comments!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marianna Boncek on 8th mo. 1, 2012 at 11:48am

Inspired speech does not mean we speak for God. I am suspect of anyone, single or in groups, who claim they speak for God and know his/her absolute will. I suppose I "tolerate" being a friend because, in my experience, Love is the single most powerful force in the universe.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William F Rushby on 8th mo. 1, 2012 at 3:14pm

Hello, Marianna!

Actually, the implication of  "inspired speech" is that it does indeed mean that we "speak  for God."  That's what makes it inspired!  If we have no sense of speaking for God, we would be well advised to remain silent.

Whether our speech is actually "inspired" or "prophetic" is the real issue.  The old Conservative Friends discouraged speakers from making claims about the "inspiration" of their words, preferring to let the church and the Bible test the degree of their inspiration .

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Timothy Bruffy on 8th mo. 1, 2012 at 5:57pm

If we "speak for God," which can be possible, we would be speaking the "Word of God," and not merely our own words. The only sense of speaking for God is in Longing after Him, Seeking after Him, and putting all our Trust in Him. If we rely on our own behalf, that falls far from the Inspiration of God, thus it is just human speaking and reasoning.

To be "Inspired," "Prophetic," which I would not vouchsafe to be said of mine own self, would imply a letting loose of Self (me, my and I) and accepting God our Father and His Christ. Then, when we let our speech be alway with grace seasoned with salt, we will be able to answer every man or woman as we ought. (Col. 4: 6) If we don't apply that, then we will not be able to answer every person as we ought.

Thank thee, Friend William, and ye all.

Timothy

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Herb Lape on 8th mo. 3, 2012 at 11:57am

Thanks Adria for your thoughtful comments. Amen.

I get nervous when fundamentalists of any stripe claim certainty to know the will of God- "Scripture is clear on homosexuality, end of discussion" or "God wants compassion, equality, and justice- anyone opposed to gay marriage is a bigot- end of discussion."

As Friends we are called to stand against narrow legalism and "witness or testify" to what we believe to be the Will of God recognizing that all human witness is fallible due to our "feet of clay" or because we "see in a mirror darkly." The best that we can do is to wrestle together with our present conflicting testimonies, using our traditional tests of truthfulness(corporate discernment), and wait patiently for a clear corporate testimony to emerge. We did this with slavery.

I too am troubled when political figures seek to use the law to coerce the conscience of religious people. My read of history is that much of our hard-won liberty came from religious folks challenging and suffering the abuses of a coercive state. I fear signs that religious liberty is being threatened. We're far from being a Nazi state but as you said without good people witnessing to what they believe they are seeing, it's a slippery slope!

Thanks for being a faithful human witness.

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James C Schultz on 8th mo. 3, 2012 at 8:05pm

Amen

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marianna Boncek on 8th mo. 3, 2012 at 8:20pm

Inspiration is everywhere, not just in our speech. In art, nature, creativity, love, our family, etc. Inspiration does not mean it is exactly God's will. It means it comes from God (however you define that) and works through us. Since, we are not perfection, neither can the manifestation of that inspiration be considered perfect and therefore the final expression of God's will. I am glad for this because we can still be inspired by words, art, love, actions, prayers, whatever we best share our inspiration through. I don't, nor have I ever, used the Bible as the perfection of God's will or any sort of final authority on God's will. We must labor together in love and that is the closest way, I believe, we can ever begin to discern a modicum of God's will for us.  I don't really concern myself with the will of God (I actually don't believe that God has a will, but that is for another blog) as I do with the love of God, which is perfect. 

William F Rushby said:

Hello, Marianna!

Actually, the implication of  "inspired speech" is that it does indeed mean that we "speak  for God."  That's what makes it inspired!  If we have no sense of speaking for God, we would be well advised to remain silent.

Whether our speech is actually "inspired" or "prophetic" is the real issue.  The old Conservative Friends discouraged speakers from making claims about the "inspiration" of their words, preferring to let the church and the Bible test the degree of their inspiration .

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Nugent on 8th mo. 3, 2012 at 9:52pm

http://http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-badash/chick-fil-a-5-rea...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Nelson Seaman on 8th mo. 4, 2012 at 6:17am

I sense that much of the current press interest in Chick-fil-A goes back to gay activists objections to Dan Cathy making poltical contributions in support of a state constituional amendment defining marriage as being between that of a man and a woman during California's voter passage of  Proposition 8.    Some thirty odd other states passsed similar amendments to their state constitutions, with some high profile donors information gleaned by gay activists and made public using campaign contribution disclosure laws.    It is within this background, unfortunately, gay activists seem to have over stepped themselves.   We must ensure free and open political discourse on issues which we disagree with.    Attempting to damage a business because of the activism of its owner seems to be a gay activist version of "poltical outing", through which information obtained from individual political campaign contributions is used with the intent to do financial harm.   This is wrong.   

Dan Cathy has deeply held religious convictions regarding marriage and biblical scripture that he lives out in all aspects of his personal life, which are not forced upon his employees, nor is he in violation of any laws discriminating against gays in the jurisdictions where he operates his business.   For a mayoral official  to step into this political fray and impose their views on gay marrige opponents by threatening to deny business permits in the absence of any legal violations should be just as illegal as denying business permits to gay business owers based upon thier private sexual practices, however inspired by God those may be, or also claimed.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 6
• Next ›
• Page