Is the recent Chick Fila bruhaha a serious issue or a distraction? Putting aside how you personally feel about gay marriage, do you really think anyone in government should say they are not going to "allow" Chick Fila to open in their city?
What does that say about the power these officials think they have or we have given them?
We used to be a nation that respected and defended everyone's 1st amendment right to free speech EVEN IF what they said was in direct contradiction to our own beliefs.
But even now we can find examples of that attitude. Maybe it is re-awakening in all of us? In reading the comment sections of at least half a dozen sites where this is a big discussion, there have been many self-proclaimed gays who support the "eat in" and it's defense of free speech. Bravo!
And here we actually have the ACLU once again stepping up to defend the KKK's free speech rights as they attempt to "Adopt A Highway" near Blairsville, GA.
But LW, you say, there are so many more important issues, this is jut a distraction!! And you know what? When I first started working on this article THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I MEANT TO WRITE!!! But the more I read and thought about it, what could be more important than our First Amendment???
And then we have the question of the opposing view being allowed to express their same right. But is there a limit? Today's "kiss in" resulted in vandalism to a Chick Fila restaurant.
Picture from LA Times.
Should they be allowed to block customers from entering a restaurant? And it's not just Chick Fila. Should people be allowed to approach your advertisers and threaten them with a boycott if they don't drop their advertising? This is what Media Matters does to Rush Limbaugh.
Doctors face the dilemma of coming under attack if they do not perform abortions when that is against their personal views.
Where is the line? Should there be a line or is it a case of "careful what you wish for" cause some bureaucrat somewhere will abuse even that.
Oh wait! One already has!