“But the government doesn’t get to pick and choose what social causes are permissible, and any government actor who aspires to that power is a lowlife thug. What’s particularly alarming about Menino’s thuggery is how openly his referencing to licensing “difficulties” reveals how things really work in government: whatever rights you think that you have, practically speaking some bureaucrat can punish you for exercising them on a whim, and there’s very little you can do about it. Menino represents the ethos of government actors who think quite frankly that this is right and just and how it should be — that they, our masters, should be able to dictate what we think and do and say if we want to do business in their fiefdom”
—-Ken, Ethics Alarms 2011 Blogger of the Year, on Boston Mayor Thomas Menino’s public attack on Chick-fil-A, the food outlet whose president openly opposes same sex marriage and contributes to anti-gay marriage organizations.
Banned in Boston
Some things never change, do they? Once my old home town used to ban books and plays that contained ideas and content the powers-that-were disapproved of, and now its mayor actually thinks its his job to decide what political and social views a business owner or any citizen can safely support without facing active government enmity and sanctions. Boston, which was the nation’s first cauldron of free thought and passionate dedication to governments allowing free thought to thrive, quickly came to exemplify the liberal hypocrisy of being so dedicated to freedom that it will punish and censor anyone who doesn’t adopt its virtuous and obviously wise and correct views of the world. Menino’s threatened abuse of power to compel Chick-fil-A’s ownership “think right” is a classic in this category. The mayor told the Boston Herald:
“Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston. You can’t have a business in the city of Boston that discriminates against a population. We’re an open city, we’re a city that’s at the forefront of inclusion. That’s the Freedom Trail. That’s where it all started right here. And we’re not going to have a company, Chick-fil-A or whatever the hell the name is, on our Freedom Trail.”
Because, dammit, we know how Americans are supposed to use their freedom, and we’ll crrrrrush anyone who uses it in ways the government doesn’t like!
Ken is right, as usual: this is frightening, the ugly face of political correctness and totalitarian thinking at their most insideous. Check out which of your liberal, progressive, freedom-loving friends think Menino is “right on,” and then picture them holding a gun to your head.
Please read Ken’s whole post here.
_________________________________________________________
Source: Popehat
Facts: Boston Herald
Graphic: Get Religion
Ethics Alarms 
Worth reading in full:
“Menino could use his bully pulpit to call on Bostonians to reject Chick-Fil-A if they come to town. He could call for social opprobrium on Chick-Fil-A and its affiliates and even on its patrons. He could organize protests and marches and letter-writing campaigns. He could carry a sign in front of Chick-Fil-A saying “BE LES BIGOT” if it opens.”
All of which I’d support wholeheartedly.
“But if he says he’ll use the coercive power of government to retaliate against Chick-Fil-A for views he doesn’t like, he’s totalitarian. If you support him because you agree with him (and with me) that Chick-Fil-A’s stance on gays is worthy of condemnation, then you’re a damned fool, and don’t let me catch you whining if some other government actor retaliates against an individual or business because of a political stance you like.”
I’d say worse than a “damned fool”, but a hypocrite too. That someone in a position of power would even think this abuse of power to be acceptable, even in private, even for a moment, should disqualify them from office.
That the mayor is unafraid to say such things publicly is a sign that the system suffers from a deep malaise.
I only have this to say to the people who support this idiots actions.
How would you feel if it was a conservative Mayor who was going to make it hard for a business that supports gay marriage to open a business?
I personally don’t eat at Chic Filet . Not becuase of the owners political beliefs But I think their food is nasty. It’s like biting into a salt patty.
And people wonder why I back the Boy Scouts? Why I am reluctant to support “gay rights” causes?
It’s seeing Mormon temples get white powder in the mail after members of the church act within California’s system to overturn the state supreme court imposing gay marriage. It’s also finding out that my best friends’ wife got death threats for her support of Prop 8 – and the perps got away and were never brought to any justice. And this is how the gay community acts when it feels it is powerless against those who disagree with them.
Menino is the latest exhibit of how they act when they DO have power over those they disagree with. There have been cases of colleges trying to toss Chick-Fil-A out – or even saying they need not apply. It’s trying to bounce out Christian counseling students who happened to be vocal about their viewpoint. It’s seeing the National Organization for Marriage’s tax returns getting leaked to the Human Rights Campaign and the Huffington Post (and yeah… whoever leaked that tax return probably didn’t agree with NOM).
There is no other words to describe how people like Menino act other than intolerant and bigoted – and willing to make me and those who have my positions second-class citizens. And why? Because I don’t view this issue the same way he does.
So, seriously… what am I supposed to do in this case. If all proponents of gay marriage were like Ken at Popehat, I think a compromise would be possible. But they aren’t, and so, I don’t think compromise is possible. For me. the better option is as an Eagle Scout to remain loyal to the Boy Scouts, as a Mormon to be loyal to my church, and to remain loyal to my best friend.
So, you’re anti-gay because some people that are pro-gay are dicks?
Rationalize much?
There is no other words to describe how people like Menino act other than intolerant and bigoted – and willing to make me and those who have my positions second-class citizens.
Still not bigotry. Good try though.
I am not anti-gay. I am, however, not convinced that the LGBT community’s talk of tolerance and inclusion is backed up by their actions. If anything, it is the opposite – they are intolerant, coercive, and bullying of those who have disagreed with them.
I was born in the afternoon, but it wasn’t yesterday afternoon. I know damn well that as a Mormon, my rights are not likely to be respected by the LGBT community given their past conduct.
I just don’t think it’s smart to hand people who have already proven themselves to be intolerant, bullying and coercive new tools of any sort that they could use to continue their past conduct. I learned long ago that appeasing bullies was the wrong course of action – it only encourages them. The only option is to stand up to them, and make it clear that pushing me around is more trouble than it’s worth.
I wish it weren’t that way, but based on what I’ve outlined, there’s no other rational option.
I am not anti-gay. I am, however, not convinced that the LGBT community’s talk of tolerance and inclusion is backed up by their actions. If anything, it is the opposite – they are intolerant, coercive, and bullying of those who have disagreed with them.
Yay for equivocation! Intolerance of physical reality is a whole lot different than intolerance of bigotry.
know damn well that as a Mormon, my rights are not likely to be respected by the LGBT community given their past conduct.
Which of your rights are being violated by the LGBT community?
I just don’t think it’s smart to hand people who have already proven themselves to be intolerant, bullying and coercive new tools of any sort that they could use to continue their past conduct.
What new tools?
It’s trying to bounce out Christian counseling students who happened to be vocal about their viewpoint.
Strawman. It’s not the vocalization of their viewpoint that’s the problem; it’s the failure to do their job that’s the problem.
“Strawman” – DING! Bigotry alarm. Plus hypocrisy. The “Tgt Rule” is thus clear:
Exclude the Christian counselors when they admit their tendencies, but never, EVER, exclude scoutmasters from the Boy Scouts when they admit homoerotic tendencies. If you claim allegiance to a certain religion, then it’s guaranteed: you’re going to fail to do your job; the projection is the inevitable reality. But, if you claim that you prefer a certain kind of eroticism, there is no criterion for any job that justifies any job-failure projection; any such criterion, and any such projection, is pure, simple bigotry, and nothing else.
(begin sarcasm) Of course, we know beyond the slightest doubt that never has there been a successfully celibate Catholic priest…
“Strawman” – DING! Bigotry alarm. Plus hypocrisy.
Pointing out that person A mischaracterizes the argument of person B is not bigotry. And there’s certainly no hypocrisy… unless you can point to strawmen I created and claimed were valid after they were pointed out.
Exclude the Christian counselors when they admit their tendencies
I have never suggested such. Hell, I said the opposite in the post you’re complaining about. This complaint is just pathetic.
Well ever since the Mountain Meadows massacre some people have learned not to trust Mormons to respect other people’s rights.
“…this is how the gay community acts…” — INQUIRING MIND, did it never occur to you that you are using a very broad brush to paint thousands of people you’ve never met, as if this “gay community” were some kind of single-minded monolith?
There’s a word for that kind of thinking: “stereotyping” (sometimes also known as “bigotry”).
To continue, I.M. — was your best friend’s wife threatened by the “gay community” (whoever that it is)? Or was the tnreat from some sick A-Hole who may or may not have been part of that “community”? You just don’t know, do you? But apparently you feel qualified to JUDGE those unknown thousands….take a look at Matt. 7:1 in the NT … you’ve heard of the NT, haven’t you?
And calling me a bigot WASN’T being a little judgmental?
There’s a difference between judging one person on their words and judging an entire class of people on the actions of a few.
Can you show me the instances where major gay rights groups (Human Rights Campaign, etc.) or prominent gay people in this country (like Ellen DeGeneres) have condemned the actions of Menino and Rahm Emanuel? Or where they called out Perez Hilton for his treatment of Carrie Prejean or others who disagreed with Ellen and Perez (and the gay-rights lobby) on the issue of gay marriage (like Brad Pitt’s mom, who got death threats for her letter to the editor)? Where were they when the National Organization of Marriage had their tax returns illegally leaked to the Human Rights Campaign and the Huffington Post (something which is a serious felony and for which Richard Nixon was facing impeachment before he resigned).
The gay community in general has been silent in all that – it hasn’t bothered them to try to root such thuggish tactics out. If anything, the thugs get celebrated as heroes – mark my words, Rahm Emanuel and Tom Menino will probably get awards from some gay-rights group for their actions.
And in this case, the silence in the face of these tactics is consent to the use of those tactics. It just doesn’t seem to bother you. The fact that the first resort of some on this thread was to call me a bigot – never mind the fact that I mentioned some conduct that was clearly out of bounds in terms of ethics. Do you believe that the end goal of “Gay rights” make such tactics okay? Or is it because the Boy Scouts, Mormons and Religious Right have that sort of thing coming because they’re just a bunch of homophobic bigots? Honestly, the why doesn’t matter. The actions – or in this case, the silence – tells me all I need to know.
In any case, the message, whether it is from Menino, or Perez Hilton, or others who have engaged in the bullying of individuals, companies, and organizations who have disagreed with the homosexual agenda is simple: Submit to their notion of “equality” or be ruined.
If that is how they act when they are relatively powerless over me, I just don’t want to give them any more power. As a Mormon, I cannot trust them to respect my rights.
Just because you don’t publicly shame someone does not mean you agree with them. Also, Whoopi’s a pretty prominent supporter of gay rights: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2012/07/14/abcs-view-hosts-decry-threats-against-brad-pitts-conservative-mom
This is a hard thing to google for, but it’s not like it’s uncommon.
Your post is one large special pleading. Groups like the American Family Association never speak out when gay’s get threatened. Why don’t you fight against the anti-gay lobby based on their refusal to disavowel bad actors on their side?
Physical threats are bad, but putting social pressure on unethical organizations is by no means bullying. It’s one of the better features of our country, yet when the pressure is going against your side, you claim it’s an unfair tactic.
Oh, also, you’re entire post was irrelevant to my comment it was in reply to. Your equivocation on the word judgment was still invalid. Your rant doesn’t change that.
Andrew Sullivan’s a pretty big Gay rights heavy weight, right? http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/07/emanuel-and-menino-liberal-thugs.html
He does make a mistake with his opposition to proper use of the word bigotry, but otherwise, isn’t this exactly what you claim nobody does?
I love how Hizzonor actually uses the word “inclusion” in his rant about why this particular restaurant needs to be excluded.
“…that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” –Inigo Montoya
–Dwayne
Touche’.