Free speech, Chick-Fil-A and government

Free speech is an intersection with multiple roads traveling in myriad directions. People tend to forget that.

Take the cause du jour at the moment chicken sandwich, waffle fries and lemonade making fast food operator Chick-Fil-A and its strong biblically based stand against same-sex marriage stated in no uncertain terms by company president Dan Cathy. He is free to have and state his opinion and say it on behalf of his business. In return, people are free to offer theirs in return even boycott the business if they choose to do so. People on the opposing side of the argument have done so to other businesses over the past decade.

Thats how free speech works.

So, too, are the Muppets well within their rights to shun Chick-fil-A. Theyre private, um, puppets.

But public officials have a responsibility to carry out their ministerial tasks fairly and evenhandedly and to uphold the principle of free speech whether or not they like a business executives social or political stances. While we disagree with Cathy, we are far more troubled by the reaction of Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino, who vowed to block Chick-fil-As effort to open an outlet in that city.

Cathys recent pronouncements on marriage provoked a storm of protest as well as support. Jim Henson Co. announced it would sign no more deals to feature its toys at the chicken restaurant. There were threats to boycott the companys food. Others swore to boycott the Muppets.

Boycotts are a time-honored way for consumers and groups to express their views through their spending power, though its worth noting that just as Americans have split along more divisive lines politically, so have their shopping habits. Some people wont travel to Utah because of Mormon support for Proposition 8; others wont step foot in a J.C. Penney because of its ads featuring same-sex couples. As both a private citizen and a prominent public figure, Menino is welcome to abstain from fried chicken sandwiches and urge others to do likewise.

Its a different matter if he attempts to trample the free speech rights of others by using the power of his office to fight against a business license for Chick-fil-A. Menino suggested that it would be appropriate to block the chain from opening in Boston because Cathys views amount to discrimination. That would rightly apply if Chick-fil-A were to refuse service to gay customers; the city has a right and an obligation to prevent discriminatory actions against its residents and visitors. But theres no evidence that any such thing has occurred.

Menino referred derisively to Chick-fil-As possible plans to open a restaurant along the citys Freedom Trail, considering Cathys stand on marriage freedom. That too misreads law and history. It was the freedom to express politically unpopular views and to oppose such views that the Founding Fathers fought to establish. Boston used to be known as the prudish place most likely to ban anything outside of a set of strait-laced moral beliefs. Without freedom to express once unpopular viewpoints in this case, full civil rights for gay and lesbian couples Massachusetts wouldnt have become the first state to recognize same-sex marriage.

See the rest here:
Free speech, Chick-Fil-A and government