In our opinion: Fast food chain well within First Amendment rights with anti-gay marriage statement

Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst visited a Chick-fil-A in Austin, Texas, as he began campaigning on the day before the runoff election. Dewhurst also met with his supporters and spoke with local media before heading to the airport on Monday, morning July 30, 2012.

Austin American-Statesman, Ricardo Brazziell, Associated Press

Enlarge photo

Free speech has consequences. The First Amendment guarantees that governmental retaliation will not be one of them.

Some seem to miss this particular distinction. For instance, there may be a consequence when a television personality says something inappropriate or out of line with an employer's policy. In such situations, a stupid statement could result in the loss of a private job. Sometimes in these instances, there will be a chorus of critics complaining that constitutional rights have been violated.

That's nonsense.

Individuals may have the right to say what they want, but they don't have the right to make anyone listen. And they certainly don't have the right to force a private individual or company to provide them with a platform.

Similarly, if a person or company is saying something people don't like, people are well within their rights to repudiate or ignore them.

Serious problems arise, however, when public officials express their personal disapproval for speech by wielding the power of the state.

Statements by Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy in favor of traditional marriage have met with widespread criticism in recent days by those who favor same-sex marriage. Those who disagree with Cathy are well-within their rights to criticize his viewpoint. They may choose to stay away from his company's restaurants as a powerful way to voice their criticism.

Go here to read the rest:
In our opinion: Fast food chain well within First Amendment rights with anti-gay marriage statement