People of all political and religious stripes are broadcasting their love for Chick-fil-A following a testy New Yorker article saying the fast food chain was making a “creepy infiltration” of New York City.
The April 13 article, “Chick Fil-A’s Creepy Infiltration of New York City,” by Brooklyn-based writer Dan Piepenberg argued that the popular chain does not belong in a progressive city like New York, given its owner’s opposition to same-sex marriage, complaining about Chick Fil-A’s “pervasive Christian traditionalism,””suburban piety,” extensive marketing, and community outreach efforts, including their famous cows.
The article set the Internet and media world ablaze with responses from fans of the restaurant’s signature chicken sandwiches and waffle fries, and others who noted the double standard.
Here are 5 responses to the New Yorker article griping about the chicken sandwich restaurant in the city.
Rod Dreher: The article was ‘beyond parody’ and ‘rank, anti-Christian bigotry’
Rod Dreher, an Eastern Orthodox Christian and the author of the New York Times bestseller The Benedict Option, was incredulous at New Yorker piece, asking several questions of the influential magazine.
“Would the New Yorker have published a piece critical of a fast-food chain owned by pious Muslims, characterizing their appearance in New York City as an “infiltration,” and saying that because of its ownership, the restaurants do ‘not quite belong here’?” Dreher inquired Friday on his blog at the The American Conservative.
“Of course it wouldn’t. So why do they single out Evangelicals for this spiteful treatment? I think we know the answer, but I wish editors at the magazine would ask themselves this question.”
He also wished they would consider how they might react if a magazine in “Jesusland,” — a sarcastic term secular liberals sometimes use to refer to more Christian populated area of the country — published an article arguing that the local opening of a business owned by Orthodox Jews was an “infiltration,” and that it “does not quite belong here.”
Dreher added that while he is a fan of the New Yorker — the publication gave him a favorable interview about his work and writing last year — Piepenberg’s article was “beyond parody” and “is not only an example of laughable cosmopolitan hickishness, it is rank anti-Christian bigotry.”
Kat Timpf: I’m Not Christian And I Support Gay Marriage; I Will Still Eat At Chick-fil-A.
Writing at National Review Monday, Kat Timpf made clear that she is not religious at all and is completely supportive of gay rights but will continue eating at Chick-fil-A because she likes the food.
“Yes, Chick-Fil-A’s CEO is a Christian. So what?” she wrote. “So are millions and millions of other Americans. I may not be one of them; however, just as I expect other people to respect my beliefs and not discount my humanity because of those beliefs, I also feel that other people deserve that same respect.”
“So … do I feel like this Christian-owned chicken chain is infiltrating my city? Do I associate the smell of its fried food with bigotry and hate?”
She went on to say that she would not visit the fast food chain if she thought her dollars would in any way contribute to gay marriage becoming illegal, but that is not going to happen since the matter has been settled in the courts.
“The truth is, the fact that there’s a restaurant chain in my city that’s owned by someone who feels differently than I do is just not that big of a deal … if I allowed myself to eat food only from establishments where the owners agreed with all of my beliefs, then I’d probably starve.”
Click here to read more.
Source: Christian Post