ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Mike Huckabee”

Security

Huckabee Suggests Obama Should Be Impeached Over Libya Incident

By Igor Volsky on Sep 28, 2012 at 10:00 am

Fox News host and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) compared the administration’s handling of the consulate attack in Libya to Watergate, during an appearance on the network Friday morning, and hinted that the president should be impeached for not immediately attributing the violence to terrorism.

“We have been flat-out lied to,” Huckabee told Fox’s Bill Hemmer. “They know they lied. As if airplanes crashing into the World Trade Center said those were just accidents. Anybody with two eyes and an IQ above plant life knows what happened in Libya was not a spontaneous reaction to a 13 minute video on YouTube”:

HUCKABEE: It was a planned orchestrated attack led by terrorists, terrorists, Bill. And this White House has to explain why it hasn’t owned up to that. Why it can’t say it. I think frankly, if this issue really gets traction that it deserves, and let it say it deserves, go back. Richard Nixon was forced out of office because he lied. And because he covered some stuff up. I will be blunt and tell you this. Nobody died in Watergate. We have people who are dead because of this. There are questions to be answered and Americans ought to demand to get answers. [...]

HEMMER: Just one more thing here. What you’re describing, comparing events of today to Watergate.

HUCKABEE: I sure am….Bill, i’m not saying this just out of some political interest. I’m saying that our trust as a nation is built on our ability to know that when our president, whoever he is, Democrat or Republican, looks us in the eye and tells us something, we ought to know he is telling us the truth.

Watch it:

Fox News, Republican lawmakers, and conservative pundits have for weeks hinted at an administration cover-up, naming it Benghazi-gate, and alleging that Ambassador Susan Rice misled Americans, when she initially claimed that the attacks were a “spontaneous reaction” to a movie trailer disparaging the Prophet Muhammed.

And while some administration officials expressed concern that “the White House began pushing the line that the attack was spontaneous and not the work of terrorists,” officials began labeling the incident the work of terrorism after investigating the incident. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, and even White House Spokesperson Jay Carney have all used the word “terrorist” to describe the attack. Obama himself attributed the violence to terrorism during a September 12 address at the Rose Garden. “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,” he said. “Today, we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.”

Since then, intelligence agencies have determined that the attack “involved a small number of militants with ties to al-Qaeda in North Africa but see no indication that the terrorist group directed the assault.” They have concluded that the attack “was not timed to coincide with the Sept. 11, 2001, anniversary” and was instead “set in motion after protesters scaled the walls of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo as part of a protest of an amateur anti-Islamic YouTube video.”

Media

Mike Huckabee Releases Islamophobic Theme Song: Middle East ‘Not Fit For Man Or Beast’

By Aviva Shen on Sep 17, 2012 at 2:15 pm

“Nutjobs stuck in the thirteenth century” is just one insult used in the parody song showcased by former Arkansas governor turned talk show host Mike Huckabee on his website Monday. Huckabee, an outspoken Islamophobe, is the latest media figure today to embrace anti-Islam rhetoric to explain the violent anti-American protests in the Middle East. The song, a parody to the tune of “We Didn’t Start The Fire” by an unknown group, mocks President Obama, the Arab spring, and employs many racist stereotypes. Here’s a sample verse:

Hot bed Middle East
Not fit for man or beast
Sand dunes, camels
Virgins when you die
Democracy, Arab spring
That doesn’t mean a thing
Culture, freedom, pyramids goodbye

Listen:

Earlier on Monday, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough claimed that Muslims “hate us because of their religion,” while Newsweek’s cover blares “MUSLIM RAGE.” Huckabee has never hidden his Islamophobia, calling the religion “the antithesis of the gospel of Christ” and has warned against sharia law taking over America. He has previously accused Obama of giving special treatment to Muslims and lying about his religion.

Election

FACT CHECK: The Truth About Obama’s Abortion Record

By Annie-Rose Strasser on Aug 27, 2012 at 11:45 am

Defenders of senate candidate Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) have come out of the woodwork in the week following his assertion that women can’t get pregnant from “legitimate rape.” Among those who have rushed to Akin’s defense are former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, both using the conversation as a launching pad to argue that President Obama supports infanticide.

Both Gingrich and Huckabee have made misleading statements about President Obama’s abortion rights record, particularly on his votes in the Illinois state senate against the “Born-Alive Infants Protection Act,” to try to frame him as a supporter of killing viable fetuses. On Fox News, Huckabee claimed that President Obama believes “you can still take the life of a baby even after abortion”:

HUCKABEE: [Obama] voted three times against a bill that would say that you had to give medical treatment to a baby that was born as a result of a botched abortion but it was a living child outside of a mother’s womb. This is an after-birth abortion. He said no, you can still take the life of the baby even after abortion.”

Watch it:

Gingrich has echoed this claim in recent days, saying Obama is “the most extreme, pro-abortion president in U.S. history” and that he voted in favor of killing unborn children.

That bill, which Obama did vote against, would have required doctors to resuscitate an aborted fetus if legislators felt it had any chance of viability. But Obama’s reasoning for voting against the bill was nothing like how Gingrich and Huckabee represent it. In interviews with a range of media outlets, Obama expressed that he feared the bill would undermine Roe v Wade by defining any fetus as a human with human rights and claimed it could be used to take down any abortion rights legislation that anti-choice activists didn’t like.

Obama was, however, “fully in support” of a federal bill that provided the same protection viable fetuses while also including protections for Roe v Wade :

OBAMA: I have said repeatedly that I would have been completely in, fully in support of the federal bill that everybody supported – which was to say – that you should provide assistance to any infant that was born – even if it was as a consequence of an induced abortion. That was not the bill that was presented at the state level. What that bill also was doing was trying to undermine Roe vs. Wade.

Obama also felt that the legislation would have taken decision-making out of the hands of doctors, giving anti-abortion activists an opening to sue abortion providers by alleging that they chose to terminate the life of a viable fetus on purpose. He did not, however, express any support for “infanticide” or for ending the life of a viable fetus, as Huckabee and Gingrich claim.

Election

Huckabee Breaks With GOP, Throws Support Behind Akin

By Aviva Shen on Aug 23, 2012 at 3:11 pm

As Republicans continue to pile on Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) for saying victims of “legitimate rape” can’t get pregnant, Mike Huckabee has strengthened his support for the embattled Senate candidate. Huckabee first gave Akin the opportunity to defend the remark on his radio show, which he did by explaining that women often lie about being raped. Huckabee also approvingly read a defense of Akin by junk scientist Dr. John Wilke, though he conceded that some “extraordinary” people were born out of rape.

To make his support for Akin crystal clear, Huckabee sent a letter to his supporters Thursday accusing the GOP establishment of trying to bully Akin out of the race for an honest mistake:

The Party’s leaders have for reasons that aren’t rational, left [Akin] behind on the political battlefield, wounded and bleeding, a casualty of his self-inflicted, but not intentional wound. In a Party that supposedly stands for life, it was tragic to see the carefully orchestrated and systematic attack on a fellow Republican. Not for a moral failure or corruption or a criminal act, but for a misstatement which he contritely and utterly repudiated. I was shocked by GOP leaders and elected officials who rushed so quickly to end the political life of a candidate over a mistaken comment in an interview. This was a serious mistake, but it was blown out of proportion not by the left, but by Akin’s own Republican Party. Is this what the party really thinks of principled pro-life advocates? Do we forgive and forget the verbal gaffes of Republicans who are “conveniently pro-life” for political advantage, but crucify one who truly believes that every life is sacred?

Huckabee also claims the National Republican Senatorial Committee launched an organized crusade to get Akin out of the race, ordering political consultants to stay away and rallying clergy to encourage Akin to drop out. While Huckabee does not specify which “conveniently pro-life” Republicans he is referring to, he does astutely call out the political posturing of the many Republicans who have disavowed Akin even though they support his policy positions.

Akin, meanwhile, says he has raised more than $100,000 online after his comments. Though Huckabee is now putting himself at odds with the party establishment by defending Akin, he will be speaking at the Republican National Convention in Tampa on Monday.

Alyssa

Limbaugh Dismantles Akin’s Junk Science, While Competitor Huckabee Guilts Rape Victims Who Have Abortions

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Aug 21, 2012 at 3:34 pm

When Mike Huckabee’s radio show debuted in April, one of the ways Cumulus Media positioned his entry into the market was as a classier alternative to Rush Limbaugh. At the time, Limbaugh was in the midst of a controversy over his nasty attacks on then-Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke, who he’d attacked for her testimony on coverage of contraception, and he looked like a viable target. As I noted at the time, “Cumulus Media’s seized that opportunity, telling stations that don’t have Limbaugh now and that might choose not to reup their contracts to carry him in the future, that in Huckabee, they’ve got a better alternative. The company’s distributed a list of 31 advertisers who have asked that their spots not be affiliated with any Limbaugh-related programming. And they’re pitching Huckabee’s show by telling stations it’ll offer ‘more conversation, less confrontation.’”

So there’s something rather astonishing about watching Limbaugh be more reasonable on a women’s health issue than Huckabee, as has been the case as both men have covered Rep. Todd Akin’s deplorable remarks about whether women can get pregnant as the result of rape. In the midst of peddling conspiracy theories about poll sampling and nailing down his pro-life bona fides, Limbaugh made a fairly good point on his show today: that comments like Akin’s are the result of a closed community reaching for any arguments they can make, no matter how specious, to convince listeners to of their position. He said:

So they sit around amongst themselves — I’m not being critical of ‘em; don’t misunderstand my choice of words or tone, and they try to think of ways to persuade other people who agree with them. So Akin goes on TV with Charles Jaco, which is mistake number one, but he goes on with Charles Jaco on local St. Louis TV. And this whole business of a woman’s body shuts down in rape, there’s no evidence for that. But this is the kind of thing that people who do nothing but talk amongst themselves will conjure up, a belief system like that, and they’ll grab on to anything they can to support what their empirical belief is because their ultimate aim is to save life.

Their ultimate aim is to protect the baby no matter what circumstance the conception occurs in. And I think that’s just who the guy is, but he doesn’t know how to explain it. He has no clue how to make his case for it. And so he hangs around people who are like-minded and they’ve devised this belief. He’s not the first guy to say this. I’ve had people tell me that a woman’s body shuts down in rape. There’s no evidence for this. I mean it’s absolutely absurd. This leads to the second problem. This is absurd. That belief that a woman’s body shuts down and the whole notion of “legitimate” “illegitimate” rape, that’s the thing that bothers me about it. That’s just absurd. It’s not intelligent.

Huckabee, by contrast, has doubled down in support of Akin. He’s given him space on his show for Akin to explain that he didn’t mean to promote ideas with precisely no scientific basis—he just mean to communicate that sometimes women lie about being sexually assaulted. Huckabee’s continued to flog the junk scientific claims of Dr. John Willke, the physician who’s backed up Akin’s claims, and whose fitness to handle women’s health issues I dearly hope is under investigation by the relevant credentialing organizations. And most horrifyingly, on Monday, he got on the air to guilt women who have become pregnant as the result of rape about carrying those pregnancies to term:

“Ethel Waters, for example, was the result of a forcible rape,” Huckabee said of the late American gospel singer. One-time presidential candidate Huckabee added: “I used to work for James Robison back in the 1970s, he leads a large Christian organization. He, himself, was the result of a forcible rape. And so I know it happens, and yet even from those horrible, horrible tragedies of rape, which are inexcusable and indefensible, life has come and sometimes, you know, those people are able to do extraordinary things.”

There’s no question that for some women, choosing to keep a child in the aftermath of a sexual assault can be a powerfully affirming decision, as it was for Shauna Prewitt, who writes about her daughter in a powerful rebuttal to Akin posted on XOJane today. But just like abortion, that’s a profoundly personal decision for a woman to make that should be influenced solely by her beliefs about what would be best for her physically and mentally, rather than by the suggestion that if she chooses to terminate a pregnancy that’s the result of rape, she’s doing a wrong to society at large. Not to mention the fact Prewitt points out, that rapists retain parental and visitation rights in many states, and giving birth to a child conceived in an assault could force a woman to have ongoing contact with her attacker. It would be interesting to see what both Akin and Huckabee, both vigorous advocates of two-parent, heterosexual-led households have to say about that element of raising children who are the product of rape.

Conversation, Huckabee-style, it turns out, can be a way to mask in niceness ideas that are even nastier than those revealed by Limbaugh-style confrontation.

LGBT

Chick-fil-A And The Conservative Appropriation Of Christianity As An Anti-Gay Wedge

By Zack Ford on Aug 1, 2012 at 2:55 pm

Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy preaching about his company's religious practices.

Earlier this week, a ThinkProgress reader wrote us, objecting to our description of Chick-fil-A as a “Christian-run” company. He cited the many steps the Episcopal Church has taken toward supporting LGBT equality as “real Christianity in action,” accusing Chick-fil-A of using Christianity as “cover for their own bigotry.” Obviously, ThinkProgress cannot and will not impose judgment upon how any individual, anti-LGBT or otherwise, expresses their religious beliefs. Nevertheless, the reader’s concern has considerable merit, and as conservatives flock to “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day,” it’s important to consider what exactly they are defending and how.

Arguably, the rise of the Christian Right is due for a 40th anniversary to mark the appropriation of Christianity by conservatives like Pat Robertson, Phyllis Schlafly, Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, and Ralph Reed. This coalition of mostly evangelical Christians, Catholics, and Mormons has largely succeeded in reducing the cultural definition of being Christian to those who share their beliefs. The present-day ravings of faux-historian David Barton seek to push even farther and erase the religious diversity at the heart of American patriotism. The “culture war” over LGBT equality presents one of the clearest dividing lines, with anti-gay talking heads like Tony Perkins over-dominating the media on behalf of “Christianity” while LGBT-affirming Christians are severely under-represented.

Some have tried to shrug off the controversy about Chick-fil-A’s donations to anti-gay hate groups and condemnations of marriage equality, but it provides a very clear example of how conservatives hide behind the respect they expect for their religious beliefs to avoid accountability for the harm caused by their anti-gay words and actions. In doing so, they maintain a wedge between “Christianity” and the LGBT community that is far more volatile than the race wedges they have attempted. Here are some current examples of this “cover” in action:

  • Mike Huckabee said Chick-fil-A must be defended against “hate speech and economic bullying” from those who “disenfranchise” Christians.
  • Sarah Palin decried Chick-fil-A’s detractors as the ones who are “intolerant, bigoted, and hypocritical” for not agreeing with the comments made by its president, Dan Cathy.
  • Conservative columnist Star Parker accused “homosexual activists” of a “hate campaign” against Chick-fil-A for the “crime of being a Christian.”
  • Robert Knight of the conservative American Civil Rights Union described the Chick-fil-A controversy as a “smear campaign” and “fascistic assault” by “enraged liberals who are at war with nature and nature’s God.”
  • Chicago Archbishop Francis Cardinal George stood by Chick-fil-A because allowing marriage equality would violate the “constitutionally protected freedom of religious belief and religious practice.”
  • Former Los Angeles Archbishop Cardinal Roger M. Mahony accused those who disagree with Chick-fil-A of trying to “punish us for clinging to and expressing our faith beliefs.”
  • The Catholic League’s Bill Donohue believes educated white people “want to punish those who hold to the traditional view,” an effort he describes as “madness laced with fascistic elements.”
  • Even the National Organization for Marriage’s official “Thank Chick-fil-A” page identifies a “culture increasingly hostile to traditional and especially Christian values,” urging supporters to “stand firm by your Christian beliefs.”

But this is all a façade — one rife with Biblical hypocrisy, at that. There is nothing about the Chick-fil-A controversy that has anything to do with so-called “religious freedom.” The company donates millions of dollars yearly to organizations that actively work against the safety and health of LGBT people. Its president preaches that gays and lesbians should be scorned as “twisted up stuff” who “invite God’s judgment” upon society. These are all actions with direct consequences for LGBT people, and religion in no way justifies them. Certainly, many who identify as Christians — including many LGBT people — see Chick-fil-A’s anti-gay principles as foreign to their inclusive faiths, but their voices are largely absent from the public conversation.

The takeaway here must be how lopsided the “religious freedom” talking point is. If standing up for the fair treatment of LGBT people is an attack on conservative religious beliefs, then denying LGBT equality is just as much an attack on inclusive religious beliefs. Religion, itself, is thus a moot point in the debate, a “headless monster” used by conservatives only to further stigmatize and disenfranchize the LGBT community. Nobody should tolerate that, no matter how they spiritually identify.

Related Posts

LGBT

Huckabee Demonstrates Anti-Gay Hypocrisy Over What Warrants A Boycott

By Zack Ford on Jul 30, 2012 at 2:45 pm

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is leading the charge in defending Chick-fil-A with “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day” this Wednesday, but with the new media attention, he has proven his hypocrisy over what warrants a boycott. Breaking from his anti-gay partners at the National Organization for Marriage, Huckabee actually disavowed the group’s failed boycotts of Starbucks and General Mills, but with a tenuous explanation:

HUCKABEE: That’s what I find most offensive. Instead of having an honest, rational, intellectually sound discussion about whether the COO of a company should be able to make statements, whether it’s Dan Cathy at Chick-fil-A or Howard Schultz at Starbucks — which I think is fine. If Howard Schultz wants to make statements, that’s fine. Let him do it. I’m not going to go asking for a boycott of Starbucks. This is a marketplace. If Starbucks starts writing on the side of every cup ‘We Don’t Like Christians,” then I’d have to look at it differently. But Starbucks sells coffee. Chick-fil-A sells chicken. The point of view of its senior executives and their founders is frankly their business. I just find this level of trying to destroy people’s jobs and livelihoods because they don’t agree with them — that’s very troubling, and it gets to the very heart of a kind of America that’s very different than the one we grew up with.

For what it’s worth, there aren’t any nationwide Chick-fil-A boycotts actually being called for. But Huckabee’s qualification of what would make him consider a Starbucks boycott demonstrates why he should actually support, or at least respect, the widespread backlash against Chick-fil-A. As he points out, Starbucks didn’t say anything anti-Christian by supporting marriage equality, let alone donate large sums of money to an explicitly anti-Christian organization (not that any such group of any significance even exists in this country).

On the contrary, Chick-fil-A gives millions of dollars annually to groups trying to demonize and eradicate gay people through ex-gay therapy, and its president said that marriage equality supporters are “inviting God’s judgment” by having the “audacity” to advocate for that “twisted up kind of stuff.” That certainly trumps how offensive a message like “We don’t like Christians” would be, but of course, Huckabee is incapable of understanding that because he shares Chick-fil-A’s beliefs. If, however, he’s really concerned about destroying people’s livelihoods, perhaps he should take some time to consider the actual impact of Chick-fil-A’s anti-gay statements and donations.

(HT: Good As You.)

Related Posts

LGBT

Anti-Gay Chick-fil-A Attracts Losers, Repels Prominent Leaders, Universities, And The Public

By Zack Ford on Jul 30, 2012 at 11:30 am

It seems telling that the political conservatives attracting media attention for coming to the defense of Chick-fil-A and its anti-gay crusades — Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty — are all most recently known for having lost elections. Indeed, the anti-gay vitriol that Chick-fil-A’s president Dan Cathy has repeatedly dispensed has been a loser with the public: YouGov BrandIndex polling shows that the public’s approval of Chick-fil-A has taken a nosedive since Cathy’s interview from 65 to 39:

Meanwhile, a number of prominent leaders have continued to show their displeasure with Chick-fil-A. Here’s a sampling:

  • House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): “For the record, I prefer Kentucky Fried Chick. #ChickFilA” (Twitter)
  • Washington, DC Mayor Vince Gray (D): “Given my longstanding strong support for LGBT rights & marriage equality, I would not support #hatechicken” (Twitter)
  • Newark, New Jersey Mayor Cory Booker (D): “Wouldn’t deny a biz a permit on those grounds BUT I’d join my residents in taking my $’s elsewhere” (Twitter)
  • Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA): “I disagree with what the CEO from Chick-fil-A said. I was glad he spoke further and said that his company does not discriminate.” (Boston.com)

To clarify Brown’s remarks, Chick-fil-A said it will “treat every person with honor, dignity and respect,” regardless of sexual orientation, but the company still has no employment protections in its official corporate policies. According to Forbes.com, there have been at least 12 lawsuits against the company since 1988 on various charges of employment discrimination.

New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn (D) wrote to the president of New York University, home to the city’s only Chick-fil-A, urging him to end the university’s relationship with the anti-gay restaurant:

NYC is a place where we celebrate diversity. We do not believe in denigrating others…As you know from recent press coverage, the President of Chick-fil-A continues to make statements and support causes that are clear messages of extreme intolerance and homophobia and a belief that LGBT Americans are less than others and deserve to be treated as such.[...]

I urge you to sever your relationship with the Chick-fil-A establishment that exists on your campus. This establishment should be replaced with an establishment where the ownership does not denigrate a portion of our population.

Another university’s leadership has already taken action against a Chick-fil-A on its campus. The president and provost at the University of Louisville released a statement saying that they “will not be eating at Chick-fil-A anytime soon.” Responding to a growing student petition, U of L administrators are currently assessing the contractual arrangements with the franchise on campus to evaluate further courses of action. At least seven other universities also have petitions underway challenging the existence of a Chick-fil-A on their campuses.

Attacking gay people as purveyors of society’s destruction is harmful to many people, and as public condemnation grows, it’s proving to be a losing philosophy for Chick-fil-A.

NEWS FLASH

Huckabee: LGBT Reaction To Chick-fil-A Is ‘Economic Bullying’ | ThinkProgress has thoroughly covered the incendiary religious condemnations of same-sex families made by Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy, as well as the National Organization for Marriage’s complete hypocrisy in terms of how it responds to corporate positions on LGBT rights. That being said, there’s little set-up necessary for this clip of NOM’s Brian Brown speaking today with Mike Huckabee. Both completely ignored the malevolence inherent in Cathy’s remarks, instead defending Chick-fil-A from what Huckabee called “economic bullying.” Take a listen:

LGBT

NOM Abandons Month-Old ‘Neutrality’ Talking Point To Defend Chick-fil-A With Mike Huckabee

By Zack Ford on Jul 23, 2012 at 1:43 pm

Just a month ago, the National Organization for Marriage was calling for “corporate neutrality,” arguing that companies like Starbucks and General Mills — both of which it has unsuccessfully tried to “dump” — should just stay quiet on the issue of marriage equality. But to defend Chick-fil-A, NOM has already abandoned this talking point and is now wholeheartedly supporting the company for its wrathful-God condemnation of marriage equality activists, casually ignoring the company’s unlikely promise to “leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.”

Now, former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR) — who just reminded the world he believes all gay people sexually abuse children — has called for “Chick Fil-A [sic] Appreciation Day,” asking conservatives to turnout on Wednesday, August 1 to eat at the chain to counter the “vitriolic assaults” president and COO Dan Cathy has experienced since his own vitriolic assault. Despite getting the date wrong, NOM is proud to stand with Huckabee and Cathy for “strengthening marriage and family”:

HUCKABEE: I have been incensed at the vitriolic assaults on the Chick Fil-Acompany because the CEO [sic], Dan Cathy, made comments recently in which he affirmed his view that the Biblical view of marriage should be upheld. The Cathy family, let by Chick Fil-A founder Truett Cathy, are a wonderful Christian family who are committed to operating the company with Biblical principles and whose story is the true American success story… I ask you to join me in speaking out on Wednesday, August 1 “Chick Fil-A Appreciation Day.” No one is being asked to make signs, speeches, or openly demonstrate. The goal is simple: Let’s affirm a business that operates on Christian principles and whose executives are willing to take a stand for the Godly values we espouse by simply showing up and eating at Chick Fil-A on Wednesday, August 1.

NOM: Imagine if folks all across the country united together in support of heroes like Dan and Truett Cathy that stand for strengthening marriage and family! Imagine the potential impact of the message that companies favoring the radical redefinition of marriage risk fallout with their customers—combined with the message that heroes who stand for marriage and family cannot be silenced! Imagine how clearly that message would be heard across the nation if Chick-fil-A reported record sales this Wednesday!

NOM has long claimed that its concern is not with gay people, but with “defending marriage.” Unfortunately, partnering with someone who demonizes gay people to defend a corporate executive who demonizes gay people has everything to do with animus and nothing to do with protecting society. On August 3rd, two days after Huckabee’s “appreciation” day, there will be a nationwide same-sex kiss-in at Chick-fil-A, which might be the only remaining reason the LGBT community and its allies have to justify visiting the wickedly anti-gay restaurant.

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up