At first I thought “kudos” to the NYT for recognizing this great American, Christian man as a pioneer, entrepreneur, philanthropist and one of the great men of our era. (see The New York Times article on Truett Cathy’s death here if you can stomach it…)
Then, I read about two paragraphs and realized that this was nothing more than another excuse for the New York Times to trash one of the most significant leaders of our country simply because they don’t agree that traditional marriage is important. From the article, here was how they depicted Truett Cathy:
“As a conservative Christian who ran his business, according to his religious principles, he was at once a hero and a symbol of intolerance. Many admired him for closing his outlets on Sundays and speaking out against same-sex marriage. Others vilified his the chain as a symbol of hate.”
First, they resort to labeling (“as a conservative Christian”). Yes, Mr. Cathy was that. It did define who he was. But, it’s that set of principles that the paper jeers against. And, how misleading to lump these dichotomy’s in the same sentence, “admired him for closing his outlets on Sundays and “speaking out against same-sex marriage.” Obviously, they didn’t do much investigation about the life of Truett Cathy. Of all the words he spoke, good deeds he did, the encouragement he gave, how much of his “speech” was given to “speaking out against same-sex marriage”? He was not the leader of the outspoken Westboro church. He should NOT be identified as someone who spoke out against “same-sex marriage”. That’s irresponsible and disingenuous reporting. It’s like saying that I’m in support of a mom and a dad raising children and being accused, labeled and then identified as being “anti single parenthood”. I may have said that a child thrives best when raised in a healthy, loving home with a mother and a father. Doesn’t mean I just spoke out against single parents. And, if I only said it a few times while spending much of my life doing and being about helping others, would it be fair to label me “anti single parents?” It’s ridiculous and irresponsible.
Second, I’m not sure (and I could be wrong) that Truett Cathy ever SPOKE OUT against same-sex marriage. Now, it is a biblical principle clearly stated that marriage is DEFINED (vs. Described, a very important distinction) as being between a man and a woman. Some may not like that. But, that’s what the Bible says. I propose that if Truett Cathy said anything about marriage, it was in SUPPORT OF traditional biblical marriages. One does not create the other. I can speak for something (and be against its counterpart) without ever “speaking out” against that which i stand in opposition to. But, the NYT is characterizing Truett Cathy as someone who actively spoke out against same-sex marriage as if that was his mission. Even if there is a statement or two that could be construed as being “anti same-sex marriage” it is so dwarfed by all of the other things that he and his life was about that what the NYT did almost borders on incredulity. And, as a side note, why would the NYT be against traditional marriage? Are they happy that marriages end in divorce? Do they support happy, healthy and vibrant heterosexual marriages? Do they put as much effort in trying to help couples stay together to create healthy home environments for the sake of our nation and the generations to come as they do hunting down those who hold an alternative view to same-sex marriage supporters and raising them up as villains, haters and bigots? I’m guessing that would be “NO”. Of course, that wouldn’t be “news” would it? That doesn’t fit their bill as depicting targeted men as being evil, stirring up controversy or leaving a man (who died and left far more good in this world than anyone at the NYT’s has or ever will) as honorable in the eyes of their (diminishing, inconsequential) readership if he held any contrary view than theirs.
Then, they had the audacity to write this:
“the foundation gave millions of dollars toward their efforts to oppose extending marriage rights to couples of the same sex.”
Are you kidding me? Did they read the mission statement of Winshape? Here it is (from their website, Http://winshape.org):
The WinShape Foundation was created by Chick-fil-A founder, S. Truett Cathy, and his wife, Jeannette, in 1982. The simple vision then, as it is today, was to strengthen families and bring people closer to God and each other. Each ministry within the WinShape Foundation is committed to equipping Christ-centered servant leaders who live life on purpose; with purpose; from children to college students, families, couples, business leaders and others in need around the world.
What in that mission says anything about “efforts to OPPOSE (capitalization mine) extending marriage rights to couples of the same sex?” Did you know that they provide marriage counseling to help marriages? Here is their mission for the Winshape Marriage outreach, “WinShape Marriage creates opportunities for marital transformation. Our experience offerings combine insightful teaching, dynamic worship, experiential learning, sequestered spaces and grace-based hospitality. We also add unique elements of adventure that create environments for couples to experience truth, growth and change.”
Does that sound like an evil vision? I guess if you’re the NYT it does. Apparently, if you give millions of dollars to help couples with their marriage you are an evil, bigoted, same-sex marriage hater. Unbelievable.
You see, Truett Cathy simply supported traditional values, biblical values, a true Christian as one who lived what he believed. However, this despicable paper, which is supposed to be the bastion of unbiased journalistic reporting has only one agenda in mind–defame, debase and demean anyone or anything that even hints they might have a different opinion than they do, especially when it comes to issues like same-sex marriage. Instead of labeling them as differences in philosophy or thought, they label others as “haters” thereby inciting a host of others to do the same. You want to know why there is an appearance of “hate”? It’s largely because organizations like the NYT continue to promote it through writing articles like this. The person with the grandstand gets to make the rules. Someone who differs in opinion is not simply a person with different thoughts and opinions. They are labeled and vilified.
They (the NYT) took the beauty of a life of a man who loved others and practiced humility, honesty and (I would guess) gave more to others in his lifetime than everything given by the individuals of the entire NYT organization put together and smeared him as a “tribute” to his life. Shame on them.
SInce when did the sole issue in our nation revolve around how we stand on this issue? When did someone sneak in during the evening and decide that if anyone is against same-sex marriage they were to be targeted, outed and labeled as haters, despite anything they’ve ever done before. Even if it’s not TRUE?
I doubt he or any of his stores ever turned away a same-sex couple from partaking of his food or hiring gay individuals at his stores. More importantly, he cared for the orphans and foster kids, treated employees with dignity and worth, gave jobs to tens of thousands of people, built a silent empire so that he could give much of it away and all this detestable paper can do is weave in hate-filled rhetoric and comments disguised as “news” about a few instances that weren’t even properly reported. As far as I recollect (and I may be wrong) the entire hullabaloo around Chick-Fil-A was that they were giving food to an event that supported traditional marriage. It wasn’t an event that outwardly spoke anything anti or negative about same-sex marriage. It was simply that the organization in question receiving food from Chick-Fil-a stood for traditional marriage.
Why can’t we stand for what we believe as freely as those who support same-sex marriage can stand freely for what they believe. Since when did support of something necessarily mean being a “hater” or “bigot” for the opposite view? I’ll tell you when—since the media started taking stances on issues like this. If they reported these fairly and unbiasedly we might stand a chance to have civil discourse over issues that we can disagree on and still come out respecting those who may not hold the same view. No, in this case, the NYT doesn’t want Truett Cathy or Chick-Fil-a to die with respect or succeed. They want his legacy to be remembered for a few instances that had no truth or substance to their creation instead of what he did over a lifetime of generosity, loving others and living a life worthy of emulating.
Thankfully, those who matter, including The Lord know his life was so much more than what this article attempts to take away. Oh, they share a few of his accomplishments. They just couldn’t do so without the inflammatory comments re. something he likely had absolutely nothing to do with (as indicated above, most of the acts that are at the heart of this discussion were individual store decisions and they were simply stores providing food for events that support Godly marriages–what a crime).
It is a shame that in the days we should be honoring a great American businessman, family man and one of the best leaders of our day, the NYT decides to use his death to once again promote their own agenda and catalyze their demonizing of anyone who stands for traditional marriage. I guess I am at a loss as to why one of the most prestigious papers in the country hates traditional marriage? Why NYT? I’m incensed and appalled, but not surprised. NYT – even you should be ashamed of your actions.
When the music fades and the lights dim, we remember the words of One wiser than all of us combined and the One whom Truett Cathy devoted his life, resulting in a lifetime of goodness—Jesus of Nazareth, who said, “In this world you will have trouble, but take heart, I’ve overcome the world.” Thankfully, that includes overcoming irresponsible media practices and those who stand in hate of a man who would have given them whatever he could because he genuinely cared. We will miss you Truett Cathy. Thank you for living a life of values and principles. Nothing the New York Times or anyone else says will ever undo that which was seen and received by millions as being the hands and feet of God to those in need. And, most importantly, their empty words will never undo the words you heard as you entered into His Presence, “Well done, good and faithful servant.”