Now We're Punishing Cops Over Fast-Food Bags. That's Pretty Chickenshit.

Categories: Schutze

SHZ_GetOffMyLawn_TitleImageV2.jpg
Wait. I'm a libtard. I'm politically correct. I hate bullies. I despise people who make fun of a co-worker for being different from them. But they sent a Dallas police sergeant to deep nights at the jail because he came back to his division with a bag from Chick-fil-A?

You know. First place, I also believe in due process, especially where the charges involve controversial fast food. And maybe in addition we should think about our need -- and I refer to all of us -- not to be so extremely thin-skinned that we have difficulty leaving the house in the morning.

The thing about Chick-fil-A bags; they are EVERYWHERE. You have to worry in general about people being driven into a rage by the sight of a Chick-fil-A bag. You have to worry in particular about armed police officers being driven into a rage by Chick-fil-A bags.
When they pull you over, is it like declaring your concealed handgun? "Officer, I have a Chick-fil-A bag on the floor of the back seat."

chicken pair.jpg
Please! Will someone think of the poor chickens?!
The underlying issue in this week's Dallas police Chick-fil-A incident is persecution of employees based on their sexual orientation, and that's not a joke. A boss or supervisor who ridicules homosexual underlings is right in the same pocket with the boss or supervisor who tries to force subordinates to have sex with him or her.

If this is a difficult concept, just try shoving your own dainty foot into the same shoe. Somebody who has ultimate control over your economic well-being comes along and says, "Take your clothes off and give it to me, sucker." Or makes fun of you because he or she does not find you sexually hot. We all get this. I especially get the last thing.

But in the Dallas incident, whatever sexual messages may or may not have been conveyed by a sergeant to his staff seem to have been communicated through the medium of a politically controversial fast food bag, which does, it seems to me, leave an awful lot of room for interpretation -- enough that maybe you don't immediately slap the 12-year veteran officer with a humiliating transfer until things get sorted out better.

Sergeant Mark Johnson was sent to deep nights at the jail a week ago after two lesbian officers complained he had been looking at them funny while delivering roll-call orders related to policing recent demonstrations at the anti-homosexual fast food chain, Chick-fil-A. Later, the officers said, Johnson came back from lunch and brandished a Chick-fil-A bag in front of them in a threatening manner.

I despise that CEO dude from Chick-fil-A who used his post as a rich fried chicken mogul to stir up hatred of gay people. He's scum. That said, I just don't quite get how we're going to manage a world in which fast food bags are treated as weapons.

Let's say your boss is known to be anti-gay, and let's say we know he eats at Chick-fil-A as a political statement, and we know he brings his Chick-fil-A bag back to the office and puts it on his desk and snaps it with his fingers and rolls his eyes at us on purpose, doesn't all of that fall into the realm of what is commonly called, excuse my French ... tough shit?

Some things are righteous cause. Other things are tough shit. When something falls within the category of tough shit, isn't it our task, our challenge, perhaps even our calling -- and I speak of all of us, together, as one humanity -- not to rise to the bait? Are there not some circumstances in which you just have to not rise to the bait?

Here is where it gets complicated. People have a right to their own opinions. Some people think the dude at Chick-fil-A is a hero. They have a right to feel that way.

But more pragmatically, if you advertise that you have this big button that people can push, people will push it. I don't know what that particular principle of human nature is called. Call it, "I have a button."

When I say button, I'm not talking about just and fundamental issues. "I'm gay" is not a button. It's a truth, just like, "I'm Christian" or "I'm Native American."

A button is, "Show me a Chick-fil-A bag and I'll go postal." Why is that a button? Well, for one thing, it's just too good. Nobody can resist it.

I have already said eight ways to Sunday how much I despise sexual harassment, but if you told me there were these two cops and all I had to do was wave a Chick-fil-A bag in front of them and they'd have a melt-down, a terrible truly bad enormously immature shameful element in me would want to try it just because ... it's too good. Like cranking a jack-in-the-box.

Oh, wait. Did I just say something bad?

See. Now they've got me in it. Fast food persecution. It's a bottomless pit. Gosh I just thought of something. I probably have co-workers I could get to go postal just by waving a McDonald's bag at them. Next question: Once having thought of this, is there any possible way on earth I can resist doing it? Give me the wisdom to know that which I cannot self-control.


My Voice Nation Help
174 comments
bdickeyus
bdickeyus

Jim, I read a lot of your stuff and appreciate your continued extreme coverage of the horrible mess that Dallas politics has become.  I am disappointed in your response to this issue. 

 

I call you out as a hypocrite in this one issue.  You say that you despise this man for revealing his personal feelings on a religious station.  If his are the opinions and feelings that you have, then a religious station should be a safe place to reveal them.  The reason I use the word hypocrite for you is that you don't have the same feelings toward those of the other persuasion that use their platform of fame to demand that all of us bow down to the alter of homosexuality.  Why should we have to deal with that rhetoric from them? 

 

Only a hypocrite would demand silence from only one side of the issue.  Chick-fil-a has gained me as a new and continuing costumer due to their strong moral stand.  From what I've observed it seems that a significant number of other folks feel the same way.  Maybe other companies ought to share their family friendly stance!!!

rufuslevin
rufuslevin

is this all the police have to worry about these days? why do we pay them then....the job is not about sitting in the office and trading insults...throw out the gays, the lesbians, and the insulting heterosexual and hires some serious law enforcement officers....this is not the fourth grade, you blue uniformed idiots.

rufuslevin
rufuslevin

GAYS AND LESBIANS.....THE NEW AFRO AMERICAN VICTIMS SEEKING SPECIAL RECOGNITION FOR REAL OR IMAGINED INSULTS AND LACK OF WORSHIPFUL RESPECT BY OTHER GROUPS NOT HAVING THE SAME PROCLIVITIES OR ETC.

 

CARRYING A PLASTIC BAG IS NOT A THREAT.   SHAKING A BAG AT SOMEONE IS MERELY A MOTION, NOT A THREAT EITHER.  A BAG WITH PRINTED MATERIAL IS FREE SPEECH, AND PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

 

BUT...SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF A HETEROSEXUAL BY GAY OR LESBIANS IN THE WORKPLACE IS BIG TIME EXPENSIVE LAWSUIT STUFF...AND WHEN YOU HAVE LESBIAN LEADERS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT IN DALLAS COUNTY....MORE VULNERABILITY TO HETEROSEXUAL LAWSUIT POSSIBILIES.....AND THEY WILL WIN, AND THE TAXPAYERS WILL PAY FOR THE GAY AND LESBIAN OUTRAGE.....OR FOOT STOMPING AND GUM POPPING OR WHATEVER ANGRY GAYS AND LESBIANS WITH NO CAT AT HOME TO KICK ACTUALLY DO WHEN JUST TOTALLY INCENSED AND ALL OVERWROUGHT WITH BODY SHAKING RAGE.

Idontlivindallas
Idontlivindallas

The CEO dude from Chic Fil A has a set. He wasn't scared to say what he believed. Now what I can't believe is that they put a cop on deep nights, I'm guessing as punishment, until they make a ruling on the matter. Or can I? Whole deal sounds like a whole friggin pile of BS. WTG DPD!

wrw22
wrw22

And yet somehow I just don't feel bad for that bigot cop.

Kyla Bussey
Kyla Bussey

as I understand it, it wasn't over the bag or the sandwich, it was over what he said to his co-workers. If you're going to be a bigot, best keep it to yourself while at work. If you don't have any self-control, perhaps police work isn't the right fit for you.

Aaron Watterson
Aaron Watterson

Good. When are you idiots going to realize that we pay to put ourselves in jail. Get a speeding ticket, get community service,and you have to go and shovel dog shit for 8 hrs a day for 77 hrs total time..NOW THATS CHICKENSHIT!!!!

Myrna.Minkoff-Katz
Myrna.Minkoff-Katz topcommenter

Jim.  You've become obsessed with these Chick-fil-A bigots.  Just let them wallow in their ignorance and move on, already.

Joseph
Joseph

I think this controversy needs some perspective.  Maybe decent people should reflect on the fact that a lot of America's leading companies enthusiastically support gay rights and have had the courage to do so even knowing intolerant people might boycott their products.  These companies include the following:

 

Abercrombie & Fitch, Absolut Vodka, Amazon.com, American Airlines, Apple, Ben & Jerry’s, Best Buy, Delta, Disney, Ford, General Mills, Google, J.C. Penney, JPMorgan, Kenneth Cole, Kimberly-Clark, Kimpton Hotels, Levi-Strauss, Macy’s, Marshalls, Microsoft, Nike, Sears, Southwest Airlines, Target, Texas Instruments, Tiffany & Co., and T.J. Maxx.

 

And on the other hand, we have Chick-fil-a.  Who do you think is gonna win this one?

 

Albert
Albert

"Look, we all winked and nudged each other when Mr. Obama aired his position on gay marriage during the 2008 campaign."

 

What about the people who agreed with his position then, support of strong civil unions? Do you think maybe they feel misled now? It's no secret that his public announcement was a result of the pressure from gay big money supporters, are you sure he can't be bought off and mislead you?

 

 

"The man is a politician, not a moralist."

 

But we were told he wasn't a politician, he was "new politics",  "Hope & Change"  - his message was morality. it sure wasn't about his record.

 

Which is getting off topic, but I find it  ironinc that so many people, Mr. Schutze included, can call those who's views have not "evolved" as "scum" who spread "hatred"  and not recognize the irony. That's a hallmark of totalitarian and fascist regimes, they simply do not get irony, because they **are** irony. 

Albert
Albert

"I despise that CEO dude from Chick-fil-A who used his post as a rich fried chicken mogul to stir up hatred of gay people. He's scum."

 

Did you feel the same way about Obma?

big_oj
big_oj

What did the announcement even say? Why did the Southeast Patrol ever need to be at the Kiss-In's? Thats the Division that this took place. They patrol Pleasant Grove, Kleberg-Rylie areas and which they take for forever time to get there when I need them. There is no Chick-Fil-A's anywhere in that area much less. The closest one would be by 75 or in Mesquite, but why did they need DPD Cops from that area? Wondering if anyone would answer this for me?

gimme
gimme

If you're going to carry your nuts in a bag and wave them at two women, expect a little crossfire.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

Maybe I can get this comment to post, having gone to a different office and different computer. Commentologists below suggest Chick-fil-A will gain new business from Bible-thumping homophobes that will offset lost business from libtards lie me, and everything will come out somewhere in the wash in the middle. So on this day of all days, I wonder: how did that kind of divisive marketing strategy work out for Komen?

Americano
Americano

 @wrw22 But if it had been two Christian Cops who were offended by a Lesbian Officer and had her shipped off to a less desirable job, you'd be furious, right?  That's not very "tolerant", is it?

rufuslevin
rufuslevin

 @Joseph GAY RIGHTS IS PHONEY.  ALL CITIZENS TODAY HAVE THE VERY SAME RIGHTS, AND NO PRIVILEDGE OR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION IS OWED TO ANYONE OR ANY GROUP.....WE GOT OVER THAT WITH INTEGRATION.

 

CORPORATIONS JUST WANT TO PROTECT THEIR CUSTOMER SALES....AND GET FREE PUBLICITY....NO CORPORATION HAS SPECIAL LOVE OR WARMTH FOR GAY AND LESBIAN CUSTOMERS OVER ANY OTHER.  THEY MERELY UPHOLD THE LAWS OF THE NATION WITH NO DISCRIMINATION....IN NO CASE TO THEY MAKE A CLAIM THAT THEY HOLD SPECIAL FEELINGS FOR A MINORITY GROUP OVER OTHERS.

pak152
pak152

 @Albert that is toleration as defined by the left. they are able to talk about toleration but when it comes to putting those words into action they are unable to walk the talk.

pak152
pak152

 @Albert you need to understand that there are two sets of rules. one set for liberals and another set for conservatives. JimS is playing by the liberal set of rules

icowrich
icowrich

 @Albert I don't recall Obama ever saying that gays were inviting punishment from God.  There is a difference between preferring civil unions to marriage (Obama's old position) and telling homosexuals that they deserve to be punished.

PerryMoore
PerryMoore

Look, we all winked and nudged each other when Mr. Obama aired his position on gay marriage during the 2008 campaign. The man is a politician, not a moralist. He centered up to win. Now he has the incumbent bounce and doesn't need that baggage. I applaud Mr. Obama for telling us what he really believes this time around. Kinda like I'm applauding Mr. Schutze right now.

RTGolden
RTGolden

 @big_oj I'm guessing it was a standard blurb read at every division/precinct/squad etc.  The announcement was probably read at every pre-shift meeting across the entire force.  As for why the supervisor had cause to be at a Chik-fil-A, it was the start of his shift, maybe he likes their food?

Albert
Albert

 @JimSX 

 

The guy voiced his opinion in support of biblical principles to an obscure religious magazine to launch a marketing campaign?

Cmon_now
Cmon_now

 @pak152 Yea and your sweeping generalizations are so good for "tolerance"

Albert
Albert

 @pak152 

 

Next up, bemoaning the lack of civility from the scumbag assholes on the right.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @icowrich  @Albert Funny, I don't recall Chick-Fil-A saying that either.  So, back at you.  How about we stick to what he said, and not the slanders and straw men?

James080
James080 topcommenter

 @PerryMoore So what you're saying is that the President lied to the American people to trick them into voting for him? Any you and JIMS are A-OK with that. Nice standards. Hope & change. Same old shit.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @RTGolden  @big_oj That's what the stories said -- it was a standard announcement, telling them that the department policy on this was to not interfere with protests on either side, unless it dealt with trespass.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

 @Albert He's CEO of a high-profile aggressively marketed company. He markets every time he opens his mouth.Just how it is. He did't know what?

rufuslevin
rufuslevin

 @Albert now that is harsh albert...would you mommy be happy with your language and biggotry?

rufuslevin
rufuslevin

 @everlastingphelps who the hell knows what Obama really thinks...he says whatever get votes, and ignores whatever he said to get them later.  Obama thinks he is God.  God knows that he is not Obama.

bdickeyus
bdickeyus

 @icowrich

 Lets look at some other passages besides Eze 16:49.  Gen 13:13, 19:4-7, Jer 23:14, Jude 7.  How about Lev 18:22, 20:13, Rom 1:26-27.  There are many more scriptures. 

None of my Christian friends would be cruel to homosexuals.  Our total desire is that they know what God's word says.  Once we have shared it with them, then they make up their mind.  It's their eternity.  I can read here the hate that comes out.  It is the intolerance of those that hate God, His word and those that love His word.  To them, tolerance is a one way street.  Homosexuals demand that others condone their (Lev 18:22, 20:13) abomination in God's sight but we aren't allowed to express our support of God and His word.  The most intolerant people are the ones that demand tolerance. 

icowrich
icowrich

 @everlastingphelps I'm claiming that Obama does not believe gays are inviting judgment from God.  I think he's rather more likely to say that we are inviting judgment for, say, not taking care of the poor.  After all, that is the real reason Sodom was destroyed (Ezek 16:49). 

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @icowrich Are you claiming that Obama doesn't believe in judgment by God?

 

If your position is that Obama is apostate, I'm cool with that, I'm just trying to pin down your reasoning.

icowrich
icowrich

 @everlastingphelps  So, you are sticking to your story that Obama's "I like civil unions" is the same position as "We are inviting judgment our nation" by supporting gay marriage?

RTGolden
RTGolden

 @Tmarc Please point out ANYWHERE that I said anything about ANY definition of the family.  Those little double curly mark things around the text in question; those are quotation marks.  I was quoting something Cathy said.

 

Reading comprehension is a virtue.

observist
observist

@everlastingphelps

First, marriage is a messy hybrid of the legal and the religious - ideally the two would be completely separated.  I think religious organizations should be able to marry or refuse to marry anyone they want.  I think the law should be required to recognize any consenting couple of non-related adults.

 

Second, I think people are born gay, and should have the same right as anyone else to legally marry whomever they want.  No one is harmed in any way if gay people get married.  Taking action specifically to deny them that right (DOMA) strikes me as nothing more than arbitrary discrimination against a group that doesn't have the numbers to defend itself electorally.

 

Third, it's a false dichotomy to categorize pro-SSM people as either Gay or Christian-haters.  I reject the your implication that the devoutly religious are uniformly against gay marriage - there are plenty of churches and churchgoers that are both devout and not anti-gay.  Some Christians (and Muslims and Jews) focus on love, compassion, tolerance and forgiveness, others focus on preventing and punishing sins, and some of them seem to have a peculiar obsession with anal sex. 

 

The bible is broad enough, vague enough and old enough that people can pick and choose passages and quotes to support nearly any position, and rationalize reasons to ignore the passages counter to that position. I think most people today choose a position, then choose a church and corresponding biblical "evidence" to support that position.  People had all kinds of biblical evidence both for and against slavery, for and against women voting, integration, various genocidal activities, etc. 

 

Neither Cathy's freedom of speech nor freedom of religion is being impinged.  Just because he tosses out a few bible quotes it doesn't mean he represents Christianity as whole, and objecting to his statements is not being anti-Christian, it's being anti-bigot.  SSM activists have the same freedom of speech that Cathy does, and have all the consumer choice the free market allows to protest and boycott CFA.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

you left out a group.

 

there are people who care about equal rights.

 

the current structure denies equal rights to a segment of the population. one segment enjoys benefits and priviledges other segments do not enjoy.

 

either discontinue those benefits and priviledges to the one segment or provide the benefits and priviledges to all segments.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @observist That's the thing.  Like most people, my real position is "don't care."  Don't care, and as a libertarian, would prefer that the government is out of the marriage business altogether.  

 

I do like chicken sandwiches.  I do like corporations that are good citizens, treating their employees well, attracting quality workers, providing good benefits, etc.  Chick-fil-a has all that going for them.

 

I also value freedom of religion and freedom of speech.  The Chick-fil-a interview was an exercise of both.  What he said was a non-controversial, mainstream opinion held by almost half the country.

 

Given all of that stuff that I DO care about vs the "don't care" of gay marriage, it definitely makes the militants look very, very bad.  

 

That's the real thing -- there are only four groups that care about this issue.  First, there's gay people.  Then, there are the devoutly religious.  Finally, there are the two groups that simply hate one of the first two.

 

Which one do you fall into?

icowrich
icowrich

 @everlastingphelps  @icowrich I didn't mean to say Obama has outraised Romney at all.  In fact, I fully expect Romney to outspend Obama 3 to 1 in September and October.  All I said was that Obama's Wall Street money is being replaced by gay money.  There is a lot of money there, but it's nothing compared the $100 million Adelson has hinted he'll give, or the $400 million that the Koch brothers have already brought in.  I would never have said Obama can match THAT.  That would imply that this is a fair fight....which, it's not.

icowrich
icowrich

 @everlastingphelps I responded to that first part above.  On corporations not being Christian, though:  I'm not sure how Citizens United would feel about that...

observist
observist

 @Albert  Don't be coy, Al.  Cathy said this:

 

 "I think we're inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say, I know better than you as to what constitutes marriage."

 

So he didn't specifically say "Stop the homos from getting married" but if you're trying to suggest he meant anything other than that, you're being disingenuous.

Albert
Albert

 @observist 

 

"...speak out in favor of discrimination.."

 

 

That's where you lose actual supporters of civil unions, the bullshit gets too damn deep.

 

 

Tmarc
Tmarc

 @RTGolden Please tell us which "biblical definition of the family unit" you are referring to. Is it the one where any number of wives/concubines is totally OK? Only one husband of course! (See: David, Solomon, Abraham, Noah, anywhere else in the O.T.)  Or is there really a subsequent scripture that refers to "one man one woman"? I can't seem to find it in my translation. Oh and references to "a man, and his, or a, wife" still does not mean he can't have more than one unless viewed through the filter of modern mores.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

@icowrich Not really. Obama is way behind Romney, and is already in the red-- and we haven't when gotten to th conventions yet.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

@observist See, that's the problem. They ARE raising awareness, but what they are making people aware of is that they have gone beyond a civil rights issue and turned it I to an anti-Christian bigotry cause. Most people aren't anti-Christian, and they are very free speech and freedom of religion. This runs against all of that. They chose thier target very, very poorly.

icowrich
icowrich

  @everlastingphelps "How would SSM activists go about boycotting the president?"  By withholding donations, which is precisely what they did.  Obama lost big Wall Street donors this election cycle, and he has since largely replaced that with gay money...which turns out to be surprisingly flush.

observist
observist

 @everlastingphelps Is that supposed to explain your bizarre rape analogy?

 

How would SSM activists go about boycotting the president?  By voting Republican?  Did you protest Bush's expansion of government by voting Democrat?   They're trying to raise awareness of the issue - protesting the president on a single policty just makes you one of 1000 other groups protesting the president.  Protesting a commercial brand gets more publicity.

icowrich
icowrich

 @everlastingphelps "I think we're inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say, I know better than you as to what constitutes marriage."  Now, show me the quote where Obama says anything about gays inviting judgment from God....also, show me where Cathy supports civil unions.Otherwise, just recognize that there is daylight between those two positions.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @icowrich In fact, I did.  Nothing in it about punishment.  All in all, it was a positive interview (starting OUT with him saying that corporations aren't Christian, individuals are.)  Not a single line about punishment.

 

WTF have YOU been reading?

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @icowrich When did the Chick-fil-a president say it?  All he said was that he doesn't support gay marriage.

RTGolden
RTGolden

 @icowrich  @everlastingphelps Can you post a link to somewhere that Dan Cathy said gays invite punishment from God?

All I can find is that he said he is "very much supportive of the family - the biblical definition of the family unit.".  How you get from there to hate speech is two leaps beyond the triple jump.

Albert
Albert

 @JimSX 

 

Maybe he thought since there was no hatred directed at the President for holding the same views, he could get away with it.

 

Talk about double standards, sheesh.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @observist  SO what you are saying is that he deserved to be demonized for holding a position so radical that our President believed it all the way up to a couple of months ago?

observist
observist

 @everlastingphelps  @JimSX  @Albert That's a strange non sequitur.  If you depend on the goodwill of the public for your livelihood, and speak out in favor of discrimination against some portion of that public, then get boycotted/picketed in response, you're somehow like a rape victim?

 

Him being the founder/CEO of a high-profile retail establishment makes him and his retail establishment susceptible to protests.  If he were an atheist and said something similar using cherry-picked quotes from biology texts, he would still be a susceptible.

Albert
Albert

 @JimSX 

 

I guess it's best to keep your damn mouth shut in America now.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

 @JimSX  @Albert In other words, you admit that him being a Christian makes him a target, and he gets what he deserves.

 

In even simpler words, she was asking for it, wearing a dress like that.

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...