Not Serving Pork Is Just Like Not Serving Gays, Say Two Federal Lawmakers In Ridiculous Op-Ed
In a ridiculous and ridiculously long op-ed, two Republicans insist that businesses should have the right to choose not only what they serve, but whom they serve.
On March 2, 1962, CBS aired an episode of “The Twilight Zone” titled, “To Serve Man.” For those who remember that iconic episode, “To Serve Man” was a pun, and the name of a book brought by aliens who landed on Earth. As it turns out, it was not a pledge of assistance, but a cookbook.
Apparently, Republican U.S. Senator James Lankford (Oklahoma) and his House colleague, GOP Rep. Randy Forbes (Virginia) – both co-chairs of the Congressional Prayer Caucus – never got the pun, and assume one meaning is the same as the other.
In a ridiculous op-ed published by the Christian Post today, the two men point to Mexican-style restaurant Chipotle, which recently dropped a pork supplier that failed to meet the fast-food outlet’s ethical treatment of animal standards, as an example of “diversity” of belief that should be incubated. Fair enough.
That same desire to create a “corporate conscience” that adheres to high standards of product sourcing and ethical treatment, the Republican duo claim, is exactly the same as another business that wishes to exercise “religious freedom” by choosing its customers by their sexual orientation.
“It is crucial that the same freedom enjoyed by the leadership of Chipotle remains equally available to business owners of faith,” the two Republicans insist.
“There is a distinct social good to preserving the freedom of individuals to form and operate a business based on deeply held principles rooted in conscience,” the pair present. “Many great leaders throughout our Nation’s history have understood the importance of this freedom—how it elevates and benefits our society as a whole when individuals openly and fully live their lives according to the moral values that motivate them, even when reasonable people disagree with those values.”
Actually, no, there is no “distinct social good to preserving the freedom of individuals” to refuse to do business with LGBT people, or Black people, or women, “based on deeply held principles rooted in conscience.” Especially not when those businesses are licensed by the state and must follow the state’s laws, including non-discrimination laws.
“Faith animates compassion, and compassion leads to greater integrity and ownership of caring for those in need around us,” the lawmakers claim, despite all evidence to the contrary – including evidence provided by Lankford and Forbes.
Â
Image by Thomas Hawk via Flickr and a CC license
Hat tip: Right Wing Watch
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.