Chicken?

In Titus 2, the apostle Paul is addressing characteristics of different groups of people; I would dare say in most of these cases, these qualities can be exhibited by all believers.  I think that the
exhortation to the young men is particularly instructive:
6 Likewise exhort the young men to be sober-minded,
7 in all things showing yourself to be a pattern of good works; in doctrine showing integrity, reverence, incorruptibility,
8 sound speech that cannot be condemned, that one who is an opponent may be ashamed, having nothing evil to say of you.

Here, special emphasis is given to the next generation that is critical even in the times in which we live.  We should all aspire to be sober-minded, which can be difficult when the enemy is pressing our buttons and attempting to get us to respond in a manner that is not representative of Christ.  We should seek to have "sound speech" that essentially confounds those who oppose us.  It sounds as if we are being encouraged to learn to disagree in an agreeable manner, firm in conviction, but following Christ's compassion.

+++++

Even when we encounter opposition in this world, we can know that God is with us, and He will empower us to speak and act in a manner that is consistent with the character of Christ. Luke 21 says:
12 But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons. You will be brought before kings and rulers for My name's sake.
13 But it will turn out for you as an occasion for testimony.
14 Therefore settle it in your hearts not to meditate beforehand on what you will answer;
15 for I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will not be able to contradict or resist.

When you travel by air, one of the intriguing features of the experience is the sometimes mind-boggling array of restaurants that you will find in the airport; with choices ranging from chain stores to local establishments, from sit-down to, well, stand-up and walk to a terminal seat.

Those flying in and out of San Antonio will, at least for a while, not be treated to the fast-growing fast-food chain known as Chick-fil-A.  According to FoxNews.com...

...six members of the San Antonio City Council rejected the inclusion of Chick-fil-A from the new Food, Beverage and Retail Prime Concession Agreement for the airport, KTSA reports. The seven-year contract for concession management at the terminal is expected to create $2.1 million in revenue for the Texas city; the motion that passed gave the green light to food shops including Smoke Shack and Local Coffee.

Now, why in the world would an airport governing board want to reject a favorite restaurant?  Well, you know the answer.  While political leanings of some dining establishments, like, say, Starbucks, are tolerated, the family- and faith-friendly philosophy upon which Chick-fil-A has been founded is out of favor with the San Antonio bourgeoisie.   The article quotes a San Antonio civic "leader:"

“With this decision, the City Council reaffirmed the work our city has done to become a champion of equality and inclusion," Councilman Roberto Treviño said of the vote, as per News 4 San Antonio. "San Antonio is a city full of compassion, and we do not have room in our public facilities for a business with a legacy of anti-LGBTQ behavior."

Notice the narrative; pay attention to the language: a belief in traditional values consistent with Biblical truth, a support for traditional marriage, is considered to be "anti-LGBTQ."  This was, of course, referring to CEO Dan Cathy's personal statement of support for marriage, oh, several years ago.  And, the chicken chain seems to have not learned.  Fox says that the liberal think-tank Think Progress had, "published tax documents revealing that in 2017, the Chick-fil-A Foundation gave over $1.8 million in charitable donations to some organizations that have come under scrutiny regarding their stance on LGBTQ issues."

For instance, according to the article:

Over $1.65 million of that contribution was given to the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, which writes in an online “Statement of Faith” that it believes “marriage is exclusively the union of one man and one woman,” and believes “sexual intimacy” should only be expressed “within [that] context,” CBS News reports.

Perhaps a number of our cultural ills could be solved if people would believe and behave consistent with those principles!   Well, Chick-fil-A responded with a statement that included Scripture:

“The press release issued by Councilmember Treviño was the first we heard of his motion and its approval by the San Antonio City Council. We agree with him that everyone is and should feel welcome at Chick-fil-A,” the rep said. “We have a fundamental code of conduct at Chick-fil-A: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

“The 140,000 people who serve customers in our restaurants on a daily basis represent and embrace all people, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender identity,” they continued. “Our intent is to have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.”

The restaurant has asked for "meaningful dialogue" with city officials in the wake of this rejection.

Attorney and columnist David French says the city is acting illegally, expressing "unconstitutional fake outrage."  He writes on the National Review website:

Simply put, the government may not condition the ability to operate a business on the government’s distaste for the religious or political donations of its owners. That’s pure viewpoint discrimination, and if Chick-fil-A chooses to sue, it will not only win, but the city council’s intolerance will likely cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of dollars.

He doesn't mince words when he says:

San Antonio is defying the law, it’s further polarizing our country, and it’s telling the Christian citizens and Christian ministries in its own city limits that their beliefs are so repugnant that the government should punish even private organizations who support their work.

Until the decision is reversed, San Antonio isn’t a “champion of equality and inclusion.” It’s an instrument of censorship and bigotry.

Now, Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas, has announced he will be investigating the actions of the San Antonio council, which could have violated state law; the Washington Examiner also reports:

Besides his letter to the council warning them of a state-level investigation, Paxton also sent a three-page letter to Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao, asking that “the Department of Transportation open an investigation into San Antonio’s potential breach of federal law and your agency’s regulations prohibiting religious discrimination by federal grant recipients.”

USA Today reports:

On Thursday, the First Liberty Institute sent a letter to Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao alleging that "religious discrimination" may have been made by members of the City Council of San Antonio during discussions to block the restaurant chain from the revamped Texas airport.

And, the airport in Buffalo has also announced its exclusion of the restaurant chain from its airport, according to USA Today.

This has occurred just months after Chick-fil-A was excluded from consideration by a university from being included in a list of options for campus dining.  This was at Rider University, where a dean, Cynthia Newman resigned due to the action of her employer.  She is quoted at the Baptist Press website:

"I am not willing to compromise my faith and Christian values and I will not be viewed as being in any way complicit when an affront is made to those values," Newman said. "I endeavor every day to do exactly what Chick-fil-A puts forward as its overarching corporate value: to glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to me and to have a positive influence on all who come into contact with me."

The university said, "Chick-fil-A was removed as one of the options based on the company's record widely perceived to be in opposition to the LGBTQ+ community."

Dr. Everett Piper, president of Oklahoma Wesleyan University, wrote for the Washington Times:

Christians are now considered verboten. Show any evidence of believing in a biblical God and biblical morality and you will be shut down. You will be forbidden to sell your product. Your “intolerance” will not be tolerated. To paraphrase Mr. Trevino, “Oh, you Christians may have your precious ‘freedom of religion.’ Yes, the Constitution may protect your right to believe in your silly God and spew your old-fashioned ideas about sin and salvation. But if you dare say anything about any of this in the public square, or if you have the actual temerity to try to practice the tenets of your faith in your business or your public life, we will sue you, we will silence you, we will fine you, we will malign you, we will blackball you, we will de-platform you, we will not buy from you or sell to you. We will crush you. Submit or be destroyed.”

So many takeaways from these developments.  And, the first surrounds the concept of a misrepresentation of Christian teaching.  Because Christians support a view of marriage that is consistent with the Bible, they are characterized as being people of hate and intolerance.  A believer can call out the sin of homosexuality without "hating" the person.  As it's been said, the most loving thing a Christian can do is to point out areas of sin.  And, despite efforts allowing the LGBT agenda to infiltrate the Church, we must continue to hold to the timeless truths of the Scriptures and not compromise our beliefs.

The pressure is enormous, and some evangelical leaders have begun to accommodate those who identify as gay or same-sex attracted; allowing people to identify in that way, superseding their identity in Christ.   There is talk of SSA people being allowed to "flourish" in the Church, rather than to repent and crucify the flesh - no talk of freedom or change; rather, the direction is toward acceptance of these desires, as long as they are not acted upon in a physical act.

We also see in our culture a distinct lack of engagement.  Instead of engaging in dialogue with Chick-fil-A, the powers that be in San Antonio are, to use another meaning of the term, being "chicken," not courageous.  It is very easy to hide behind a corporate or government banner and hurl false narratives.  Discussion can be productive and lead to understanding; lack of it can result in polarization and lead to further contempt.  But, when we engage, we have to make sure that we are grounded in the principles of Scripture.