We’ve seen this before. Hobby Lobby, Chick-fil-A, and now the Washington Redskins have all come under fire for not fitting into the politically correct agenda of people on the Left. Despite millions and millions of dollars being poured into groups supporting government force to advance the agenda, the American people simply are not buying it.
Chick-fil-A was one of the first major corporations to come under attack by the PC crowd. In an interview on The Ken Coleman Show, Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy said the following
“I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.'”
Now did Cathy say he wanted homosexuals executed? No.
Did he say he wanted them to be ostracized and outcast from society? No.
He simply stated his beliefs as a Christian about the definition of marriage, based on Biblical principle. However, the PC crowd took it and ran with. There was outcry from the Left to boycott Chick-fil-A because of their “anti-gay” stance. However, such a boycott never came to pass. In fact, quite the opposite.
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee created and promoted the event “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day” to be held on August 1, 2012. Well, it turns out the Chick-fil-A had its biggest business day in history because of the support!
Where did the PC crowd go? Back into the shadows, searching for another target.
That next target came with Hobby Lobby, which came under fire for not providing specific contraception methods under the new healthcare law. The Green family, who own the company, said that the requirement was a violation of their freedom of religion under the 1st Amendment.
“We simply cannot abandon our religious beliefs to comply with this mandate.” -David Green, Hobby Lobby CEO & Founder.
Again, Mike Huckabee came in a spread the word to help Hobby Lobby from this abuse of power. The case is currently in Supreme Court, as there are very ‘High Stakes’ as the Court is weighing in on the case.
“The stakes are very high in the Conestoga and Hobby Lobby case,” explained Matt Bowman regarding the First Amendment implications in the lawsuit. “It involves fundamental issues of whether or not religious freedom belongs to every American, and whether the government can redefine freedom to force citizens to buy abortion pills for other people.”
The outcome of the case is unknown as of the writing of this article. However, the implications will be extremely far reaching, as the entire basis of the Affordable Care Act will be in jeopardy (forcing people to have health insurance, and forcing businesses to provide it).
Hobby Lobby won a preliminary injunction against the contraception mandate from U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton in Oklahoma.
In the meantime, the attackers on Hobby Lobby have seemingly disappeared into the shadows again. Support against Hobby Lobby has diminished, as more support for freedom of religious conscience is taking precedence over forcing business owners to violate their religious beliefs.
Now we come to the Washington Redskins, and the PC crowd wants to force the team to change their name because it is “offensive” and “disparaging” to Native Americans.
Some, such as Harry Reid, have been calling on the Redskins to change their name, but on June 18, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office canceled the Redskins’ trademark registration, calling the team name “disparaging.”
The Redskins, of course, are appealing the decision, and the trademark is still in effect during the appeal, contrary to the opinion of some. In fact, only 11% of people polled by the AP believe that the team name should be changed, and among nonwhite football fans, only 18% believe the name should be changed.
Where is the massive outcry for changing the team name? 11% at large, and 18% among nonwhite fans can hardly count as a quorum, let alone a majority.
But even if the team name was offensive or “disparaging,” why should we allow the government, at gunpoint, force a private entity to alter their branding and logo? It’s a gross abuse of power to accommodate a very small subset of a minority special privileges to “feel good” while violating private property rights of another?
This is an extremely dangerous route to go down, and Americans are starting to recognize that. If the government can tell the Redskins to change their name because it is “disparaging,” what is to stop them from doing likewise to another?
Maybe the New York Yankees’ franchise disparaging to Northerners? Or maybe the San Fransisco Giants’ franchise disparaging to really tall people? Perhaps the Detroit Redwings’ franchise could be disparaging to fallen angels!
The point is that there must be a place where government control over private entities must be stopped. Forcing a business to change their name is way past that point. How can we call ourselves a “free country” when even the right to name your own business is under fire?
Americans at large are beginning to ask themselves that very question.Follow Seth on Twitter: @sconnell1776