October 17, 2008

The Golden Arches Parable

My sister used to work at McDonald's, as a manager. She always had the funniest stories to tell (she worked the overnight shift, from which spawned the strangest experiences). The McDonald's "Golden Arches" sign is not very tall and is located on a small portion of lawn next to the parking area. The sign below it (usually proclaiming how many customers served or other announcements, like "Now Hiring Days") was fodder for teenage pranksters. My sister described to me how one night the sign had been altered, most likely by the snickering group of teenage boys who had sauntered in earlier that evening.

The sign had previously read "NOW HIRING DAYS," but that night a middle-aged woman walked in to report that the sign was displaying "NOW HIRIN GAYS." My sister, who has an excellent but not politically-correct sense of humor, did her best to stifle the burst of laughter forming in her gut. "Oh my, that's awful," she laughed. "I think it's another teen prank; I'll have the maintenance guy get on it when he arrives." The woman stared at her, astonished that it wasn't an urgent matter, and walked back out.

About an hour later, an elderly couple walked in. They asked for my sister and timidly told her that something was amiss with the sign outside. Sis chuckled again (she does love pranks). "Yes, we know about it, and we're waiting for the maintenance man to get here." The couple apologized (for what, I don't know) and continued their breakfast order.

Throughout the night-- I was surprised to learn that so many people actually read McDonald's signs-- a few customers mentioned the sign. Some thought it was quite humorous, while others were miffed that McDonald's wasn't taking such "discrimination" seriously.

The policy for the night crew is that they are forbidden to leave the building from 11pm to 6am. This is why no one at the restaurant replaced the sign; and the maintenence man doesn't arrive until morning. So up the sign stayed until late morning, when it was finally restored to "NOW HIRING DAYS."

I remember that story because I read this headline at WorldNetDaily this morning:

"McDonald's surrenders! Boycott declared over; Family group says fast-food giant agrees not to promote 'gay' agenda"

A corporate executive for McDonald's restaurants who had been on board of directors of the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce has stepped down following a boycott of the chain organized by the pro-family American Family Association.

McDonald's officials confirmed today to WND that Richard Ellis, who had been named to the "gay" chamber board after McDonald's contributed $20,000 to the organization, "made a personal decision to step down" after he accepted a new position with McDonald's Restaurants of Canada.

McDonald's officials also told AFA the company has no plans to renew its membership in the special interest group when it expires in December.

"We appreciate the decision by McDonald's to no longer support political activity by homosexual activist organizations," AFA chairman Donald E. Wildmon said in a prepared statement.


As much as I applaud the temerity of these pro-family groups, I've stated before that I wish these groups would clean their own houses before attacking sinners for their unclean houses (1 Corinthians 5:9-13). I'm tired of their "culture" war against homosexuality and etc, especially when I read that divorce, pornography, immorality, and humanism runs just as rampant in the churches as in the world. And as much as I believe in heterosexual marriage as the only definition of marriage, it is not the job of government nor politicians to define marriage-- it is the job of the church influencing society, which the church has obviously failed to do for the past century (see J. Gresham Machen's Christianity and Liberalism and Francis Schaeffer's The Great Evangelical Disaster). For even the churches to view homosexuality as a "political" issue is a disgrace as well as an error.

I have been against the Constitutional Marriage Amendment because it is beyond the scope and authority of the government to dictate the issue. I hope Christians who support altering such a serious document (the Constitution) know what they are truly doing-- they are creating a tyrant, just as the humanists are creating a tyrant. The Christians think that creating a tyrant in favor of Christians will somehow prove beneficial; but once you create your tyrant, beware; for you will find that the tyrant you create will one day rise up to control you. ("Give us a king!" they cried).

America's founders did not build our form of government to enact social change and dictate social issues. I agree with Clarence Thomas, who observed:
"America was founded on a philosophy of individual rights, not group rights."

Does McDonald's have the right to hire gays? Yes, they do. Do the pro-family groups have the right to protest and boycott the business? Yes, they do. Does McDonald's have the right to change their position? Yes, they do.

It is government that is restricted. Government does not have the right to force McDonald's to hire gays; government does not have the right to prevent protests and boycotts; and government does not have the right to dictate McDonald's business policies.

It is within the scope of government to acknowledge and enforce justice. Justice, as our founders stated, is found with the Ten Commandments and conviction that every individual will be held accountable to God for his/her actions. I'm sorry if some people don't like to hear that. Perhaps you should move to a country with the government you do like, rather than work to subvert this good form of government that has served us so well for two centuries. Tacitus had said:

The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.

If the churches were doing what they are supposed to be doing-- convincing hearts and minds rather than making our culture more palatable for themselves-- we wouldn't even have these problems and divisions and endless streams of laws now regulating our every move and thought. The answer is not more legislation, more government dictation. The answer is repentance, first in the church, then in society.

2 comments :

  1. akaGaGa said...

    Well done, Cato, well done. It does my heart good to read this. I had begun to think I was alone in thinking that responsibility for the ills of our society rests within the church, not the government.

    You might want to read my post on this subject: http://akagaga.blogspot.com/2008/09/christian-view-of-church-and-state.html

  2. Hercules Mulligan said...

    This is a great post, Cato. Thanks so much.

    I think that your idea is very important to grasp, and that God has been impressing this truth of the responsibility of the Christian Church, not upon the great and wise and mighty, but upon those who have open ears and open hearts.

    Interestingly enough, this very question was raised at the last meeting of the Christopher Dawson Society of the AHI, which I attended last Monday night. I will blog about it later, but I was astounded to hear one of the attendees say, that the responsibility for the moral downturn of our nation lies at the doorstep of the Church. He then posed the question of "why." Why have "religious institutions" failed to relevantly address this nation's moral decay? Why have they failed?

    Unfortunately, I did not get the opportunity to answer this question, due to time restraints, and not being able to catch my breath (I'm usually too timid to raise my voice in public gatherings like this). However, I will elaborate upon my intended answer in a post, on The Foundation Forum. And when I do, I'll consider linking to your post, if that's alright.

    God bless.