Mike Farrell’s On Point Response to Detractor’s “Oxymoron” Alert
Accessibility Notice
This post was created on the previous version of the MRFF website, and may not be fully accessible to users of assistive technology. If you need help accessing this content, please reach out via email.On Feb 14, 2019, at 3:00 PM, (name withheld) wrote:
Oxymoron alert???
Confusing, you are for religious freedom and yet wish to censor the potential religious viewpoints of someone?
I don’t understand………..
(name withheld)
xxxxxx, Ohio
USA
Response from MRFF Founder and President Mikey Weinstein
From: Mikey Weinstein [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 6:15 PM
To: (name withheld)
Subject: Re: Chick-fil-A
(name withheld), I am not sure what your particular objections are but I can tell you that this individual told the Associated Press yesterday that the Chick-fil-A foundation does not contribute to anti-LGBTQ organizations which is a direct lie… That by itself is pretty miserable, brother…
From: (name withheld)
Date: February 14, 2019 at 3:29:03 PM PST
To: “‘Mikey Weinstein'” <[email protected]>
Subject: Chick-fil-A
Well hello Mr. Weinstein!
I am very surprised to get a reply from someone of your stature – just figured I was sounding off into the great void.
My objection (more like confusion of your organizations objectives) is;
If your organization is for the support of religious freedom guaranteed to us by the United States Constitution, why would you object to someone that holds the traditional Christian view that marriage is a creation of God meant to only be for a man and a woman and not for homosexuals?
How is silencing a person with that viewpoint match up with your objectives – I would think you would be saying go ahead and supporting their right to speak their mind even if you don’t agree???
Regards,
(name withheld)
xxxxxxx, Ohio
USA
Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member Mike Farrell
Hi Mr. (name withheld),
In reading your initial message to Mr. Weinstein and then your follow-up, I sense what I hope is a sincere confusion. Acting on the assumption I am correct, I want to try to clarify a couple of things.
The mission of the MRFF is clear: it is dedicated to the protection of the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religious or non-religious choice of those in the military. It was formed because of the personal experience of Mr. Weinstein and his children, all graduates of the Air Force Academy. During his time at the Academy Mikey, a Jew, experienced the kind of casual bigotry that is unfortunately present in our society. In addition to that, however, he also experienced more serious attacks and ugly expressions of antisemitism and dealt with them privately.
When, years later, he found that his sons were experiencing not only the same thing but a much more militant and more widely and openly expressed version of this behavior (his son came to him and said he was going to get into trouble. When Mikey asked why, his son explained that he had taken as much of the grotesque behavior as he could stomach and was going to deal with the harassment head on) Mikey asked him not to and instead went to the leaders of the Academy himself, told them of the problem and expected it to be resolved.
It was not.
In time, in the face of what quickly became clear was an attempt on the part of a zealous strain of fundamentalist Christianity to infiltrate both the ranks and the leadership of the Air Force Academy (and others) in order to further a campaign promoting the conversion of our country into a Christian nation and the military into Jesus’ Army, MRFF was born.
Today it is one of the leading organizations in the country working to promote and protect the separation of church and state.
The current situation that has caused your confusion has to do with the invitation of a man who represents a business that has a history of anti-gay bigotry. While homosexuality is not a religion, the MRFF has widened its scope to include protection of the rights of gay and transgender women and men in the military because it is the right thing to do, but also because an anti-gay agenda is very much part and parcel of the fundamentalist Christian, or dominionist, belief system.
When the Academy invites a speaker for its National Character and Leadership Symposium there is, inherent in the invitation, a suggestion of respect and admiration for the speaker and what she or he represents. The young, need I say impressionable, women and men at the Academy who are presented this speaker and what she or he represents are given the clear impression that this is someone whose life, character and viewpoint is consistent with that of the Academy and the Air Force.
The man in question has a right to believe as he chooses, but the anti-gay philosophy he represents is not, in the view of the MRFF, a viewpoint that should be given the imprimatur of the Academy, the U.S. Air Force and, by implication the U.S. Government.
If I may add a personal note, your suggestion that an anti-gay belief or philosophy is “a traditional Christian view” is certainly no longer the case.
Best,
Mike Farrell
(MRFF Board of Advisors)
Recent Posts
- March 25, 2024 | 2 comments
- March 14, 2024 | 2 comments
- March 8, 2024 | No comments
As I understand Mike Farrell’s logic, if the company did not engage in anti-LGBTQA bias then the speaker would be welcome. The personal views of the speaker are their own at that point, not a representation of the company.
That said, because the company Chick-Fil-A supports anti-LGBTQA groups, having the company represented fails to live up to the code of the symposium. He said it better but sometimes to get the point it needs to restated more than once.