Chicken and All That

The Fuzz has not been stuffing himself with Chick-fil-A chicken these days.  But that's only cause he doesn't care much for the stuff.
He does have a few thoughts though.
Professor Warren J. Blumenfeld writes:
 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/warren-j-blumenfeld/chick-fil-a-ceo-makes-no-bones-about-biblical-marriage_b_1720074.html)-
"Questioned about the opposition his company, Chick-fil-A, has received on its position supporting the so-called 'traditional family,' CEO Dan Cathy quipped, 'Well, guilty as charged.'  In a recent article appearing in the Baptist Press (July 22), he continued that 'We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.'"
Professor Blumenfeld then cites several examples of what he claims are "biblical principles". 
First Abraham:
"Approximately 4,000 years ago, Abraham (commonly referred to as "the father of the Jewish and Arab people" and patriarch of Jews, Christians and Muslims) was a distant ancestor [assume he meant descendant]  of Shem, son of Noah. When his wife Sarah (who in fact was his half-sister having a common father) was unable to conceive, as it is written, Sarah told Abraham to conceive a child with her Egyptian maidservant Hagar, who birthed a son, Ishmael."
This is actually an example of how not to do things.  This affair resulted in nothing but trouble for Abraham  and resulting generations.  The people in the Bible are as flawed as any of the rest of us, and everything they do should not be emulated. 
Jacob:
His polygamy caused family strife.  This is another example of how not to do things.
David:
Professor Blumenfeld implies that David and Jonathan's relationship was homosexual, quoting  2 Samuel 1:25-26: "...You have been very pleasant to me. Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women."  This is going a bit beyond what is actually written.  But, even if it were the case (which I doubt) David was also an adulterer and murderer.  These are hardly traits to emulate either.
Ruth:
"Naomi and Ruth likewise loved one another romantically."  This is another assumption based on a single word, that in it self, in no way implies a sexual relationship.
Mr. Cathy would be viewing the Bible from a Christian perspective of course, which does not condone polygamy.  Nor does it condone homosexuality.  Romans 1:26,27: "... even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature... Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men..."
Professor Blumenfeld quotes Ephesians 5:22: "Wives, be submissive to your husbands..." but ignores Ephesians 5:21: "submitting to one another..." and Galatians 3:28 "...there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
To equate Christians who oppose same sex marriage with Islamic fundamentalists who stone adulterers is a bit much in light of Jesus' own actions in the 8th chapter of John.
If same sex couples want to live together, that is their own business.  But let's not try to make it the same thing as marriage.  It seems to be only common sense to see this as a male- female relationship.
Mr. Cathy has every right to express his personal opinion on this subject.  If someone is offended by this, they don't have to eat his chicken.  Trying to run Chick-fil-A out of town, seems a bit excessive.