Note: This column contains language that may be unsuitable for some readers, especially thin-skinned homosexual activists and hypocritical bigots.
The faux outrage over Chick-fil-a's stance on gay marriage has moved to my little campus of UNCW, which stands for the University of North Carolina – We Teach Students to be B*tchy Little Bigots. And no student has elevated bitchiness to a Zen art quite like Brice Horton. He recently decided to take action to get Chick-fil-a removed from the university food court because he has to have all of his meals prepared by people who approve of homosexual sodomy. And apparently, he can’t just choose to eat elsewhere.
Horton has confessed to his bigotry - admitting he's contacted Aramark, the company that handles all of the food choices at UNCW. For the record, I am assuming that food preferences, like sexual practices, are determined by choice, not by genetics.
UNCW released a statement just a couple of days after Horton waged his jihad against freedom of religion and diversity of food choice. UNCW announced that Chick-fil-a will remain on campus. It must have been gut-wrenching for UNCW to make a correct common-sense decision. But even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Although correct, the reason UNCW gave for the decision, as quoted by local television station WECT, is disturbing. They were quoted as saying that the management and employees at the Chick-fil-a location at UNCW are Aramark employees who "fully adhere to the diversity and inclusion principles specified by Aramark and UNCW."
In other words, the university appears to have taken the time to investigate the Aramark employees in order to see whether they had the right (that means left) values needed to remain on campus. What happened to our commitment to diversity of opinion? It is worth noting that there is no indication that UNCW investigated Brice Horton to see whether he “adheres to the diversity and inclusion principles” needed to remain on campus. Obviously, he does not.
The entire incident shows that UNCW is willing to investigate people to determine whether they should be excluded in order to promote inclusion. This could not get more Orwellian, could it? Yes it could. The entire statement issued by UNCW is worth reading:
UNCW is an institution that values diversity and inclusion. As part of the university experience, we recognize the right of all people to speak freely – even if that speech goes against our values. We also recognize the right of individuals to make their own choices as consumers. The management and employees at the Chick-fil-A location on campus are Aramark employees who fully adhere to the diversity and inclusion principles specified by Aramark and UNCW. This means they respect the diverse backgrounds, styles, values and beliefs of their customers and employees, and they strive to offer choice and variety to the UNCW community. UNCW does not have plans to alter this food service option that Aramark provides to our campus.
Did everyone catch that? UNCW will respect speech even if “that speech goes against our values.” What are UNCW’s collective values? More specifically, what speech did Chick-fil-a express that goes against UNCW’s collective values? Is UNCW saying that it supports same-sex marriage? If not, why do they seem to be distancing themselves from Chick-fil-a while “allowing” them to remain on campus?
If I were UNCW Chancellor Gary Miller, I would do three things immediately. First, I would clarify UNCW’s stance on same-sex marriage, which had better be one of neutrality. Second, I would fire the incompetent who wrote the Chick-fil-a press release. Finally, I would expel Brice Horton immediately.
Of course, the moral case for expelling Brice Horton has nothing to do with his beliefs about same-sex marriage. It has everything to do with his lack of emotional maturity. If we don’t get this kid off campus, he might encounter other ideas that might cause him to lose his composure. He might throw another hissy fit, which would lead others to say that gay activists are nothing more than emotionally inferior lunatics. Such speech would promote stereotypes. And that’s the kind of speech that goes against our collective values.
Wherever you stand on this issue, it is clear that we need to exclude non-conformists who do not share our collective values. How else are we going to promote diversity and inclusion?