Principles are Hot: Ed Helms and gay chickens

Okay, anyone who knows me is aware of my long-standing crush on Ed Helms. I think he's just adorable. I'm a sucker for a funny guy who's willing to sing in public, and the fact that he's from Georgia is just icing on the cake. (Also a bit of a shock when I learned that, since I tend to assume that all funny people are Canadian.)

Now, about Chik-Fil-A... I couldn't eat at Chik-Fil-A for years because they cooked with peanut oil and peanuts make me not breathe. Being Chik-Fil-A-less was awful. Just looking at waffle fries made me cry. Then a few years ago Chik-Fil-A switched to a super-refined peanut oil that doesn't have the protein that causes us allergy sufferers to not breathe, and suddenly waffle fries and spicy chicken biscuits were back in my life again. Yay!

And - no exaggeration here - not a month after my first Chik-Fil-A experience since childhood, I found out that their CEO is a raging homophobe. Oh, come ON. So, I haven't been to a Chik-Fil-A since. Their owners are free to donate to anti-gay causes if they want, but I certainly don't have to help them out with my biscuit money.

This week, Chik-Fil-A's CEO Dan Cathy gave an interview in which he more explicitly outlined his family's ultra-conservative views: "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," he's quoted as saying. Well, good for you.

It was after that interview that Helms tweeted news of his apparent boycott of Chik-Fil-A, writing that they'd "lost a loyal fan." Now, it's not as if Cathy and family are going to change their views, or even their habit of donating to groups that actively work against gay rights just because the star of "The Office" isn't going to eat at Chik-Fil-A anymore. But it does matter when those us - not just celebrities - who benefit from privilege stick up for those who don't. It lets this group of people whose basic humanity is up for public debate know that they're not alone. And, more importantly, it signals to the people doing the debating just how far out of the mainstream they are.

As much as I take issue with Dan Cathy's view of "the biblical definition of family" - my divorced/remarried parents who are leaders in their church still make Jesus shake his head in shame, apparently* - they have every right to practice their interpretation of their faith in their home. And corporate America could only use more businesses that operate on principles like "don't cheat/lie/steal things."

But donating to groups that tried to "convert" gays to heterosexuality (Exodus International), or that are designated hate groups (Family Research Council), or that don't even have a web presence where someone could learn about their activities (the Marriage and Family Legacy Fund) is crossing the line. That's taking your private views and pushing them on the public. Again, they have every right to do that. But, unlike with one's private views, I then have every right to judge your public actions medieval and hateful and a total perversion of this religion that I love. The guy who said this is shaking his head in shame at one of us, Dan Cathy, and it isn't me.

So, no Chik-Fil-A for me. Y'all can still go there if you want; that's your business. But Ed and I are going to catch lunch somewhere else. (In spirit, at least.)

*I'm sorry, I'm still not finished with this... so, what, Dan Cathy, your family are better Christians because you're "still married to our first wives"? I must have missed the chapter in the Bible where Jesus goes over what it takes to be an extra-special Gold Star Christian. So, do you guys get to sit at the front of the bus to Heaven, and all the divorced/widowed/remarried/never married people get stuck in the back where the ride's all bumpy? Because I have to tell you, if Heaven's going to be just like middle school, I'd rather go to Hell with the gays.

What the (rhymes with "duck"), Huck?

A was going to do a "principles are hot" post about Natalie Portman severing her relationship with Dior following John Galliano's anti-semitic rant earlier this week - and I admire the hell out of her for taking a stand that way - but events, and Mike Huckabee's mouth, overtook me.

On Michael Medved's radio show the day after Portman won an Academy Award for Best Actress, Huckabee held her up as an example of Hollywood corrupting America's wholesome family values by setting a bad example (or something). Frankly, I'm not sure what he was going for. Let's figure it out together:

“People see a Natalie Portman or some other Hollywood starlet who boasts, ‘we’re not married but we’re having these children and they’re doing just fine,’” Mr. Huckabee told the conservative radio host Michael Medved on Monday. “I think it gives a distorted image. It’s unfortunate that we glorify and glamorize the idea of out-of-wedlock children.”

Hmmm... Here we have an example of someone staking a position on something other than facts. Or BS, if you want to think of it that way. In my job, when I prep people for media interviews, I stress that you should never veer off into areas that you don't know by heart, documentation included. If you start basing opinions on something you vaguely recall that you heard somewhere, then you risk looking like an idiot.

For instance, I don't think anyone could describe Portman as "boasting" about being a single mother. She and the baby's father seem to have gotten engaged as soon as they learned they were pregnant. Also, Portman's my age. Even if she weren't a highly paid film actor with a bachelor's degree fron an Ivy League school, most people our age are at the point where they can support a kid. The single mothers Huckabee talks about who find themselves limited in their education and work opportunities are typically younger. And, if one's going to pull out a prominent example of a young woman who got pregnant, say, in high school, and who's parlayed her notoriety into appearances on national magazines and reality TV shows, which probably reach a lot more impressionable young women than an R-rated art house film... I think that would not be Natalie Portman.

But there's a bigger problem with what Huckabee said that has nothing to do with an actor. More than one of them, actually. Let's start with this myth that no one had sex pre-marriage before the sexual revolution, when the awful feminists forced women to burn their underwear (or something). Not true. There's more than one person in my family who was born far less than nine months after their parents' wedding. (In the 50s.)There's also the memorable example of a relative born in the early 20th century more than a year after her "father" died. So don't blame sex on Hollywood.

But what's more troubling is his implication that unplanned pregnancies are all on the mother. Oh, those silly girls, going out and getting ideas from movie magazines and then running on down to the Knocked Up Store so they can be trendy and raise babies off the government. No men were involved in the making of this pregnancy.

And then there's real WTF. Let's let Huckabee explain:

My comments were about the statistical reality that most single moms are very poor, undereducated, can’t get a job, and if it weren’t for government assistance, their kids would be starving to death. That’s the story that we’re not seeing, and it’s unfortunate that society often glorifies and glamorizes the idea of having children out of wedlock.

If that reality is something that keeps Huckabee up at night, really and truly, then there are things he can do besides throwing up his hands and saying "Single mothers, whaddya do?" For starters, he could rethink his support of abstinence-only sex ed programs, which he supported as Arkansas' governor and as a 2008 presidential candidate. He could've eliminated the waiting period for abortions in his home state. (In 2008, Huckabee said he favored a Constitutional amendment banning abortion.) He could encourage other states and the federal government to promote healthy living as he did as governor. He could support raising the amount of Pell grants and other aid that make it possible for low-income people to attend college. He might consider supporting tax deductions for child care expenses. He would certainly prevail on his fellow Republicans to stop targeting safety net programs like the one that provides birth control and pap smears to low-income women.

But that might actually require effort, as opposed to casting judgment on people he doesn't know.

Principles are Hot!

Every time I try to start a regular feature, I get distracted and end up dropping it. So I'm just going to tell you upfront that this is NOT going to be a regular thing. But when I read about a guy (occasionally a woman, but I am straight after all) doing what I consider to be the single most attractive thing one can do, I want to highlight it. What is that sexy thing? Having principles, living them and acting on them.

First up, we have two guys I've crushed on for awhile now: Scott Fujita and Zach Galifianakis.

Fujita is an NFL linebacker currently playing for the Cleveland Browns. Jezebel has a great rundown of reasons to love Fujita, and today he added to the list by co-authoring an op-ed on the links between LGBT equality and immigration reform. Fujita speaks out on issues relating to adoption, family and reproductive choices, but he gets extra points with me for being so outspoken about LGBT rights even as he makes a living doing one of the most stereotypically "manly" jobs out there. HAWT.

I finally saw "The Hangover" a few weeks ago, and I don't mind writing that I'd kick Bradley Cooper out of bed any day for either Ed Helms or Zach Galifianakis. But Zach also gets points for growing up one county over from me in our our very rural corner of North Carolina. So part of my Zach-crush is identification. I don't know and I don't care if he was involved in cutting Mel Gibson from "The Hangover 2," but it is true that he's done some work for Growing Voices, whose projects include community development in Africa and, yes, domestic violence awareness here in N.C. Ha-aht.

I'm kind of a loudmouth myself (hence the whole "blogging into the void" thing...). While I can't tell you what Women(TM) want, I can assure you that this woman gets all warm and fuzzy when I see people stand up for something they believe in.