Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson: The Latest Victim of the PC Police

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas


But that's not true. They fired him based on statements he said in a GQ interview. He SAID something they did not agree with (and didn't want representing them as a company), so they fired him.

It wasn't based directly on his religious beliefs at all.

Besides - In said interview, he compared homosexuals to DRUNKS and TERRORISTS. Imagine if a professional athlete or famous actor said that. Don't you think their contracts would be terminated? Why should this guy get special treatment?

Restricted
reply to post by technical difficulties

 

So, if I murder someone, I'm not immoral. Got it.

Murder is wrong regardless of religion. There are valid reasons why murder is wrong. There are no valid reasons why homosexuality is wrong.

I'll be sure to explain myself more clearly next time, since it looks like I said that sins can't be immoral outside of religion after rereading it. It's pretty clear that's what you're referring to in your comment.

Some sins can be immoral outside of religion, that doesn't mean all sins are though. All that's required for something to be a sin is for it to be wrong in the eyes of religion. It actually being something that's wrong is optional.

the owlbear

addygrace
Why does this guy get canned for telling the truth. Homosexuality is a sin. Is A&E claiming it's not? It's lumped in there with every other sin, such as beastiality.

What if I were to say being a homophobe was a sin?
I don't need tv to tell me that we all have our rights to our own opinions, but sometimes...DISCRETION IS THE BETTER PART OF VALOR...
That goes for everyone, myself included

Owlbear out.

Sin is not what we want it to be. It's in the Bible. He's telling the truth. What is so offensive about that?

O'Reilly is discussing this right now.

ProfessorChaos

addygrace
Why does this guy get canned for telling the truth. Homosexuality is a sin. Is A&E claiming it's not? It's lumped in there with every other sin, such as beastiality.

To be fair, it is not a sin to people that do not believe that it is a sin, however it is common knowledge that it would be considered a sin by someone with Phil's belief system, so this is clearly a setup to send a message to the public.

"Accept and/or embrace things that you disagree with, or you will be punished."

He's basing it being a sin on the fact it's in the Bible. Nobody's being unfair. We don't get to pick and choose what we think is a sin. It's in the Bible.

reply to post by technical difficulties


Wow. You really believe that. Stunning.

I think it's more offensive, for people to act like it's not a sin. Why lie to ourselves. The Bible says every man sins, so why would saying homosexuality is a sin be offensive. It is what it is. If it's what you practice, it's what you practice. It's not offensive to me at all. Him saying its a sin is not offensive, at all, either. If you're offended. Take it up with the companies that publish the Bible, not the guy that references it.

Restricted
reply to post by technical difficulties

 

Wow. You really believe that. Stunning.

edit on 12/19/2013 by Restricted because: (no reason given)

That a sexual orientation between consenting adults isn't immoral? Not really stunning considering that there's no actual proof to say otherwise.

That being immoral in reality isn't a requirement for something to be a sin? Considering that homosexuality is considered a sin despite it not being immoral (only in the eyes of religion), it kind've goes without saying.

addygrace

the owlbear

addygrace
Why does this guy get canned for telling the truth. Homosexuality is a sin. Is A&E claiming it's not? It's lumped in there with every other sin, such as beastiality.

What if I were to say being a homophobe was a sin?
I don't need tv to tell me that we all have our rights to our own opinions, but sometimes...DISCRETION IS THE BETTER PART OF VALOR...
That goes for everyone, myself included

Owlbear out.

Sin is not what we want it to be. It's in the Bible. He's telling the truth. What is so offensive about that?

Don't go there...you're only setting yourself up.
Sin in the eyes of whom???
Not everyone (including the duck guys tied it in to the thread) ascribes to your holy book or your definition of sin out of it...

ExquisitExamplE
You... bought your children Duck Dynasty camo caps for Christmas? I just... I... well, Merry Christmas!

100% Redneck children. Little girl dresses in pink camo and has matching wardrobe for her Barbies, little boy dresses in regular or arctic camo while he builds LEGO fortresses on the family room floor. At 6 and 7, they've dressed more game and caught more salmon than many adults will in their entire lives. Merry Christmas to you, as well!

eNaR
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

Apparently he wan't looking very hard or it could be that the anvil that dropped on his head when he was a baby affected his ' sight ' !

I know, like, can you totally believe Phil Robertson did not spend his childhood as a leftist political activist & stuff?

Like, wow, he is so totally not kewl, what a terrible guy!

reply to post by technical difficulties


By your definition, any aberrant behavior could be acceptable.

Biologically speaking, homosexuality does not allow you to procreate if you follow your urges to their extreme expression.

Biologically speaking, the only reason sex exists is to continue a species. If we ceased to need it for procreation, we would evolve away from being sexual beings because sex is biologically expensive to maintain.

Therefore, homosexuality is unnatural because it interferes with your basic purpose and drive as an organism.

The reason why homosexuality is classified as a sin is because it is antithetical to natural law and nature's God, not because it necessarily perpetrates harm on another person. Also, understand that it is the act of homosexual sex that is the sin, not the identification of one's self as a homosexual. This also was made plain by Mr. Robertson in his interview.

Homosexual sex is pretty much on the same plain as all other sexual sins like adultery and promiscuity ... something else Mr. Robertson addressed.

technical difficulties
Some sins can be immoral outside of religion, that doesn't mean all sins are though. All that's required for something to be a sin is for it to be wrong in the eyes of religion. It actually being something that's wrong is optional.

If that is the case here, then why get even the least bit upset over it? All Phil said was that fornicators would end up in hell as they are sinners precisely according to a passage in the Bible. Let's examine that, if you decry him for stating "homosexuality is a sin", then logic would indicate that you probably also don't feel like homosexuality equals going to hell. People are getting pissed off because his Biblical definition of sin differs from their own personal definition of sin and said sinner is going to go to a place they don't believe in anyway?

Wow, forgive me for feeling less than impressed by that attitude. If you don't believe in the man's understanding of sin or agree with his understanding of hell, why spend any of your time lambasting him in the first place? Christ, some folks are acting like he's the new Fred Phelps when all he did was read a passage from the same Bible a billion human beings across the globe profess to believe in daily.

the owlbear

addygrace

the owlbear

addygrace
Why does this guy get canned for telling the truth. Homosexuality is a sin. Is A&E claiming it's not? It's lumped in there with every other sin, such as beastiality.

What if I were to say being a homophobe was a sin?
I don't need tv to tell me that we all have our rights to our own opinions, but sometimes...DISCRETION IS THE BETTER PART OF VALOR...
That goes for everyone, myself included

Owlbear out.

Sin is not what we want it to be. It's in the Bible. He's telling the truth. What is so offensive about that?

Don't go there...you're only setting yourself up.
Sin in the eyes of whom???
Not everyone (including the duck guys

tied it in to the thread) ascribes to your holy book or your definition of sin out of it...

What I'm saying is they asked him and he said it was a sin based on the Bible. People are extrapolating that out to mean he hates gays. By saying its a sin in the Bible, he's telling the truth. Do you agree?

Restricted
reply to post by technical difficulties

 

By your definition, any aberrant behavior could be acceptable.

No it wouldn't. If you can prove something is immoral using logic and reason, then it's immoral. You can't do that with homosexuality. This really shouldn't be that difficult to understand.

reply to post by burdman30ott6
He implied it was wrong, given the context of the quote. Homosexuality is neither right nor wrong. It's merely a sexual orientation. I too thought he just said homosexuality was a sin, until I read the interview.

burdman30ott6

technical difficulties
Some sins can be immoral outside of religion, that doesn't mean all sins are though. All that's required for something to be a sin is for it to be wrong in the eyes of religion. It actually being something that's wrong is optional.

If that is the case here, then why get even the least bit upset over it? All Phil said was that fornicators would end up in hell as they are sinners precisely according to a passage in the Bible. Let's examine that, if you decry him for stating "homosexuality is a sin", then logic would indicate that you probably also don't feel like homosexuality equals going to hell. People are getting pissed off because his Biblical definition of sin differs from their own personal definition of sin and said sinner is going to go to a place they don't believe in anyway?

Wow, forgive me for feeling less than impressed by that attitude. If you don't believe in the man's understanding of sin or agree with his understanding of hell, why spend any of your time lambasting him in the first place? Christ, some folks are acting like he's the new Fred Phelps when all he did was read a passage from the same Bible a billion human beings across the globe profess to believe in daily.

This is exactly what I've been trying to say. You are dead on. There's no other way to look at it. I starred ya.

ketsuko

Therefore, homosexuality is unnatural because it interferes with your basic purpose and drive as an organism.

edit on 19-12-2013 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)

Homosexuality is natural because it arises naturally in the real world, among people and animals. Nature doesn't care about man's theories about basic purposes. If you want to know what's natural, go spend some time on the farm and you'll see male animals trying to hump each other.

You know what is unnatural? The Bible. Man-made. Didn't grow on a tree or something. Written by man. Even if you think its inspired by God, it was physically written by the hands of men.

I support the man's right to express his opinion. I don't find someone who believes in the Bible and sin offensive. I'm sick of the P.C. B.S. going around like crazy. Can't we just let each other live, even if we disagree?

reply to post by TwoTonTommy


Animals don't know any better. Humans do.