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

amazing

openminded2011
reply to post by burdman30ott6


I do not care how gay people conduct themselves in the privacy of their homes, or if they want to marry. None of my business. I am not against gay rights. But I am also in favor of peoples right to have an opinion that they can express. The issue I take with the gay community is that they are all about rights, except when it has to do with the right of someone to have a difference of opinion with them. That is a form of repression, which ironically what they are supposed to be diametrically opposed to. Its funny but they will never really be free until they are able to accept the fact that not everyone in the world is on board with them, without reacting the way they do. The way they react to things like this gives the impression that they secretly feel that their position is too weak to stand up to criticism. So they have to crush it every time. They are actually working against themselves by doing it. The smart thing to do would be to ignore it instead of giving it all the attention they are now giving.

edit on 20-12-2013 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)

Well...no...imagine that you were born different, gay even and you didn't have a choice in the matter and then someone says that you should go straight to hell. How would that make you feel? Then imagine that you were born black and Phil said...hey...you were better off when you didn't have as many civil liberties or legal rights as us white guys. How would that make you feel? He's a scumbag. He does have a right to say whatever he wants and I would die fighting for his right to free speech. But we, I, whoever has a right as well to oppose scumbags like this every chance we get.

Regardless of what he says, just because you don't like what he says does not mean you have the right to silence him. In effect you are doing to him what homosexuals accuse others of doing to them, ie repression for a different viewpoint. Its freedom of speech. Disagree with it if you want but he has the right to believe that just like you have the right to believe what you want. I dont like what a lot of people say about a lot of things but I would never presume just because I dont like their viewpoints they have to shut up. Is that not, in effect exactly what gay people are fighting? They want the right not to be silenced, why is it they are allowed that right to believe what they want but one one else is if it opposes their view? That sounds a lot like fascism. Let him rant. Live and let live. I am sure he could care less about what gays do, he was just expressing a personal belief. As far as I know we are all allowed to have them.

Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson and his family believe they have been ‘hung out to dry’ by TV network A&E after he was suspended for homophobic comments made in a magazine interview, MailOnline can reveal.

Sources within the close-knit Louisiana clan say they are convinced A&E are manipulating the controversial situation to bring them – and particularly Robertson – back into line after Television executives grew tired of the family pushing their deeply-held, Christian beliefs.

They also think the network could have done something to stop the controversial GQ article being made public, because an A&E representative was present during the interview with patriarch, Roberston, 67.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... -comments.html#ixzz2o7PSdwjw
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Yes a rep. was present

‘It is our belief that they knew what was going to happen and then used the situation to exercise control over Phil.

‘It is our understanding that when the TV executives came up with the concept for the show they wanted it to be a case of people laughing at a bunch of backward rednecks.

‘But when it didn’t turn out like that and people actually started identifying with the way the family behaved and were laughing with them, not at them, they became uncomfortable. It did not sit will with the New York TV types.

and I believe this too.

and BTW,last night Jon Stewart defended Phil’s “right to say ignorant &hit”

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by nightmare_david

 

20 some odd pages of nonsense, and you said all that needs to be said. Well put.

There are 44, well 43 when you posted, and i beg to differ, there are some very good post here.

What's missing here is that you can't force people to think the way you do. The brain doesn't work that way. You can paint them into a corner and get them to parrot your mantra, but unless they personally embrace a belief it ain't gonna happen.

The gays will have to accept that some people have an aversion to their lifestyle. Not everyone is going to show them the love and there's nothing wrong with that. THAT is normal.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


what does having an a&e rep at an interview have to do with the interview being published? Once said, that ship has sailed. And you really believe A&E isn't "comfortable" with the #1 show on TV? They just want more $ and this has made them happy. Bad publicity is publicity.

John Stewart is right. He has every right to stay stupid stuff. Doesn't mean there aren't consequences, but he can say all the backwards idiotic things he wants.

CJ

reply to post by LeatherNLace

The Robertson's dont hate gays they hate the sin of homosexuality.

youtu.be...

I'm glad someone mentioned the fact that an A&E rep was present at the GQ interview. It's beginning to look like this is another lie that the holier-than-thou gay PC police are foisting on the world's consciousness. From the poor sot that was murdered in Wyoming years ago ostensibly because he was homosexual whose name became a rallying call, but it turns out he was just a drug dealer, to the waitress that forged the receipt belonging to a totally innocent family saying they refused her a tip because of her lifestyle. One poster somewhere in these threads wrote that the gay community is shot through with something like, paraphrasing here, over exuberant animosity or something close to that. Yeah, that's being pretty charitable IMHO. GLAAD has had a huge backlash over this idiocy. Hopefully it will set them back years if they keep it up.

Stormdancer777

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by nightmare_david

 

20 some odd pages of nonsense, and you said all that needs to be said. Well put.

There are 44, well 43 when you posted, and i beg to differ, there are some very good post here.

edit on 083131p://bSaturday2013 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

Of those 40 pages, 20 are useless.

(ok, so i just guessed at the page count, and you are right)

reply to post by ColoradoJens


For one the rep would have known what was being said, for A&E to feign ignorance, bologna,

set up

Besides he didn't say that at the interview it was said on a program already aired.

I'm done

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan




Ignorance abounds, something i am good at

reply to post by Astrocyte


First of all, I didnt say we were on the verge of despotism. My meaning was that the groundwork is being laid for the emergence.

I cannot believe that people (which they do) would rather trade their freedoms for security.

Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.

As our govt grows, it becomes ever more ponderous in nature, allowing for the excesses of which we are getting a taste of here and now.

It wasn't until WWII was in full swing that some germans (non-jewish, of course) began to realize what they had lost. Some realized earlier, no doubt, but as long as prosperity was the name of the day they were fine with it. Others realized, or rather, owned up to the facts only once the war was being lost....

With the right leadership, the right conditions, despotism emerges easily and at times very quietly.

The NSA is violating our right to privacy. The IRS is exercising it's (or was) power on behalf of a single political party. One branch spying on another (House of Reps cloak room, by the executive dept) and it goes on and on...that doesnt even take into account the lies and deceptions perpetrated on the populace.

MrPlow

beezzer

MrPlow

beezzer

MrPlow
Phil Robertson is a victim of his own ignorance...left to suffer his convoluted interpretations.

boo hoo

So do you feel that people, anyone, should be punished, denied basic rights, because they are ignorant?

(Careful, the sword cuts both ways)

That would be a valid question if Phil Robertson, a #ing reality TV star, actually was denied basic rights.
He is a television star, giving answers to a magazine. You really enjoy believing in your mind he was just some regular dude who said some # and then was tackled, beaten, and thrown in jail for what he said...?

Phil Robertson exercised his right to express his anti gay rhetoric and his employer exercised their right to fire him. Ya know what happened after all was said and done...? Everyone involved still has all of their basic human rights and are still free to pursue happiness. The end. Freedom worked for all, like it's supposed to.

edit on 20-12-2013 by MrPlow because: (no reason given)

You're wrong.

Let me explain.

A&E was is their full (cowardly) right to fire him. True.

But they only did it under the pressure of GLAAD.

So you wrote a post that I disagreed with.
I can (and am) posting a rebuttal.

But if I were GLAAD, I'd contact ATS and have you banned.

Do you see the difference now?

Whatever A&E's motivation, they were well within their right to do it.
And if you contacted anyone to have me banned for whatever reason, I would simply be banned from one website. Nothing more, nothing less. I would not lose any freedoms or basic human rights. I am only on this site posting because the owners of it allow me to. It is their free choice to take that away from me.
So no, I'm not wrong. Sorry

You say they were in their right to fire him, but yet his views were presented in a religious context. That enters into the civil rights arena.
Firing Phil for expressing his religious beliefs is illegal, his civil rights were violated. He did not advocate gays be discriminated against, he did not advocate violence against gays....all those claiming hate speech and "anti-gay rhetoric" are, IMO, displaying THEIR ignorance and their support for a culture that would support civil rights for some, but not others.

Freedom of Speech is specifically a part of the Bill of Rights to prevent the govt from taking action against individuals for expressing themselves regarding beliefs and even opinions regardless of Truth, regardless of facts.

Since that is one of the pillars of Freedom and of what our country stands for, does it make sense that in the private sector we ignore such a noble philosophy? Does it make sense that the private sector should react in a knee jerk manner to punish those who think differently?

What I am seeing is that Americans seem to want to hold our govt to a higher standard than themselves. What is wrong with this picture??

Despotism arises in many forms. Should we not call it out and demand a reckoning wherever we find it?

The Despotism of the PC police MUST be called out. I have every right to express myself and should be able to do so without fear of retribution provided I am not advocating violence, provided I am not advocating illegal acts. I should be able to be honest and not fear the repression of the PC police to a degree that I become afraid to express my opinions.

NoRulesAllowed

Christian Voice
reply to post by luciddream

 

No one uttered hate speech of any kind. If you think he did then you have some deep seated emotional issues.

SEMANTICS!! Entirely irrelevant!

He already did the required step because he consciously (or sub-consciously) lumped in homosexuals with prostitutes and swindlers, in his eyes they are criminals. The REST is entirely semantics, whether he only THINKS homosexuals are equal to criminals or openly would call upon violent actions in a "real" hate-speech...it doesn't matter. What matters is his mind-set here and it's entirely clear and obvious from the context in what and how he said it.

And do NOT argue back that it cannot be hate speech (or disguised hate, intolerance whatever) because he bases what he says and thinks on the bible. THIS MAKES IT NOT LESS HATE, in the same way as it doesn't become more justified or legit if a Muslim terrorist would call upon on war again the West (or justifying stoning of women) JUST BECAUSE THE QUARAN MAY SAY SO it's ok.

Worse even, that you and similar people do not even recognize your own hate and intolerance...and how you conditioned yourself (or let others condition you) to become prejudging and intolerant - because this IS THE BASE of hate. You need to have a "reason" to hate, whether this reason is rational or not. Assuming that homosexuals are in the same group of people like "swindlers" and criminals is all that's needed.

hate speech...is a matter of semantics, by your own definition.

You would clamp down on free speech because everything stated that is counter to your beliefs is hate speech. There is, apparently, no room for freedom of expression in your world.

What about Phil's civil rights to worship as he chooses? His remarks were made (given the paraphrased quote from the Bible) in a religious context. Therefore his civil rights were violated when he was terminated by A&E.

Freedom of Speech is a concept just as much as it is part of the Bill of Rights. It is apparent that we hold our govt to a higher standard (by far) than we hold ourselves. There are those of us who would prohibit Freedom of Speech (as evidenced severely by the content of this forum topic) in some, but yet demand it for other groups.

Personally...in a country that claims equality as one of it's standards I find the definition of "protected groups" to be absolutely hypocritical and disgusting.

Either we are all equal, or we are not. By today's definition we most definitely are not.

reply to post by Lingweenie


"if I went around saying whatever I want about someone."

is it libleous?,,or slanderous or hurtfull???,,it's ok,,,,,cause its "free speach"???

do u have any reverance for the cost in , blood,,that ,,it cost others, too give u the gift of "free" speach?

really??

Thanks to those who liked my post

The fact that an A&E rep was present for that interview gives a little support to the theory that Phil has become a target. Not for his religious beliefs, but his political views. They are using the interview as their excuse for why they really want him gone.

Seriously people, watch the show if you haven't before. Do they make it clear they are Christians? Yes. Do they use the entire show to push that on others? Not at all. The biggest religious related part of each episode is the family prayer at the end. When Phil starts quoting the bible in some episodes, take a wild guess at what he is trying to get out of it, a little "honey on the biscuits" from Mrs. Kay LMAO.

BTW there has been a video of Phil saying the exact same stuff on YouTube since 2010. Where was the outrage then? He starting showing his political side in public more often and became a target for that. Not his religious beliefs. Certain people in power saw him as a threat who was gaining some attention and made their move. Plain and simple.

I will defend Phils right to be a jerk but I seriously doubt if he would extend me the same courtesy being as how I have a completely different religious background and attitude.

Blacks may have been happy and singing where he lived; where I grew up in Lubbock, Texas, they were abused and segregated.

I knew that Duck Dynasty guy was homophobic & a racist before he made the comments.
They say dont judge a book by its cover but Jesus look at that cover

pauladaballa777
Notice how he says "homosexual offenders" instead of just homosexuals. He is not saying that being homosexual is a sin, but the act of sodomy between two men is sin

Oh THANKS for clearing that up, that of course changes everything!
(Sarcasm mode off)

It's a tough cross to bear for gays for sure

It's a "tough cross" for whom...for GAYS? To me it looks the entire issue is "tough" only for conservative religious, because others would just laugh about it. This "toughness" exists in your mind only, because it's YOU who makes this an issue

rupertg
I knew that Duck Dynasty guy was homophobic & a racist before he made the comments.
They say dont judge a book by its cover but Jesus look at that cover

I have to admit I never watched this show and have no intention to watch this show, ever. I haven't watched TV in several decades, thanks god.

But what I see from the images etc...this is a show about (wealthy) rednecks in Louisiana, correct?

A&E certainly knew exactly what they are in, and those rednecks LOOK and probably also act like the prime example of the redneck stereotype of the southern US I can picture in my head....I mean just LOOK at them

Now (regardless of my comments earlier) I think that A&E is acting idiotic because from a stereotypical redneck i would EXPECT EXACTLY THAT...some ignorant/religious person who would say EXACTLY THAT what he said in the interview.

And now...A&E is all "shocked" because one of their stereotype rednecks said something one would expect a typical redneck to say? I think A&E is at least as stupid, just saying.