It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil's lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe. . . . Phil's decision to push vile and extreme stereotypes is a stain on A&E and his sponsors who now need to reexamine their ties to someone with such public disdain for LGBT people and families. . . . What's clear is that such hateful anti-gay comments are unacceptable to fans, viewers, and networks alike. By taking quick action and removing Robertson from future filming, A&E has sent a strong message that discrimination is neither a Christian nor an American value."
"We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series Duck Dynasty. His personal views in no way reflect those of A&E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community."
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?edit on 19-12-2013 by mitman93 because: To add last statement.edit on 19-12-2013 by mitman93 because: (no reason given)
Anyone else sick of hearing about gays?
reply to post by grey580
First off, A&E hasn't fired him. He has been suspended. Second, their actions are not because of his religious beliefs. Their actions are due to the fact that his words could affect their profits. Are you saying that a company should not be allowed to fire an employee if the actions of said employee directly have a negative impact on the company's success?
He believes homosexuality is wrong. He didn't say anything hateful. He is allowed to think as he wishes.
9Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, 10thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. 11Some of you once lived this way. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
I think suspending him is ridiculous. He expressed an opinion, which one is allowed to do in the United States.
Reading a bit through this thread brings this to mind: All the people here defending this Phil Robertson spud and criticizing A&E for suspending him, did they also defend Martin Bashir and criticize MSNBC for firing him? How about Alec Baldwin? Just wondering...
As for freedom of speech and all that, this guy is welcome to say whatever he wants, but a company doesn't have to keep him in their employ if they don't care for what he says, particularly when he is a public figure/celebrity of sorts. I'd imagine his contract with A&E would have some stipulation to this effect as well.
Furthermore, it wasn't just what he said about homosexuals, but also what he said about blacks, that was considered offensive and/or patronizing.
But am I surprised that a gun-toting, homophobic, racism-denying red neck getting 86'ed by a cable network for speaking his mind on several controversial topics makes for red meat for a lot of ATSers? Not one bit.
reply to post by burdman30ott6
I have mixed views about this. Ive seen a few episodes of duck dynasty, and although the antics - particularly si - are funny, they are friggin stupid backwards rednecks. Their views are embarrassing to anyone who lives in the bayou.
And it appears that they have fired back with force: A&E thought they could maintain rapport with the family despite suspending their patriarch. So. Will A&E relent, and give in? Or are their political views more important than the wild success of duck dynasty?
Frankly, a part of me would like to see these guys taken off TV. Seriously. Can you imagine anything more lowbrow? Is this what "arts and entertainment" stands for nowadays? I get that they are funny, and weird, and ignorant - and for some strange reason, although most people disagree with their views, they enjoy watching them.
in any case, their views are BACKWARDS, utterly useless, and should be snubbed by A&E.
Isn't it funny how peoples views change?