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

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


We have a winner! I find it amusing, and a little sad, that people care so much about TV characters.. Same thing happened not too long ago with Brian the dog on Family Guy being killed off....

Homosexuals and their sympathizers in this country are like freaking 5 year old children. They are allowed a public opinion of anyone they want and can be as ugly about it as they want but they wish to prevent us from having an opinion at all. Phil was perfectly within his rights to speak of his faith and how it pertains to homosexuality. Shame on A&E. They can show gays making out on national prime time television but apparently Christians cannot even be interviewed by a magazine anymore without fear of retribution.
SICKENING!!!!

reply to post by jhn7537


Is it about DD or just the tip of the iceberg, I think it is more of a discussion of freedom of speech and rights,

All those other topics I have started in the past, they get little attention.

I am tried of beating dead horses.

bigfatfurrytexan
That aside, however, this whole thing is a charade. Months ago Phil said he wanted off the show. He didn't want the spotlight, and the work, that comes with it. So they manufactured this little thing so that everyone wins...except the freedom of speech. A&E gets to cater to the progressives (a key demographic for them), Phil gets to proseletyze (which he admits to wanting) and the show gets publicity.

I couldn't have arguerd with you over that theory until now:

"We are disappointed that Phil has been placed on hiatus for expressing his faith, which is his constitutionally protected right. We have had a successful working relationship with A&E but, as a family, we cannot imagine the show going forward without our patriarch at the helm. We are in discussions with A&E to see what that means for the future of Duck Dynasty," it said.

Source: CNN

It seems that A&E has shot itself in the foot.

Harte

reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn

It most certainly is.

It most certainly is not. He has lost but one podium from which to preach from, he has the support of millions and simply only needs to choose another one. Hell, he's rich enough to start his own cable network from which he can make up rules that state anyone on his network must condemn gays, if he wants to.

However, according to the new unwritten 'constitution' of the extremely politically correct, our new moral compass, the liberty to speak his mind should be taken away because he is seen, now, as socially unacceptable according to the collective concious and therefore should be punished for that. Very Borg like, don't you think?

Some people might call this unwritten constitution, the free market, or myself I might call it the Constitution playing out exactly as it should. The people involved, every step of the way, making choices with their freedom of speech and living with the consequences that they were never offered protection from.

Phil Robertson chose to exercise his freedom of speech via the words he spoke and being no dummy, I'm sure he knew what the consequences would be, jail not being one of them he made the choice to say them. GLAAD exercised their freedom of speech when they decided to take issue with A&E, and will now have to live with they backlash they are sure to receive from Phil's fans as will A&E (who I have no illusion of giving a damn about the LGBT community), they made a gamble between extremes and will most likely lose out big because of it.

Rather it seems Borg like to me to only realize the rights of one side of an issue. I don't think it's right that people are now saying that you can't criticize criticism or try to make doing so fall under the taboo of being PC. If I'm offended by something and I feel like spouting off about it, I damn sure will and no one is going to shame me with labels into not doing so.

Now if laws were being proposed to criminalize the type of speech Phil Robertson engaged in, I would be on his side. And until such time as this is true, his freedom of speech is well in tact.

Christian Voice
Homosexuals and their sympathizers in this country are like freaking 5 year old children. They are allowed a public opinion of anyone they want and can be as ugly about it as they want but they wish to prevent us from having an opinion at all. Phil was perfectly within his rights to speak of his faith and how it pertains to homosexuality. Shame on A&E. They can show gays making out on national prime time television but apparently Christians cannot even be interviewed by a magazine anymore without fear of retribution.
SICKENING!!!!

Coming from the Christian Voice your response is shocking..... A&E is a business there to make profit, if they deem something bad PR or detrimental to their business and decide to pull the plug, they have EVERY right to do that. And your right, Phil had every right to speak his mind, just like A&E had every right to pull the plug. No ones rights were abused here, this is just a company making a business decision.

Btw- that first sentence you wrote is hilarious. I wish you could elaborate on that a little more. Can you show me some examples of gays and their sympathizers acting ugly with their public opinions?

Thanks! From a sympathizer...

Gotta love Camille Paglia lol. She is VERY liberal but has consistently called out liberals for their hypocrisy.

dailycaller.com...

Just a couple quotes from her interview:

“In a democratic country, people have the right to be homophobic as well as they have the right to support homosexuality — as I one hundred percent do. If people are basing their views against gays on the Bible, again they have a right of religious freedom there,”

“To express yourself in a magazine in an interview — this is the level of punitive PC, utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist, OK, that my liberal colleagues in the Democratic Party and on college campuses have supported and promoted over the last several decades,” Paglia said. “This is the whole legacy of free speech 1960’s that have been lost by my own party.”

I would rather discuss just about any topic with Paglia than any msm 'reporter'. She believes what she says and also holds herself to the same standard that she holds everyone else to.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the producers of the show are responsible for the content that appears on the final cut, are they not? This sounds like a publicity stunt based on the principle of 'any publicity is good publicity.'

These channels seem to be actively inciting a questioning attitude toward the Bible, Jesus, and religion in general. The powers that be not only want to rid the world of religion, but also must continue to create an atmosphere of divisiveness, which are two birds that this stone seems to kill.

If a third effect of diversion is achieved by this, as Schleptic Overreach suggests, then yay.

We have yet to see if ignorant American's love for Phil Robertson outweighs their hatred for homosexuals.

reply to post by jhn7537


Don't worry...people that don't support marriage equality and LGBT rights are just up in arms because they feel they're loosing "the fight". I think another state supreme court last night ruled in favor of gay marriage. I believe that brings it up to what, 11-12 states now?

To those people I say this:

Look, gay marriage is going to happen, it cannot be stopped. Equal rights under the law for everyone is going to happen, even if you personally don't like that idea.

This show just got more viewers(republicans, Christians etc) because of this stunt. I say they doing it alright.

I bet in few weeks the show is back on schedule with more viewers.

jhn7537
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

 

We have a winner! I find it amusing, and a little sad, that people care so much about TV characters.. Same thing happened not too long ago with Brian the dog on Family Guy being killed off....

And Brian isn't dead any more anyway.

Much ado about nothing.

jaffo
Let's be very clear about this: The man is NOT "a victim of the PC Police."

Wrongo.

He voiced his opinion based on religious beliefs (freedom of religion is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights) and was punished by small minded people for that.

Kindly explain exactly how he disparaged the gay community (actually read the interview, please).

HIs civil rights have been violated (as guaranteed by the civil rights act passed during the 60s which makes it unlawful to fire someone for their religious beliefs) because he paraphrased the Bible.

For those of you who were around before the PC police began flexing it's muscles it is quite clear. For those of you who have only known life with the PC police, you are probably "offended".

Meanwhile it is quite clear to me why our country is going down the tubes...quite clear.

Tetrarch42

Aisling

The fact that one talentless hack is exploiting her homosexuality to attract attention and make tons of money doesn't mean that someone with an anti-gay diatribe should be able to spout their nonsense without fear of consequences or criticism.

Please explain how what he said was an "anti-gay diatribe". This is a ridiculous statement.

Did you even read what he actually said, or are you just bouncing off what others have written?

UnifiedSerenity

bbracken677


Reminds one of the fall of Rome and what preceded that fall. Seems that we are following in the steps of many civilizations of the past.

This is all by design to get full control. Push an agenda the majority don't like and eventually you will get the backlash. It has happened in all civilizations as the powerful controllers look to consolidate their power. This is why I said in an earlier post that when the tables turn again and the real majority have had enough there will be a true backlash just as there was in the French revolution. It's meant to get ugly, very ugly, and the end result will be a new world, but it won't be the one the progressives are dreaming of, no they will be the first to go. Study Bezmenov, he said what was going to happen and it is happening right in front of our eyes.

Actually that statement is not directly related to this incident in particular but rather a damning statement regarding the direction our country has taken in general. PC policing is just a symptom of the overall decline.

A lack of decent work ethics, sense of entitlement by a huge proportion of our country, corruption (not that it is new), loss of morality, bureaucracy in the extreme, etc etc etc...these are a few of my favorite themes.

There are 1000s of behaviors practiced by a minority of society, so is there anyone here that agrees with all of them? Are there behaviors that each of us disagrees with?

The difference between all these other behaviors and homosexuality is the others have not had 40 plus years of activists, billions of dollars rolled into pro gay campaigns and all the magic of Hollywood backing them too.

There are basically two purposes to gay marriages, and one is that gay couples want the same legal benefits that heterosexual couples enjoy. The other purpose is that activist see this as a way to force the normalization of their behavior on the entire population. What better way to do that then to have the Government legally recognize it.

So here we are at the point that one particular behavior out of 1000s practiced by a minority of society may well become a civil right and anyone who dares to disagree with that behavior will be punished under a hate crime.

Should we do this we each and every other behavior too, doesn't each and every one of them deserves the same privileges that homosexuality enjoys today? I never watched the show, but if we inserted any of the other behaviors out there with "gays" in the article would he still be on the show?

Astrocyte
reply to post by Lingweenie

 

Since most people in general tend to be pretty ignorant, and don't really make very good arguments. And don't really do much research.

How true that is.

I didn't mean it in any deprecatory way. In general, I have a lot of respect for the morality that Judaism and Christianity has helped inculcate in people.

Same here, I didn't use the word ignorant to imply stupidity, or an insult per say. I just use the strict definition of the word; Lacking knowledge or awareness. Most people would probably be one of four things:
1. Ignorant
2. Unknowingly ignorant
3. Willfully ignorant
4. Just don't care ignorant

And I didn't mean to imply that Christians in general were the only culprits. I only meant that most people in general typically aren't very knowledgeable. And tend to try and keep their focus and awareness inside of there own comfort zone.

But, I will say that I am not a genius. There are in fact somethings that I do not know and possibly never will. But I have keep an open mind, and try to piece things together. And I don't see why people would want to restrain themselves to just one antiquated book. I actually think people need to realize that they are in fact ignorant. And religion has been one of the reasons why people don't come to terms with that. They somehow learned the secrets of the world, and the path they will take after death. They can tell you every step to get into "heaven." Yet, they hardly know what their doing while on Earth. And to me, when people claim to have all of the answers, to everything. It would seem like a "to good to be true" situation. And I personally wouldn't really be gullible or naive enough to believe that.
"One thing that I know: is that I know nothing."

But I do think the Bible has done far more good in the world than bad. Think of the moral principles it's helped spread. Yes, it did so not via reasoned intuition, but the command of God. Some people would consider this "inadequate". In a way it is, but in another way, it seems to be how things actually are. Why else do we "know" that it is right to honour our parents - in a way that is different from how we honor others? Of course, all people deserve respect and honour (in the sense that we show appreciation for how they live, the struggles they've faced, etc). do not murder/adultery/steal/lie/covet....do not "idolize" etc... These are ideas which I think have eternal validity. In fact, they are guidestones towards bringing healing to ourselves, each other, and our planet.

Well, yes, Christianity has some nice things to say, but on the other hand, it's not like these things weren't already around. It's pretty common sense not to go around and murder, rape, and pillage everything. If that were the case it would be chaos and we humans would never get anything done. We probably would've just self destructed by now. And I think there would be something very wrong if people need to look at a book to tell them that. This should be something people pretty much already know. Hell, animals don't seem to have any problems getting along with each other. Yet, they have no books or philosophies. It's already in their natural to work together. It is how they survive, and the same goes for humans. If we didn't truth each other, and work together in peace years and years ago. We'd probably undoubtedly be extinct right now. A species at war with it self is doomed to fail. And it wouldn't take much brain power to figure that out.

RickinVa
I am an atheist and that makes this whole thread rather silly.


Next thread please!!!!!!

I see, so personal freedom, civil rights and religious freedom means nothing to an Atheist?

WTG

Join the NSA and spy on your neighbors.

jhn7537
reply to post by MystikMushroom

 

Yep... We have a lot of people here defending our 'rights' and freedom of speech, but I honestly believe it's really just upset fans of the show...

I read the below message from a CNN article and found it interesting...

The truth is it is a messed up situation when a governor rumored to have his sights on the presidency doesn't understand the breadth of the First Amendment.

The Federal Communications Commission did not send officials into the office of Nancy Dubuc, president of A&E Networks. The FBI did not threaten to put Robertson away, and the Internal Revenue Service didn't freeze his bank accounts.

This is what the First Amendment protects us from -- laws being made that restrict freedom of religion, the press and/or speech. It does not protect us from how society responds to the expression of one's religion, the press or speech.

CNN

I do not watch the show. I dont, in fact, watch any of the so-called 'reality' shows. My personal opinion is that the quality of TV has been dumbed down significantly with the advent of reality shows. That's saying something given that TV was the not exactly quality entertainment to begin with.

I tend to watch a few series that I like and find the rest to be mindless or crass entertainment not worth my time.

I do support Phil's right to espouse his religious beliefs without fear of punishment and that is what has incensed me. I am not even a particularly religious person...I am sure that I would fall into the sinner category as well....just not the ones in question lol

openyourmind1262

....... Glad he did'nt admit to stoning one of his kids to death years ago for backtalking.

edit on 20-12-2013 by openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)

I hate to say it but this is got to be one of the most ignorant statements I have ever herd.

No Christian ever was commanded to stone a child. And if you are referring to some Laws given to Israel that does not apply to anyone but them. They never did followed it either.

Before making such wild statements make sure you know what you are talking about.

A very loud, active, vocal minority is tearing this country apart at the
seams. Its time the majority stand up proudly and stop cowering under
the pressure of this minority. PC should have been DOA its time to kill
it, before it kills anymore of us.