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

MystikMushroom
reply to post by bbracken677

 

He was under a contract, and he was employed by a TV network. As a reality TV star he represents that network 24-7. This would have been explained when he signed his contract. A&E basically "owned" his life for a set period of time. He apparently broke his contract, because I doubt the legal team at A&E would risk a civil rights lawsuit.

This whole argument is nothing more than a disguise. The real argument is about people feeling hurt because a man that thinks the same way as they do is not getting paid anymore.

It's not about free speech
It's not a "civil rights" issue

So what you are saying is:
1) if you are under contract you forfeit your civil rights
2) if you are a TV personality (I will not call him a star...I dislike the show) you forfeit your civil rights?

Would this be the first time a corporate entity violated a citizen's civil rights?

If he was, indeed, "owned" wouldnt that be described as slavery?
Unless the contract is worded extremely specifically regarding speaking about his faith, the breaking of the contract is not black and white but rather quite subjective.

He answered a question by paraphrasing a quote from the bible and came pretty darned close to the actual quote...and got canned for his reply.

Seems cut and dried to me...he was canned for his religious beliefs.

MystikMushroom
Oh, and if you are a Phil supporter you're in the same boat as the Westboro Baptist folks:

Westboro Baptists Support 'Duck Dynasty' Star Phil Robertson Following A&E Suspension: Church Plans Picket

Westboro Baptist Church announced their intention to picket the A&E headquarters in New York City in protest of Robertson's suspension. Over 300,000 people have signed a "Stand With Phil Robertson" petition, which will be hand-delivered to A&E on Monday.

Yes by all means, while we are denying freedom let's extend it.

I do not in any form fashion or manner agree with what the Westboro group says and does, but I WILL defend, with my life, their right to say it.

reply to post by bbracken677


All those things were also happening under Bushes watch. It's good for our democracy that such things are being drawn out, and not repressed, like would happen in a true despotic state.

jhn7537
reply to post by bbracken677

 

So I'm the one defending the gay community, also sympathetic to their feelings but I'm the close minded one... Ok, that makes a whole lot of sense... Maybe in the eyes of religious folks im close minded, but on many other topics I'm anything but that. I'm sorry that I'm one who puts science before a book written thousands of years ago.. You can keep taking all the cheap shots you want at me, it only speaks to your character too, and I'd expect better out of a married 59 year old man. You should be better then that, but I guess you enjoy getting into pissing matches with 20-somethings year olds instead of taking the higher road...

edit on 20-12-2013 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)

Reading comprehension FTW

I did not say that you, specifically, was close minded. I suggested possiblities...you actually ran with it.
Not to mention supporting the gay cause, defending their cause or sympathizing with their feelings in no way guarantees an open mind. How do you figure that? How do you rationalize that?

Have I made any anti-gay statements, or are you making assumptions? I can answer that...

Regarding closed minded...I advocate on the side of freedom. I advocate on the side of civil rights for everyone...not a select few. I decry the use of bullying tactics to silence people.

I do not, nor did not, make statements of opinion as fact. I called you out for just that. Call it a pet peeve of mine. Then when you used the "weak-minded" regarding a group of people (a rather specific group) all I can say about that is : bigot much? Hypocrite much? Close minded much?

Yeah..I did say it this time. No inference needed, you confirmed it.

reply to post by bbracken677


You did not say me specifically, but you said it in response to me which is easy to see who you're directing that at... I believe people who are anti-gay are very close-minded, so the flip-side of that would be open-minded, no?

You sound like some real freedom fighter, Capt. I'd die for your freedoms... Umm, ok, cause the only thing I see you doing is typing... How are you dying for anything. Even if you served before, you aren't now and shouldn't speak on the subject of dying for a cause when you are doing anything but that....

Astrocyte
reply to post by bbracken677

 

All those things were also happening under Bushes watch. It's good for our democracy that such things are being drawn out, and not repressed, like would happen in a true despotic state.

Absolutely..unfortunately nothing is being done except yada yada yada.

If you look at one of my previous posts I remark about the shredding of the constitution (actually several) and I also, in one post, remark about it happening during the last 12 years or so (Patriot Act...the greatest shredder of all IMO)

I find it matters not whether the politician is repub or dem...they both want power, control and the usual constitutional controls are being dismantled allowing for despotism to emerge. I care not whether that despotism is in the name of republican or democrat.

Leonidas
What is happening to ATS?

This story is the Top Story? Who cares what some nutty hillbilly thinks?

For me, it is about the despotism of the PC police.

I wholeheartedly agree that there are more important matters that people should respond to in proportion to this subject.

We should be horribly outraged by our politicians support of the shredding of the constitution. We should be outraged to a degree that we make a statement by removing EVERY incumbent politician. We, the people, should be outraged that our govt is no longer of the people, by the people and we should regain control by whatever means necessary.
Our govt is out of control...out of control spending, out of control power hunger, out of control intrusion into our lives, out of control regarding virtually every aspect the constitution is supposed to guard against.

My buddy shared this on his Facebook wall, in regards to the Duck Dynasty story...

What upsets me is that men and women like Phil Robertson use religion as their basis for hate, and therefore anyone of faith gets lumped in with that assclown. I'm religious, I pray to God, I follow His teachings as best as I'm humanly able to do so. That being said, nowhere in my belief in God do I find it acceptable to hate anyone who is different than myself. Jesus went amongst the sinners, healing and teaching and speaking and inspiring. I didn't read anywhere where He felt the need to insult, hate, or hurt those he was trying to help.

I don't know why we as a people use beliefs as a basis for ignorance.

Very interesting take on the story...

jhn7537
reply to post by bbracken677

 

If you haven't already read this book, you should check out The Bible Unearthed

The book overview

In this iconoclastic and provocative work, leading scholars Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman draw on recent archaeological research to present a dramatically revised portrait of ancient Israel and its neighbors. They argue that crucial evidence (or a telling lack of evidence) at digs in Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon suggests that many of the most famous stories in the Bible -- the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua's conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon's vast empire -- reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts.
Challenging the fundamentalist readings of the scriptures and marshaling the latest archaeological evidence to support its new vision of ancient Israel, The Bible Unearthed offers a fascinating and controversial perspective on when and why the Bible was written and why it possesses such great spiritual and emotional power today.

So, that's just one book to check out...

People believe in the bible because most were indoctrinated into the belief by their families and thats what they are told to believe..... period!

There is no archeological, historical evidence from 4 BCE to 30 AD that there ever was a divine man named yeshua. No writings of that era, no coins depicting him, no physical description, no date of birth, no works of carpentry, no government documents written about him by either hebrew or roman officials of that time yet personal and government documents from that era..NOTHING about a divine jesus or yeshua.

The new testament is a collection of books written by authors unknown. Stories of a talking snake (snakes don't have vocal chords) a talking donkey. Yeshua cursing a fig tree, and yeshua running pigs off a cliff to get the demons out (thats sinful in itself, ruining some farmers livelyhood)

The four gospel writers are not the orignal writers, thats been proven. Some of Josephus writings have been proven forgeries, and Paul said he only saw yeshua in a vision, so he never met him. Therefore without plausable evidence, the yeshua story is BUSTED!

I am impressed, frankly....rather than spouting opinions as fact you actually did a bit of research.

This, although intriguing, does not provide proof that the Bible is a work of fiction, anymore than the archaeological finds that support the existence of places and people as described in the bible proves it truth.

I support your right to believe as you wish. I do not, however, support your right to present opinion as fact, nor do I support your desire to belittle those who believe differently from yourself and then to refer to yourself as open minded.

Much of the work above is conjectural, yet intriguing. Not solid provable facts.

reply to post by jhn7537

I have yet to see any hate in Phil's statements.
The 'assclown' statement.... your buddy may be jealous of Phil's success.

butcherguy
reply to post by jhn7537

 

I have yet to see any hate in Phil's statements.
The 'assclown' statement.... your buddy may be jealous of Phil's success.

Well, maybe no hate in the interview, but.... well, check out this clip at 18:25

crap cant get the clip to work....

In one of his sermons he preaches "They're [homosexuals are] full of murder, envy, strife, hatred; they are insolent, arrogant God haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil."

go here

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by jhn7537


The cat is out of the bag. It's funny how this new vid has come to light and it is safe to assume it wasn't the only time he said this or worse - but WAIT!! It's my FAVORITE TIME WASTING ACTIVITY so let's defend this garbage!

CJ

jhn7537
reply to post by bbracken677

 

You did not say me specifically, but you said it in response to me which is easy to see who you're directing that at... I believe people who are anti-gay are very close-minded, so the flip-side of that would be open-minded, no?

You sound like some real freedom fighter, Capt. I'd die for your freedoms... Umm, ok, cause the only thing I see you doing is typing... How are you dying for anything. Even if you served before, you aren't now and shouldn't speak on the subject of dying for a cause when you are doing anything but that....

edit on 20-12-2013 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)

First off, you BELIEVE that those who are anti-gay are very closed-minded. However, the flip side is not necessarily open minded.... A gay person is, of course, going to support gay causes. That does not make him automatically open minded. A gay person (or for that matter, a straight) can support gay causes and still be closed minded. Dont believe it? Look around...talk to someone who supports any cause that is considered "progressive" and often you will find individuals who are anything BUT open-minded. Close minded individuals exist in every group, every demographic, every race, every culture. I believe that it is human to be so....I find that the truly open minded individual is an extremely rare occurrence. I make no particular claims to anything but an attempt to be open minded....I KNOW I am closed minded on certain subjects, certain philosophies.

Oh, and btw..my example regarding progressive causes is equally applicable to conservative causes. I used the progressive because of the common misconception that liberals, or progressives tend to think of themselves (erroneously) as open minded. I love to burst that bubble

I find that most liberal causes (this coming from an extreme liberal 35 years ago who has slid over to extreme conservatism, by my definition not yours, during those last 35 years) have done more harm than good or have been corrupted by politicians, or...have just plain been stupid in application even though noble in concept. Ergo, my conservatism is more based in what works, what has worked, what has failed.

Want some examples? War on poverty? Created more poverty...actually totally screwed up the black community (IMO), Obamacare? Will totally screw up healthcare in America. As 2 examples I do not fault the philosophy nor the desire to "fix things" but rather the methods applied, the incentives used (instead of positive, negative results). The War on Poverty was a noble cause, but was doomed to failure in methodology.

I am wandering off the OP so I will hop off my soap box....for now

reply to post by bbracken677


Yes, we are both wandering from the OP at hand. We should probably get back on topic before the Mods throw us in ATS jail....... Good discussion, I don't hate you, we just don't see eye to eye and that can sometimes lead to heated exchanges..

reply to post by jhn7537

He is stating his opinions of homosexuals.

If I say the same of the Nazis or KKK .... am I preaching hate?

Can you identify the hate in his sermon. He stated his beliefs. Is he exhorting anyone to treat homosexuals poorly or to hurt them?

butcherguy
reply to post by jhn7537

 

I have yet to see any hate in Phil's statements.
The 'assclown' statement.... your buddy may be jealous of Phil's success.

You see this everywhere, by lot's of people. Their self esteem is low enough that it is critical for them to demean others in order for themselves to achieve some sense of superiority. Perhaps the buddy is intimidated by the hick's success?

Turns out the guys from Duck Dynasty are hardcore evangelical Christians, which explains why they all look like inbred versions of Moses.

jhn7537

butcherguy
reply to post by jhn7537

 

I have yet to see any hate in Phil's statements.
The 'assclown' statement.... your buddy may be jealous of Phil's success.

Well, maybe no hate in the interview, but.... well, check out this clip at 18:25

crap cant get the clip to work....

In one of his sermons he preaches "They're [homosexuals are] full of murder, envy, strife, hatred; they are insolent, arrogant God haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil."

go here

www.youtube.com...

edit on 20-12-2013 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-12-2013 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)

So, no hate in the interview that caused him to be canned? wow...just....wow. Pretty much confirms that he was canned for his beliefs...not for hate speech.
Civil rights for all, for just for select groups?

bbracken677

butcherguy
reply to post by jhn7537

 

I have yet to see any hate in Phil's statements.
The 'assclown' statement.... your buddy may be jealous of Phil's success.

You see this everywhere, by lot's of people. Their self esteem is low enough that it is critical for them to demean others in order for themselves to achieve some sense of superiority. Perhaps the buddy is intimidated by the hick's success?

I feel like both you guys are getting caught up by the assclown portion of the comment, what about the rest?

reply to post by burdman30ott6


Same old divide and conquer tactics. Nobody would have cared about this if the MSM wouldn't have aggressively waved it in our faces. The corporate owned/government mouthpiece mainstream media perpetuates racism and hatred to keep us fighting with each other so that we don't unite to fight them