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

reply to post by openminded2011


Agreed, at least in principle. I'm not silencing Phil... just speaking out against his hate speech. He has a much larger audience than me though! The other issue is, does AE have a right to fire him or silence him and then again, that answer is yes....it is their network and show. No one is stopping his free speech though...he could go to any news outlet and give another interview any time he wants and it would probably be printed/aired and read/watched by millions.

Point one...he has a right to say what he wants. Point two...his right to free speech wasn't impaired or taken away. Point three...I have a moral obligation to stand up and against hate speech like his. Point four...AE has a right to fire him if they want...he's basically their employee. Point five...what is the issue then if his right to free speech wasn't taken away?

BobAthome
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??

I never said it was okay to slander or say hurtful things to people. You obviously twisted my words around.

I'm saying that you can say anything you please. However, you may have to suffer the consequences it brings. If I harass someone, they may sue me for it. If a network isn't pleased with what their employee is saying, they may suspend them in order to keep their business ratings.

Why do you think when you're arrested the police officer states "Anything you say can, and will be used against you."

You can express your thoughts and words to your content. But that doesn't mean that what your saying will be to your benefit.

amazing
reply to post by openminded2011

 

I'm not silencing Phil... just speaking out against his hate speech.

How exactly is anything he said hate speech? A hate crime is a crime you commit because you hate a person or "what" that person is. What in his words showed that he hated anyone? Did he say he hated gay people, or are you putting your words in his mouth? Or are you implying that one person can't disagree with another's life style, whatever that lifestyle may be? Or maybe it is his religious beliefs in the Bible that you think is hateful. If so...I guess you believe the Bible is hateful...right? And if so...his religion is hateful...also right?

So then...you are calling this man, his beliefs and his religion hateful. And by denouncing him, his beliefs, his way of life and his religion...you are doing exactly what you claim he did. Expressed his disagreement with what another does, thinks and believes.

Isn't it amazing how you are both doing the same thing...but only he is wrong.

But then...you and people who feel as you do are glad he was fired. You are glad this is brought out into the public eye. To show how hateful you believe this person, his beliefs and his religion truly is.

So...as he never said a word resembling "I hope these people die" or anything, you show happiness in him being injured. And HE is the bad person???

Again...amazing.

I am new here, so I am picking a very controversial thread to get started in. Only read the first 3 pages, such a long thread!!
I love Duck Dynasty! None of my family or friends does, so what happens does not affect Their TV viewing at all.
Poor 'O Phil was just stating his beliefs and some of us oldies have our faith ingrained very deeply.
Freedom of speech does have its consequences, so careful what you say, once a word is spoken, it can not be unspoken and it can come back to slap you in the face and worse. it will be remembered!!!
It not only affects you but your family and maybe your friends. It depends on whether you are ready to make those sacrifices. School children may be hit very hard with a public statement that can cause an uproar such as this one has.
I feel so sorry for him and his family.. especially the children..

reply to post by galaxy40


I agree with every word you said. But please understand that, in my opinion, this is equal to peacefully protesting something and being fired for speaking your mind. And other people need to realize that not everyone is every going to agree with them. Our views are different and one person can not change another's view by simply calling them names...or rejoicing in their firing.

This man was asked a question and he answered...truthfully. Something even our President can't do. I applaud him for standing by his beliefs and morals. What I dislike is others saying he is wrong, hateful or somehow evil. Why do they say that? Because his views aren't like theirs. Pretty selfish and self-serving in my opinion.

reply to post by WeAreAWAKE


You are very understanding, and know really why Phil said what he did. His beliefs are his and did not mean to be forcing his opinion on anyone else. I am sure he never meant for it to do any harm. I have to say more power to him.
Goodness, I am afraid if I ever spoke out my beliefs on public TV there would be no hiding place safe enough for me!
I only know that we are a very young species on this little Paradise Island called Earth. We have a long way to go before we can ever have compassion and tolerance for one and all. It is not in our nature yet.
But I can say this for you.. I have been in many different religions trying to find my way and no matter what faith system I was in at the time, each one of these thought theirs was the right one! That is what faith is..believing.
I never found the right one.
I read there are 32,000 religions structured on the Bible!! I don't have that much time in my life to visit each of these personally, so I have my own now. 32,0001??

This guy sold out when he and his family prostituted themselves to the boobtube industry and began marketing themselves like laundry detergent. Anyone who isn't an idiot should know you have to be careful marketing yourself to a mass audience and that there are things you can't say from all sides of the cultural divide and the political spectrum if you want to stay on TV. It's way too late in the game to start crying about freedom of speech. This show has been edited all along to present an acceptable image.

DelMarvel
This guy sold out when he and his family prostituted themselves to the boobtube industry and began marketing themselves like laundry detergent. Anyone who isn't an idiot should know you have to be careful marketing yourself to a mass audience and that there are things you can't say from all sides of the cultural divide and the political spectrum if you want to stay on TV. It's way too late in the game to start crying about freedom of speech. This show has been edited all along to present an acceptable image.

You clearly only know of them from the A&E show or this story. Don't say you don't or you'd know they've been doing a show on the Outdoor Channel and were making their own hunting DVD's years before they appeared on A&E.

A&E offered them a show featuring the family side. What goes on when they aren't hunting. A&E told them to be themselves. They've been doing that very thing. At some point A&E went to Phil asking him to stop the family prayer at the end because an Atheist group was complaining about it. He told them he wasn't stopping that. It's who they are (Robertson's) and what they asked for (A&E). Take that out and the show is over. Conversation was over.

After that happened they started asking the younger family members to cuss and create arguments to add entertainment. They wouldn't do it. Reed, Jase's son, even brings that up in the interview he did with www.iamsecond.com. Filmed long before any of this happened btw. Shows that their relationship with A&E has been back and forth since day one.

About all the Duck Dynasty merchandise, that's all A&E. Yes the Robertson's likeness is used, but that's all A&E's doing. Willie and Jase have both gone on record saying it's way too much and mostly useless crap. Like I mentioned in an earlier post. Look at any Duck Dynasty merchanidse and it's all using the exact same images of their faces. They more than likely did one single photo shoot and A&E is using everything taken during that shoot for all the merchandise. Now go look at their Duck Commander line of merchandise. Their official line of products. Nowhere near the amount A&E does and they don't plaster their faces on everything.

If the show ends it won't phase them at all. Just allow more time to hunt and do more of their own videos. They've been doing that for 20+ years before A&E came calling.

I was leaning towards his political following getting bigger struck a nerve in certain power groups. It now looks like it's nothing more than a PR stunt by A&E. Each episode averages 14 million viewers. They have no reason to do anything like this. He wasn't doing what they wanted him to do so they pretty much threw him under the bus thinking it would work. Huge fail.

reply to [uresn't it trouble anyone that this dul=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread988707/pg1#pid17333779]post by burdman30ott6[/url]


Doesn't it trouble anyone that this Duck guy spends his entire life and makes his living conning people into believing that he can make ducks want to have sex with them?

reply to post by F4guy


Try typing in English and not troll. People may understand your question better.

Thanks

You gotta watch out for that "love everyone" hate speech!

reply to post by WeAreAWAKE


Whoa....whoa..just hold on there a minute, brother.

I'm not defining this as a hate crime or anything that crazy, but it is hate or hateful speech coming from this hateful person. Sure anyone can disagree with anyone. He could have said he disagreed with the gay lifestyle and what not but he went much further. He said...homosexuals well I quote him here.."They're 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" He also said that homosexuality leads to bestiality. He's saying that gay people are evil and that they will all have sex with animals. That's pretty hateful, don't you think? Offensive? I mean, come on.

Then he went on to say that black people were better off when they didn't have the same rights as white people. How do you define that? I'm not making stuff up here. You need to pay attention to what that hateful man is saying. Seriously. It's not okay.

amazing


Then he went on to say that black people were better off when they didn't have the same rights as white people. How do you define that? I'm not making stuff up here. You need to pay attention to what that hateful man is saying. Seriously. It's not okay.

Can you find the source for me? I'd like to see how he said that.

beezzer

Can you find the source for me? I'd like to see how he said that.

Just google "Phil Robertson" and "blacks."

nightmare_david


About all the Duck Dynasty merchandise, that's all A&E. Yes the Robertson's likeness is used, but that's all A&E's doing.

Their faces are plastered all over crap in every Walmart in America and they have nothing to do with it? Sorry, I'm not buying that at all.

And I'm not buying that the A&E show isn't orchestrated the same way every other reality show is. These guys are on the same level as the Kardashians.

Whether you like manufactured phony celebrities who make sex tapes or ones who make duck whistles just depends on what your preferences are, I guess. As far as I'm concerned you can't invite TV cameras into your home and sell your image all over America and then pretend to just be sincere good old boys. They're reality TV "stars" with everything that always goes along with that.

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

And your judgement differs how?

You are flat out calling him a racist (even though he has an adopted black son) and homophobic based, initially, on his appearance?

Who just committed the greater "crime"...you who judged him on appearance or he who quoted a passage from his religious belief system?

Hypocritical much? Bigot much?

amazing
reply to post by openminded2011

 

Agreed, at least in principle. I'm not silencing Phil... just speaking out against his hate speech. He has a much larger audience than me though! The other issue is, does AE have a right to fire him or silence him and then again, that answer is yes....it is their network and show. No one is stopping his free speech though...he could go to any news outlet and give another interview any time he wants and it would probably be printed/aired and read/watched by millions.

Point one...he has a right to say what he wants. Point two...his right to free speech wasn't impaired or taken away. Point three...I have a moral obligation to stand up and against hate speech like his. Point four...AE has a right to fire him if they want...he's basically their employee. Point five...what is the issue then if his right to free speech wasn't taken away?

Apparently you have not read much of the thread....not going to repeat myself more than I already have.

Being new here and reading this thread has already intimidated me. As of now the only thing I know for certain is .. I don't know the facts. To post further, my ignorance would start to show and all I would be doing is posting my opinion .
Very interesting thread and some really good attack and counter attack posts or Tic for Tac.

Glad to be on ATS..

reply to post by amazing


"hate speech"??? Let me ask you something: Do you consider it "hate speech" if a homosexual calls southerners "inbred" or "sub-human" "dumb" or any other derogatory names?? The way I'm seeing it, the left/communists can say whatever they want but if someone says something about them, they cry foul. How is that right? Can we just exercise our first amendment right? Or is it just for 'certain people'?

reply to post by beezzer

Originally from GQ

“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field. ...They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’ — not a word! ...Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”

Charles M. Blow, NYT

While this is possible, it is highly improbable. Robertson is 67 years old, born into the Jim Crow South. Only a man blind and naïve to the suffering of others could have existed there and not recognized that there was a rampant culture of violence against blacks, with incidents and signs large and small, at every turn, on full display. Whether he personally saw interpersonal mistreatment of them is irrelevant.

Louisiana helped to establish the architecture for Jim Crow. First, there were the Black Codes that sought to control interactions between blacks and whites and constrain black freedom.

reply to post by bbracken677

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.

Which means, you're expecting a despotism, no?

If thats correct ^^^, then theres not much of a difference between "verge" and "groundwork is being laid for the emergence [of one]"

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

Ok, you have now gone outside what we were talking about. Where did you get the idea, from the post you just quoted, that I think were in a situation of trading freedoms for security?

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.

Can I qualify that statement? In China, the smartphone has forced the government to accept certain limitations to its power. They didn't anticipate the powerful effects that the average chinese with a camera could affect via youtube like sites. It essentially puts greater power in the hands of the people. Not even China - a state with a totalitarian apparatus - can deal with.

So why are you so worried? We live in a country where we still have tremendous freedoms. When was the last time you were bothered by the government? I live in Canada, a country with more socialist type forms of governance, and I hardly ever have to deal with the government. I can write what I want online, I can meet any girl I want, I have access to free health care, I have a great job that I enjoy, a job that even affords me the ability to influence government policies, particularly in education.

I live in a free country. YOU live in a free country.

And yet, you are focused in this negative direction. You are convinced of a plan to take away peoples rights - to what end, I don't know - but you think this is all happening even though there are many other plausible alternatives; for example, society is profoundly complex. Every day new information enters the system - our world - which politicians, business leaders, local leaders in industry, and others, have to coordinate activities towards. This is a very general way to put it. And it's general because once you hone in a particular aspect, you discover how exceedingly complex are the variables which govern society, from the purely psychological biases which govern human attention, to the interplay of biases between individuals within a great network.

You honestly attribute far too great a power to the people who run our societies.

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....

We live in a completely different time period. The context we live in today is FAR MORE OPEN than it was when the Nazis were in power. Like I said, the internet has changed the game. People are all connected now - any abuse makes it to youtube, or some other site, and everyone knows about it.

Is this not true? Don't get me wrong. If they try to dial back internet freedoms, I'm gonna be one my toes worried that they are attempting to take undeserved power. But so long as our societies remain open, and the internet - the most incredible invention in history - remains open and free, then theres no need to be pessimistic and on guard. It's actually good to experience connection, integration, and solidarity with other human beings - politicians included.

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

While I don't doubt that that is possible, theres no reason to always concentrate on that when things are already so open. I understand the reason to not be all Gung-ho about government, but to be as pessimistic as you are is equally bad.

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.

So whats your worry, then? If democrats and Republicans are the same - as you say - then why would the IRS - a government body - make a discrimination between republicans and democrats? Good question, no?

Here's a possible answer:

Democrats and Republicans actually believe different things - have different philosophical interests. Philosophy, after all, is at root of what differentiates the right from the left. And when you have a different philosophy, at a neurobiological level, you have a brain system that "favors" this or that way of thinking.

Do you see? The IRS is filled with mostly liberals. The media is filled with mostly liberals. What kind of worry should we have about the future? That liberals - who, for the most part, are about openness, acceptance - will use their power to kill everyone the way the Nazis did the Jews? Or will they just target conservatives - as if conservatives couldn't be converted - as they are already being converted - via slow and gradual propaganda?

Listen. I respect the right to free speech, and I respect the need to respect peoples views on things. Generally, I have more respect if we people give a plausible, well thought out reason for their beliefs, and not simply: the Bible says so! - which is so inept it's basic awareness, it's sheer lack of philosophical perception.

I am a centrist. In fact, I would say I lean to the right. I believe the family unit is extremely important, I believe Judeo-Christian values - particularly in their "positive" sense, and not their overly critical, symbolizing of every action as "bad" because they've devised a metaphysics in their head, that they allow to take precedence over immediate, cultural facts - have been very good for this world. I love America as a country. I think it's continued dominance in the world is a good thing. I see China as a major problem - as well as Russia. The values which our politicians have, although you may impute ill will to them - is aligned with our values - with American/Western values.