It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did GLAAD mess with the wrong duck? Could this be a tipping point in the culture wars?

page: 14
30
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 09:26 AM
link   

openminded2011
reply to post by BlueMoonJoe
 


I think there is a big undercurrent of people who are fed up with the over the top attitude that has pervaded our society for a number of years now with respect to this issue. They dont wish any ill will against the LGBT community, but they are tired of being basically told they have no choice but to accept their agenda. Most people simply dont care if you are gay or straight, as long as you keep your business to yourself. The whole "I am gay and you have to like it" mantra that has been pushed on society relentlessly for a long time now is about to get a backlash. Here is what I would say to the gay community. You are free to live and do as you wish as long as you don't infringe on the rights of others or harm anyone. But as for those of us who don't share your orientation, NO, we DON'T have to like it. And yes, some of us even consider your behavior to be immoral, and we don't want our children exposed to your "culture" until they are old enough to make their own judgments about it. We, like you, have the right to live in the world in our own way. And our position on the issue does not infringe on your rights, so dont let your position infringe on ours. Its OK for you to live as you wish, but STOP trying to force us to accept it. STOP, it is working against what you are trying to achieve. Isn't forcing people to behave in a way that is not conducive to their nature what the LGBT community supposed to be fighting? Or does it only apply to them?
edit on 24-12-2013 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-12-2013 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)


Replace "LGBT" with "Christian," and replace "gay" with "religious" and "straight" with "non-religious." Now read it again.

Replace "LGBT" with "Republican," and replace "gay" with "conservative" and "straight" with "liberal."
Now read it again.

You can replace LGBT with "Democrat" or "atheist" or "Quaker" or "Libertarian" or "Librarian" or "intolerant people masquerading as tolerant" and get the same point.

When any group is reduced to second-class citizen status, we all are.
edit on 24-12-2013 by Gryphon66 because: Bad grammar. It's early.




posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 



butcherguy
If what you got out of the interview was that he lumped them in with bestiality, then you also believe that he lumped them in with heterosexuals too...


And I would support heterosexuals who were offended to make their case to A&E.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by openminded2011
 

Doesn't sound much better than the idea of "seperate but equal".

I don't recall any "I am gay and you have to like it" mantra.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by BlueMoonJoe
 





I don't know about this. I saw what he was said to have said, went to the article, and saw that he didn't say what he was said to have said, neither with the bestiality nor the Jim Crow bit.


If we are talking about the same thing, it is because what the article printed as said during the interview, was lifted from comments he made on the show.

So in other words A&E knew the truth,

Set up an interview in which the author of the article did a hit job on Phil.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Christians have dropped so many Old Testament sins including some of their sexual ones that the sex-based sins they do keep, especially homosexuality (and that may actually be the last sex sin at this point), really stand out as being hypocritically maintained to malign and abuse a small minority.

Christians eat pork, shellfish, wear mixed fiber clothing, and can fornicate and commit adultery without being stoned to death, but for some reason homosexuality has become some utmost egregious sin worthy of public attacks and condemnation. It stands out as extremely hypocritical given how many sins Christians have since given up from the Old Testament.

LGBT people simply want equal rights under the law in an allegedly secular nation, but are stymied by a group of fanatical haters who base their hate explicitly on several thousand year old laws. Most of which they now ignore.

Its sickening behavior and I hope everyone who maintains this baffling public display of hate finds themselves on the losing end of the hate battle they for some reason keep fighting.
edit on 24-12-2013 by Frith because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Frith
 


Christians have "relaxed" the punishments for all sins of the Old Testament since the time of Christ.

Do not pretend as though Homosexuals are preyed upon by the Christian church and all other sinners are welcomed with open arms.

If John and Shelly were married at the local church and were known by the congregation, he would be treated the same on Sunday if he showed up with his boyfriend Steve or his girlfriend Rachel.

The difference is (once again) homosexuals want to have a known sin be acceptable for them. They want to be able to live openly in public and flaunt their sin and have it be OK before Gods and man. It simply does not work that way.

I am not Christian and even I know you cannot expect dogma to change to fit your lifestyle.

Drunks get sober on Sunday for church, cheaters and womanizers walk the straight and narrow before the congregation. Homosexuals do not have that luxury and therefore want the church to accept them for what they are and change the cannon to reflect that their choices are no longer sins.

Cannot have it both ways. Either you believe in God and know it's a sin, or you don't believe in god and it doesn't matter.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by 200Plus
 



Drunks get sober on Sunday for church, cheaters and womanizers walk the straight and narrow before the congregation. Homosexuals do not have that luxury and therefore want the church to accept them for what they are and change the cannon to reflect that their choices are no longer sins.

Cannot have it both ways. Either you believe in God and know it's a sin, or you don't believe in god and it doesn't matter.


Well said!!
And it’s certainly not just GLAAD trying to jam things down the throat of the church (and the country). Forced acceptance is the new norm.

As for Duck Dynasty, within 24 hours of 1 million votes getting A&E to pull Phil, A&E received over 1.5 million votes of support for Phil. I have a feeling A&E will back down or suffer greatly losing its best show. Either way, both GLAAD and the gay community will lose this battle.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by 200Plus
 


You ignored what I wrote, but I certainly expect that on this subject.

Christians force their laws on homosexuality on others and use the power of government to do that. An allegedly secular government. It should be perfectly legal for LGBTs to marry in any state in the union, but its not because Christians are hypocritically enforcing portions of their religious laws on minorities they hate.

It was shameful for the U.S. federal government to enact the Defense of Marriage Act in the 90s and its shameful today that many states still employ religious hate on their law books to deny a small minority a legal status they're seeking.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by butcherguy
 



butcherguy
If what you got out of the interview was that he lumped them in with bestiality, then you also believe that he lumped them in with heterosexuals too...


And I would support heterosexuals who were offended to make their case to A&E.

Sure, GLAAD was offended, but who was injured?
The point of my post was that the homosexuals were 'lumped in' with bestiality and people that commit adultery... even as heterosexuals... as a sin, in his opinion.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Frith
 


Again I am not Christian.

I do not see the marriage issue as a battle of equality so much as a fight for acceptance.

The LBGT community are fighting to be considered a part of traditional marriage. Yet they still believe marriage is between TWO people. Why is TWO such a magic number?

If it was a fight for equality marriage laws would only consider age and close blood relation.

However, by keeping the marriage set as two people the LBGT community can say " see we stand for traditional marriage between two people". Hence an acceptance into society rather than actual civil liberties or even equal rights for all.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Gryphon66
 


Let's not pretend that the conservative religious crowd doesn't have their own PC agenda that they push at every opportunity.

I am just hoping to see the whole PC concept thrown into the dust bin of history.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Gryphon66
 



1. The counter assertion against what GLAAD et. al. stated about Phil was that he was "just repeating his religious beliefs/quoting the Bible." If, instead, by his insertion of bestiality in the list in such close proximity to homosexual behavior ... then he IS making a statement on his own and therefore HE IS doing what GLAAD cited him for. Homosex=sinful, bestiality=sinful, in light of the oft repeated "sin is sin" ... then what is heard is "homosex=bestiality." That is, at any rate, what some people heard.


Some people, indeed many people, perhaps most people heard it. Why? Because that is how it was presented by glaad and many media outlets. They went with the sizzle and didn't care about the steak. Well done and reap what you sow, eh?


2. In my opinion, GLAAD is most likely, well ... glad ... of the publicity, overall. They couldn't afford to pay for the massive airtime across the media spectrum they're getting for free. More people have probably typed "GLAAD" into their search engines today than in the last year combined.


You could very well be right if--and it's a very big if--you subscribe to the love me, hate me, just TALK about me school of publicity. If not, maybe "aren't they the assholes who tried to railroad that duck guy?" may not be the best branding move.


Any "massive blow back" they're getting seems to be mostly from the political right-wing (fundamentalist Christians, Republicans, libertarians, etc.) (at least, judging from the sites that seem to be repeating the virtually same tagline - Breitbart, Examiner, etc.) which are hardly the sources of GLAAD's anticipated supporting demographics for its activities and efforts.


Again, you could be right. But this thing isn't going away in the way some folks wish it would. Now it's getting play because of twitter blocking links to the istandwithphil website. The massive blowback on that one caused twitter to unblock it claiming a tech glitch, which isn't flying.


This is what I meant by a tipping point in the culture wars when I started the thread. I'd love to see a little more attention put on that aspect because this really isn't playing out according to the script. The really seem to have ph***d with the wrong duck in that respect.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   

200Plus
Cannot have it both ways. Either you believe in God and know it's a sin, or you don't believe in god and it doesn't matter.

Actually civil marriage has nothing to do with any religion.

So, different "churches" oppossing same sex civil unions are forcing their beliefs onto others.

edit on 24-12-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   
I'd like to point out something here.

This isn't a David vs Goliath fight here.

This is two multi millionaires in what basically amounts to a contract dispute. Their lawyers will settle out of court.
I can imagine that DD will move to another possibly more conservative network. And make millions of dollars more.

I don't see Phil as a bad guy here. He merely stated his beliefs. Which btw he's free to do in this country.

Just like the lgbt contingent is free to ask for and certainly deserve equality.

What we all need to do is be respectful of each others beliefs.

And we should realize that if we limit the speech of one group we set ourselves up to limit the speech of other groups as well.

Freedom of speech shouldn't just be free for the speech we agree with. But with speech we may not agree with as well.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 06:06 PM
link   

ANNED
People that have the compulsive urge to control other people are mentally ill.

and the PC people are in need of long term mental health care.


They also need to go back to school and learn about the 1st amendment and freedom of religion.

Political Correctness: The Scourge of our Times.
It is used by people that want to control your daily lives without they themselves being challenged on there control of you.


Lol?

I'm sorry but the consitution protects people from the government.

Not broadcasting companies.

You might have learned something like this in school if you were paying attention. Maybe another visit yourself would help.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Gryphon66
 




Let's not pretend that the conservative religious crowd doesn't have their own PC agenda that they push at every opportunity.


Uh, wait a minute. While you could certainly make a case for the crc having an agenda, there's no way you can accurately call it PC as they are diametrically opposed. The conservative religious crowd's agenda is precisely what the PC folks want to tear down. Some think this is a bad idea, others are glaad that it is being dismantled brick by brick.


I am just hoping to see the whole PC concept thrown into the dust bin of history.


I'm with you there, but the way things are going, it looks as though the PC concept will be successful in throwing history into the dustbin.

Amidst all this fuss and bother about the duck guy and the glaadiators, let us not forget that the whole PC madness springs from cultural marxism. It has a specific pedigree via the Frankfurt School.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 06:15 PM
link   

BlueMoonJoe

Uh, wait a minute. While you could certainly make a case for the crc having an agenda, there's no way you can accurately call it PC as they are diametrically opposed. The conservative religious crowd's agenda is precisely what the PC folks want to tear down. Some think this is a bad idea, others are glaad that it is being dismantled brick by brick.



Both of the silly sides have their own PC nonsense.

The left has gay people, different races/religions other than Christianity, women, etc..

The right has Christians, business owners, and white people.

Both sides have their PC crap, they just express them differently.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   
‘Duck Dynasty’ Debacle Has TV Industry Abuzz As A&E Charts New Territory

Interesting little article



LisaColumn__131015210634-275x198UPDATED: Five Things A&E Did Wrong has become the hot parlor game among TV industry execs at holiday get-togethers. Cable news network execs, meanwhile, are giving thanks for the cultural warfare that has erupted, during this traditionally slow news period, over A&E’s decision to suspend Duck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson for comparing homosexuality to bestiality in a GQ interview even Phil’s family has acknowledged was “coarse.”



A&E has been dazedly dog paddling since the interview came out and its hit show suddenly stopped quacking like all those other homespun reality series on TV and began Bible-thumping like the religious parable duckdynastyit actually is.


A+E Shocked To Learn Bible Thumping ‘Duck Dynasty’ Star Talks Like Bible Thumper

“A rookie mistake.” That’s how one TV industry veteran who’s put in time dealing with rogue reality stars described A&E’s handling of its Duck Dynasty nightmare.

A&E logo“It’s very difficult to keep these people in check then they get famous,” the exec noted, in A&E’s defense. Particularly when the star already has amassed a large pile of money making bird-calling devices for hunters, believes he has a religious calling, and isn’t afraid to lose his TV series. A&E is charting new territory, execs with whom we spoke acknowledged. “You’ve got an immovable object who actually believes he has God on his side. He’s a multimillionaire who lives in a swamp!” one industry image specialist acknowledged. “I don’t’ think he gives a flying .... whether or not [A&E] agrees with him. I don’t think there’s any fear in this guy.” Ditto the rest of the Robertson family, who quickly issued a statement suggesting they will not do the show without Phil.

Our panel of industry execs is still scratching their .s in re why the A&E let Phil Robertson, a guy whose religious beliefs were well known to the network, within 100 yards of a GQ interview.



“Who the hell let them talk to GQ in the first place?” one veteran wondered. “This is their biggest show. Are they going to get a bigger audience by talking to some snarky reporter from GQ? Where is the upside? There is none. Zero.”

Chimed in another: “GQ is not a Duck Dynasty-friendly place, and [A&E] knew they had talent that talks and goes off the reservation. What the # you gonna get from GQ? It’s not going to get you a new audience. Then they left him alone with the reporter.” (A&E had a rep on site, but the reporter nonetheless managed to squeeze in some alone time with Phil, during which he cut loose, according to media reports).

Robertson, on the other hand, is guilty only of consistent behavior. “He has not flinched. He’s very consistent in his opinion. He has gone off [A&E’s] script, but he’s perfectly on-script for him,” said one TV exec. “There was some sincerity to the show – unless it was all bull#. Turns out, it wasn’t.”


18-river-and-jaseIn addition to Know Your Star, execs we spoke with said the basic tenets of Surviving Reality TV Series Hits also include Know Your Show, Know Your Audience — and, last but not least, Get Out Of Your Own Way (aka, Hollywood and New York Are Not the Norm in the Country).



Duck Dynasty isn’t just another of the homespun reality TV shows about swamp people, trailer park people, pickers, hoarders, storage-locker openers, and coupon clippers that litter the TV landscape these days – it’s a religious parable, our pundits noted. “This is a show where, somewhere in every episode they’re saying grace,” noted one. “These people have a certain genuineness to them, even if they did agree to do a reality show.”


Meanwhile, as A&E has learned during the past few days, if it didn’t know it already, a vocal chunk of the show’s audience subscribes to Robertson’s views on the Bible, Christianity, and homosexuality. Putting a show’s star on “hiatus” during the show’s hiatus, and with the next run of 10 Phil-featuring episodes already in the can might have seemed utterly logical from inside the industry, and the jaded press gave the network points for a move that looked like doing something while actually doing not much — and certainly no damage to the franchise. But, to Duck Dynasty’s religious followers, it was a battle cry.
Said one exec, “Their statement … should have been simply along the lines of, ‘The opinion stated by Phil is his opinion only; it’s not the opinion of A&E’ — and let it go.”

Added another: “Gay groups and others can come after [the network], but that’s a lot better to deal with than to have the stars of your [hit] show want to take it elsewhere for not supporting them.”

Ironically, A&E’s Duck Dynasty holiday marathon, with episodes that feature Phil, has not placated Phil’s fans. Weirdly, it’s enraged them and caused them to accuse A&E of a) hypocrisy and b) putting business a. of principles. That’s a bit thick. Industry execs, on the flip side, commend A&E for staying the course on the marathon.



www.deadline.com...

“They’re going to have to apologize,” agreed another. “If they want them back, they’re going to have to eat crow. They’ll probably do it right after Christmas. Look for a note sometime over the next week and a half.”

edit on 063131p://bTuesday2013 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRegal
 



Both of the silly sides have their own PC nonsense.

The left has gay people, different races/religions other than Christianity, women, etc..

The right has Christians, business owners, and white people.

Both sides have their PC crap, they just express them differently.


Again, no. You just can't redefine terms to the point to where they lose their meaning. Both sides have their agendas, certainly, but both are not PC. The reason PC/cultural marxism exists is to tear down the dominant culture that the right seeks to maintain. Calling them both PC is therefore incorrect.


“One can rightfully speak of a cultural revolution, since the protest is directed toward the whole cultural establishment, including morality of existing society.” Herbert Marcuse

“The Revolution won’t happen with guns, rather it will happen incrementally, year by year, generation by generation. We will gradually infiltrate their educational institutions and their political offices, transforming them slowly into Marxist entities as we move towards universal egalitarianism.”
Max Horkheimer


Those who poo poo the idea of the culture wars are free to do so, but that doesn't take away the reality of what is going on and who is pulling your strings as well as yanking your chain.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 08:55 PM
link   
While it is technically accurate to state that a term "political correctness" evolved historically from a socialist/communist vocabulary, through academia with the identity politics of the 60s and 70s, I think we have to admit that the term as used predominantly in American culture has now mutated far beyond that usage into the darling catch-all expression-of-contempt from the political Right in the US (reference DeSouza, Coulter, O'Riley, Buchanan). "PC" has been in use perjoratively from the early 90s to present, usually in tandem with the sister phrases "thought police" and "cultural Marxism" to counter any calls for equal treatment, multiculturalism, denial of hateful speech or in a wider scope, anything smacking of being too "liberal."

One of my favorite quotes on the subject is from Herbert Kohl who said "neoconservatives ... insinuate that egalitarian democratic ideas are actually authoritarian, orthodox and Communist-influenced, when they oppose the right of people to be racist, sexist, and homophobic."

Please, empty and malicious political rhetoric is in constant full-blown use by both "sides" in this country. We are being "divided and conquered" while we sputter and spit about the most trivial stupidities. We are indeed being "managed" but it is neither by a communist "Left" nor a fascist "Right."
edit on 24-12-2013 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
30
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join