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

reply to post by OccamsRazor04

And if a lot of people say "I'm not going to watch Ducks anymore" the guys who buy advertising won't do so anymore.

That's the way it works. No matter how you look at it.

beezzer
But what if it isn't against T&C?

Ours or Mr. Phil's?

We have no idea what he signed to so, we can't say if he violated T&C or not.

OccamsRazor04

maus80
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Ok first off: "I hope you haven't eaten today." Wait, wait...wait. WHEN did I say I was a Christian? puh-lease.

Secondly, you are giving me quotes from, and talking about a guy from, The Old Testament. I was specifically referencing the teachings of Jesus Christ. Once again, he was very clear on the subject, more than once.

edit on 22-12-2013 by maus80 because: grammar errors

Ummm .. I quoted the very next verse after the verse YOU quoted. So try again. The fact you are not a Christian is telling as you have zero idea what the Bible, or Jesus, is talking about.

Yeah, yeah. You finished the passage from the sermon on the mount, which I almost posted in entirety to begin with, but decided to be brief and more specific. How exactly was I taking it out of context? The context, and meaning, are very easy to understand. The rest of your answer was from the Old Testament, and irrelevant, unless we should be bringing incest, multiple wives, murdering back-talking children and all sorts of weirdness into the conversation as well. This is pretty simple, it really is. Jesus was very clear, more than once, in stating that wealth is an evil form of greed, and was extremely quiet in matters of sex and sexuality, other than pertaining to betrayal.

reply to post by BlueMoonJoe


I don't know anyone personally who takes GLAAD (nor PETA for that matter) seriously. They are essentially the Westboro Baptist Church of non-profit orgs.
(ohh the irony! )

OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Rosha

 

Um, that's exactly what he did. He said "according to the Bible" and then said he was a Christian and this is what the Bible teaches.

GLAAD said he is not a Christian and all Christians accept homosexuality as normal and if you disagree you are not a Christian.

I think you are one, misinformed and two, need to go take a look at this man and what he is 'really' saying.
LINK

""Women with women, men with men. They committed indecent acts with one another, and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions," Robertson said. "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." "" - Robertsons' words in the GQ article in question.

Where is " to me" or "in my biblical belief" there ?
Where is judge not ?
Where is love thy neighbor?
Where is any mention of what Jesus said about anything?



""“It seems like, to me, a v*gina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s an*s. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”" - Robertson

Where is " to me" or "in my biblical belief" et al there either?


This has nothing to do with God, again..only this fretful little mans lust for 15 seconds of psuedo-power and fear of anything different to his fish bubble view.

Phage
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

And if a lot of people say "I'm not going to watch Ducks anymore" the guys who buy advertising won't do so anymore.

That's the way it works. No matter how you look at it.

Yep. And I have no problem with that. What I DO have a problem with are groups that proclaim they are about promoting tolerance and acceptance of different ideas, attack anyone and everyone with an idea different to theirs, and then attack all their associates as well. They then leverage the fear they cause and use that fear against their adversaries bullying people into silence for fear of retribution.

If the show got cancelled because no one wanted to watch then so be it, people have the right to choose what they want to support with their viewing time ... except now they don't. GLAAD took away that right by employing their typical tactic of fear and bullying.

daskakik

beezzer
But what if it isn't against T&C?

Ours or Mr. Phil's?

We have no idea what he signed to we can't say if he violated T&C or not.

Word salad.

If you posted something that I didn't agree with and it was within T&C, and I wanted you banned for having an opinion, is that right?

beezzer
Word salad.

If you posted something that I didn't agree with and it was within T&C, and I wanted you banned for having an opinion, is that right?

But you have no idea what the guy signed to so, you can't say that it was similar to someone disagreeing to something within T&C.

maus80

OccamsRazor04

maus80
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Ok first off: "I hope you haven't eaten today." Wait, wait...wait. WHEN did I say I was a Christian? puh-lease.

Secondly, you are giving me quotes from, and talking about a guy from, The Old Testament. I was specifically referencing the teachings of Jesus Christ. Once again, he was very clear on the subject, more than once.

edit on 22-12-2013 by maus80 because: grammar errors

Ummm .. I quoted the very next verse after the verse YOU quoted. So try again. The fact you are not a Christian is telling as you have zero idea what the Bible, or Jesus, is talking about.

Yeah, yeah. You finished the passage from the sermon on the mount, which I almost posted in entirety to begin with, but decided to be brief and more specific. How exactly was I taking it out of context? The context, and meaning, are very easy to understand. The rest of your answer was from the Old Testament, and irrelevant, unless we should be bringing incest, multiple wives, murdering back-talking children and all sorts of weirdness into the conversation as well. This is pretty simple, it really is. Jesus was very clear, more than once, in stating that wealth is an evil form of greed, and was extremely quiet in matters of sex and sexuality, other than pertaining to betrayal.

Yawn.
Seriously, when you have zero understanding of the Bible don't debate it with someone that does. Nothing you say is true.

Act 15:7
After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe.

Act 15:8
God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us.

Act 15:9
He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith.

Act 15:10
Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear?

Act 15:11
No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

As to sexuality ..

Rom 1:27
In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

1Cr 6:9
Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men [fn]

You are free to discount the Bible. It is clear though. Phil does not discount the Bible, it's the basis for his beliefs. I have seen numerous people say if Phil was basing his statements on religious beliefs it wouldn't be a big deal. It's then proven Phil stated exactly that, and they ignore it and continue bashing Phil.

Rosha

OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Rosha

 

Um, that's exactly what he did. He said "according to the Bible" and then said he was a Christian and this is what the Bible teaches.

GLAAD said he is not a Christian and all Christians accept homosexuality as normal and if you disagree you are not a Christian.

I think you are one, misinformed and two, need to go take a look at this man and what he is 'really' saying.

Or, you know, I could look at the ACTUAL INTERVIEW.

I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together. However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me.

Where Phil flat out says he believes what the Bible teaches, and this is it. Seriously, you are proven wrong, again and again it's proven Phil said his religious beliefs say homosexuality is wrong and that is the basis.

This has been a hoot to follow.

I have:
1. Made popcorn.
2. Enjoyed sex (with my wife of course).
3. Taken a shower.
4. Helped change the sheets.

... and you guys are still at it.

OccamsRazor04

Rosha

OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Rosha

 

Um, that's exactly what he did. He said "according to the Bible" and then said he was a Christian and this is what the Bible teaches.

GLAAD said he is not a Christian and all Christians accept homosexuality as normal and if you disagree you are not a Christian.

I think you are one, misinformed and two, need to go take a look at this man and what he is 'really' saying.

Or, you know, I could look at the ACTUAL INTERVIEW.

I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together. However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me.

Where Phil flat out says he believes what the Bible teaches, and this is it. Seriously, you are proven wrong, again and again it's proven Phil said his religious beliefs say homosexuality is wrong and that is the basis.

The two quotes I placed above ARE from his ACTUAL interview.

sigh.

daskakik

beezzer
Word salad.

If you posted something that I didn't agree with and it was within T&C, and I wanted you banned for having an opinion, is that right?

But you have no idea what the guy signed to so, you can't say that it was similar to someone disagreeing to something within T&C.

Yet I disagree with you. If I had a picture of Springer having a salad lunch with Dick Cheney at Haliburton HQ and could force him (with exposure of the picture) to ban you, would that be fair?

Let's see AE fire them all now

The entire Robertson family is standing behind their Patriarch and have public I unannounced they agree with everything Phil said and they are all religious and have given AE ultimatum bring Phil back or they walk, if sued they will countersued on religious freedom, which Phil has already threatened because they had stated in contracts they are christian and pray but AE have been editing their dimmer prayers to remove the word Jesus, Phil and rest of family have already threatened to walk off due to breech of contract if they kept it up.

They twitter and blogs say they are all in agreement with Phil and will not bow to censorship, forced opinion of others, will not change their speeches or way of living. Si commented the company made multi millions before AE came around and the network is not needed and at the moment no longer wanted for being intolerant.

OccamsRazor04
Yawn.
Seriously, when you have zero understanding of the Bible don't debate it with someone that does. Nothing you say is true.

I have a great understanding of The Bible, it isn't that hard to understand. You can't address the validity of any of my arguments, so you are resorting to ad hominem and jumping on my admission that I'm not a Christian. Like I said, you quickly drag in The Old Testament, which contains hundreds or more versus that directly go against the teachings of Jesus.

Everything I said is completely true. If you cannot directly address and disprove them, that is on you. Look at my join date. All of these things have been discussed to death by members far more knowledgeable than you. I am not Phage, I really don't have the patience for your type. Phage - enjoy!

Rosha
The two quotes I placed above ARE from his ACTUAL interview.

sigh.

HILARIOUS!!!! You don't even get it after I point it out to you.

Where is " to me" or "in my biblical belief" there ?

HELLO!!!!

I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together. However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me.

It's right friggin there. You just want to ignore it.

Snarl
This has been a hoot to follow.

I have:
1. Made popcorn.
2. Enjoyed sex (with my wife of course).
3. Taken a shower.
4. Helped change the sheets.

... and you guys are still at it.

Well that isn't saying a lot is it? You were done with all of that in under 20 minutes yes??

I am only teasing. I couldn't help it....I tried to resist.

beezzer
Yet I disagree with you. If I had a picture of Springer having a salad lunch with Dick Cheney at Haliburton HQ and could force him (with exposure of the picture) to ban you, would that be fair?

So you're trying to say that it was blackmail and not someone forgetting to read the fine print of their contract?

It could be but you don't know that which debases the premis of your analogy.

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe


AHHHH hahahahaha. I like you too Kanga. You're a fun person!! I hope everyone else participating is getting a smile out of this.

You know the mods are going to kill these posts, right?

maus80You can't address the validity of any of my arguments, so you are resorting to ad hominem and jumping on my admission that I'm not a Christian.

Oh look the cry of the person who lost the argument. "You resort to ad hominem".

Using the ol' ad hominem ploy is great when it's true. When it's not it just makes you look beaten. Now since I never used any ad hominem attacks against you, it seems you are just beaten.

I used Jesus' own words to prove you are taking his words out of context. You claim to have a great understanding of the Bible yet have zero clue that the old laws don't apply to gentiles because it's considered an undue burden. Seriously, rethink your knowledge of the Bible, it's not great, it's not even good.