If I don't subscribe to your ideology, and can force ATS to ban you, is that right?

Xcalibur254
reply to post by beezzer

 

So if I made a thread on here stating I was fired for such reasons you would come running to defend my right to free speech?

If you were denied the right of free speech, then I would defend you.

If you simply violated workplace rules then you're on your own.

reply to post by dragonridr


And thus is the price of fame. He really doesn't really have a private life anymore. The goal of this interview wasn't to just talk about himself. It was to promote his show. Thus the A&E rep that was present. Phil was clearly acting as an employee of A&E. Even then he is a public figure and anything he says represents his show and the channel it is run on.

reply to post by beezzer


So then if what Phil said violated a clause on his contract he should have been fired. Of course none of us know what his contract says. So how can we lay the blame on anyone and make accusations that his rights were violated?

Xcalibur254
reply to post by beezzer

 

So then if what Phil said violated a clause on his contract he should have been fired. Of course none of us know what his contract says. So how can we lay the blame on anyone and make accusations that his rights were violated?

Since a rep was at the GQ interview, and Phil was not fired, I think it can be safely assumed that what he said was not in violation of his contract.

It was only after the phone call from GLAAD, that he was suspended.

reply to post by beezzer

It was only after the phone call from GLAAD, that he was suspended.

What phone call?

Phage
reply to post by beezzer

 

It was only after the phone call from GLAAD, that he was suspended.

What phone call?

The decision to suspend Robertson came Wednesday night, hours after an early-morning phone call between A&E executives and GLAAD, the civil rights group told TheWrap. A GLAAD spokesman would not say which executives were on the call.

www.thewrap.com...

reply to post by beezzer

Despite having received a massive blowback after A&E suspended Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance against Discrimination said it is researching other companies who sponsor the Christian patriarch of the popular program, Breitbart reported Friday.

GLAAD, the organization that targets what it calls "homophobia," indicated it intends to target those companies in an effort to pressure them to follow A&E's lead. Robertson was suspended after GLAAD contacted A&E executives.

But it appears the group has not gotten its full pound of flesh and apparently wants to destroy the Robertson clan.

“Silence is agreement in this case,” said Rich Ferraro, GLAAD's vice president of communications. “With such egregious anti-gay and racist comments, those companies that choose to be affiliated with this family need to speak out.”

But will their efforts work? The group has already sparked an angry backlash that could only get worse if they continue to target Robertson for holding Christian views they disagree with.

“In the five-and-a-half years I’ve worked at GLAAD, I’ve never received so many violently angry phone calls and social media posts attacking GLAAD for us speaking out against these comments,” Ferraro said.

The group also wants Robertson to "sit down with gay families in Louisiana and learn about their lives and the values they share."

Not everyone on the left is on board with GLAAD, however.

Feminist Camille Paglia, for example, called the Robertson suspension "utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist."

TMZ editor Harvey Levin said A&E was being dishonest, and knew of Robertson's opinion before the GQ interview.

"A&E - outrageous for suspending Phil. They knew his beliefs when they hired him..he was ON VIDEO. A&E has a litmus test on what we can say," he tweeted.

"And when Phil did the interview with GQ ... A&E obviously signed off. Of course the reporter was going to ask about his feelings toward gays," he added.

In another tweet, Levin said he is gay and doesn't agree with Robertson, but said the Duck Dynasty star has a right to his beliefs, which he said are "religious" and not based in hate.

Breitbart noted that GLAAD's outrage appears to be selective, since it has "given left-wing actors and celebrities like Alec Baldwin a pass for anti-gay slurs in the past."

reply to post by beezzer

Got it. "Only after the phone call." Must have been the phone call then.

So, you think a decision made the night after an early morning call must surely be a case of simply knuckling under? You don't think that there were some intense executive meetings that led to the decision? You don't think that maybe the call from GLAAD may have bringing something which may have been of concern to the attention of the executives?

reply to post by beezzer

The decision to suspend Robertson came Wednesday night, hours after an early-morning phone call between A&E executives and GLAAD, the civil rights group told TheWrap. A GLAAD spokesman would not say which executives were on the call.

So representatives called in the early morning and he was suspended at night. I'm sure a lot of other people called during that time including sponsors. So why lay the blame on a call that came hours before the decision was made?

reply to post by Xcalibur254


What is this De Ja Vu - just like minds think alike - its almost like a game of jinx tonite.

reply to post by WWJFKD


Logic is logic.

Connecting dots in no particular order...not so much. Applying logic to illogical conclusions is bound to provide the same sort of thoughts.

Phage
reply to post by WWJFKD

 

Logic is logic.

Connecting dots in no particular order...not so much. Applying logic to illogical conclusions is bound to provide the same sort of thoughts.

edit on 12/22/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Im unclear as to why people are arguing its cause and effect. The phone call was to pressure A and E and it worked at first. Now they changed their minds again which shows it was a snap judgment. They were worried about a backlash which won't materialize.

reply to post by dragonridr


Once again the phone call and the decision came hours apart. Do you really think no one else called during that time? Do you really think A&E got a call from GLAAD and decided "We need to put Phil on hiatus now! But let's wait a few hours."?

If we were to find out that one, if not multiple. sponsors called them during the time between the GLAAD call and the announcement would you still claim that GLAAD is the sole reason for A&E's decision?

Xcalibur254
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Once again the phone call and the decision came hours apart. Do you really think no one else called during that time? Do you really think A&E got a call from GLAAD and decided "We need to put Phil on hiatus now! But let's wait a few hours."?

If we were to find out that one, if not multiple. sponsors called them during the time between the GLAAD call and the announcement would you still claim that GLAAD is the sole reason for A&E's decision?

Yes you know they called their sponsors as well rule number one when trying to go after a show. And alot of them panicked as well im sure as i said earlier even cracker barrell folded pulled their products off the shelf just to change their mind as well. The reason for the change of heart simple people started getting upset over the decisions that made. There was a lot of fans that hopped on this and changed the executives decisions.

Good question. I've been under a self imposed post ban for a few months, now. but your thread got me. Cause a week ago, i'd been reading a new member posting for a few weeks, and chose to write a mod about this person's threads. Not insignificantly and not without pondering my gut feeling for a week or so of reading. And I hadn't been posting, only reading. So, not participating, really, just observing.

So then I see your thread. And I look up the flack about Robertson and Duck Dynasty and A&E, as I don't watch television, though I caught this show once at my daughter's while catsitting for her.

Did A&E have the right to fire him? Sure. They're a business. Though, it may not have been a wise move as a business invested in a medium that should represent a panorama of views without so much judgement, eh?

Now, as to your question as it applies to this site, and my personal caveat of having written a mod about what I read posted by a new member: I have no special ability to ban or insist on a ban, nor would I want any such thing. Nor do I believe in censorship. But I think we can agree that communication can sometimes cross a certain line, though this line is very vague and this, I think, is the essence of your OP, the vagueness of that line.....

as to when it's not about what you disagree with, for you can read that all day here and anywhere or the net, but as to what is definitively inspiring and calling for violence and/or what exemplifies and evokes a gut instinct as to its ongoing happening, and "something just not being right...." if you get what I mean.

These are different qualitative states of judgement, certainly. Do I wish to censor? No. But if I get a gut instinct that someone is exhibiting a certain profilic personality that connotes a propensity for acting in a certain way which may hurt others, should I or will I judge and act? Yes.

There are involved quantitative qualifications, represented within and without context, here, that raise red flags. It's a gray area, in many ways, but instinctually and within a certain context, not really. If you sense someone, within the description I have tried to illuminate, is being hurt.....yes. This is not censorship, but awareness, then, and wanting the best for every human being, yes?
Tetra50

beezzer


My thread question. . . . .

If I don't subscribe to your ideology, and can force ATS to ban you, is that right?

Yes/No.

From the trend I see it's just a matter of time....

You will be a mod soon enough and it won't make any difference what a persons ideology is. Get enough mods to side with you and you can ban the member for any reason you see fit. You can use the old LEO ploy..."stop resisting, Stop resisting!!"

Your problem is that you view right and wrong as absolutes, no shades of gray, compassion is a non entity, and ideology combined with protocol, takes precedent over honor. I remember this attitude when in basic training. Apparently so do you!

reply to post by tetra50


Can you count how many members here at ATS have called for revolution?

reply to post by WWJFKD

No, I can't. For one, math is not the language of my strong point. But perhaps I am dense, as I must ask your point?
Tetra

reply to post by beezzer


Beez,

Here is my take on it. The gay mafia is the very epitome of what they are claiming to fight. They attack christianity like wolves on a carcass, they cast aspersion on anyone that does anything else but completely accept the entire package, not even "acceptance" or "tolerance" but if you don't go so far to acknowledge that this movement is tantamount to the second coming of Christ then you are a bigot, plain and simple.

A&E had every right to take any action they felt needed. A&E is a private company and the members of Duck Dynasty are under contract and what ever action they take against their employees is up to them and while I do take issue to the obvious slight of free speech I feel they are enabling, I can not justify an all out war on the network because of it.

GLAAD however...... That's another story altogether. The problem is that despite what the liberal media tells you all, the majority is with Phil, the majority wants free speech protected, the majority wants the gay mafia to go away, the majority is sick of the gay mafia forcing unneeded things on people that didn't care before and don't care now. An overwhelming amount of people want that. Overwhelming.

It's time to lower the voice of the liberal agenda from their own side, it's time to understand that if you keep pushing this fight, this pointless fight that the backlash is going to set you back a half of century. More people than ever are willing to tolerate, accept but it's being pushed too far, too hard and so many more people still hold Christian values and even more just don't want to hear about "gay rights" in a time when their own rights as AMERICANS in general are being trampled on.

I promise you one thing. Stop this assault on Christianity, abandon this witchhunt for "bigots" and learn how to be at peace with yourselves and your sexuality without involving the rest of society or I can promise you one thing....... It will without question become a whole lot harder for you before it gets better any time in the foreseeable future.

Authoritarian liberalism has a finite shelf life and if you don't try to get along with everyone else before it dies in America, what do you have left? Russia? There is the possibility of this type of backlash here as well, the numbers are on the side of people keeping their expectations in line with human nature and I think our liberal administration here in the U.S. has given people false hope about exactly the state of where human nature stands.....

reply to post by WWJFKD


Let me be explicit because I sense we are talking from a different context, altogether, where you refer to politics, and I refer to people in houses being tortured by serial killers, who write about their messiah complexes and how they will not cause revolution, but "RAPTURE," ie, kill, deal with violently anyone who opposes them rapidly and without hesitation......

do we have an understanding? If you, as a profiler of murderous intent psycholigically speaking, came across such a poster, with certain and specific criteria and mentions of such out of context that sent a chill up your back, then what would you do? Should you object, should you ask this site to ban that person? And even there, is a paradoxical quandary, for shutting them down by banning them, then silences what they may be up to, and anyone that may be under their influence (putting it mildly) without control cannot be ascertained or their whereabouts found out.....or do you let them, innocent of all that, continue, speaking in a way that you know will feed and encourage others who will do such harm......

And not only that, but what is a website's responsibility thereto, and when are the police called when it's become obvious, or even when it's not so obvious. Revolution? I'm not talking about revolution, dude. I'm talking about torture. No one likes to think about it. We'd rather think we're all relatively sane, whackjobs, objecting to the standard mathematical equation of screw everyone over, TPTB, and other abbreviations that we take our anger over our lives out on and our lack of control, and showing how complete how lack of control is.....

What I'm talking about here is crossing a whole other line.....