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.
catfishjoe
It seems as if some groups are all for free speech, unless something negative is said about them. Who cares what some bearded white guy says? Not everyone is going to like you. Paper thin skin and weak as water.
m.newson6.com...
Pull your pants up!!!
Tulsa is looking to pass a law banning sagging pants. First time offenders will get a warning and after that its a $25-$50 ticket.
The councilman who came up with the ordinance states it has nothing to do with race and I agree. I see more white boys doing it than blacks. Me, personally, can't stand to see kids dressing like that. Thank god my boy wants skinny jeans.....................
It will remain a crybaby issue until it happens to someone who gets fired for a pro abortion stance.
macman
reply to post by theantediluvian
I stand by my statement.
Piers Morgan should be returned back to England.
I never said he should be kicked off air, fired, or silenced.
Does that make my stance clear enough for you???
*sigh* Why is this asshat still on American TV, let alone still here in the states?
Can someone please show him the door.
theantediluvian
Seems perfectly clear to me. Piers Morgan said something you didn't like, and not only did you want him off American TV ("Why is this asshat still on American TV"),
theantediluvian
you wanted *somebody* to deport him ("let alone still here in the states?") because he expressed an opinion that differed from yours.
theantediluvian
The "somebody" could only refer to the government because who else can deport people? So in actuality, you expressed a desire for the government to kick a television personality out of the country for saying something that you didn't like.
That's waaaaaay beyond calling for his employer to put him on hiatus.
beezzer
It will remain a crybaby issue until it happens to someone who gets fired for a pro abortion stance.
g146541
reply to post by network dude
I can't believe that a "reality show" is being discussed on ATS.
Talk about a distraction.
What will come of this, division of the peoples and a better contract for the duck guys.
You folks have been hoodwinked.
I can't believe that a "reality show" is being discussed on ATS.
Talk about a distraction.
What will come of this, division of the peoples and a better contract for the duck guys.
You folks have been hoodwinked.
beezzer
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
I've even defended Westboro Baptist Church.
Not because I agree with those idiots, but because free speech is important!
olaru12
beezzer
It will remain a crybaby issue until it happens to someone who gets fired for a pro abortion stance.
If that pro abortion stance/speech hurts the business in question; they deserve to be fired.
It's a business decision not a free speech issue. Most businesses don't need BS in conducting businesses. It's hard enough as it is. Why is this so hard to understand?edit on 20-12-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)
beezzer
reply to post by olaru12
If "Duck Dynasty" network A&E feared advertisers would scatter like waterfowl after a shotgun blast because of Phil Robertson's anti-gay comments ... it's not happening.
A company called Skyjacker -- which builds truck suspensions -- tells us it stands solidly behind Phil and the show ... saying it's a matter of God and country -- it's a free country and Phil has a right to his opinions.
www.tmz.com...
Seems that at least one of the sponsors is siding with Duck Dynasty.
Bad for business, A&E business.
redhorse
reply to post by network dude
The whole situation is so absurd that I suspect the network was simply looking for an excuse to tank the show. In spite of it's huge popularity at the moment there are signs in the popular culture tea leaves that blow-back is imminent, so maybe they were just gettin' out while the gettin' was good.
theantediluvian
beezzer
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
I've even defended Westboro Baptist Church.
Not because I agree with those idiots, but because free speech is important!
Privately owned television networks have no obligation to provide platforms for free speech. This is not a free speech issue. If Phil Robertson wants to kill ducks and say it's because "God hates fags!" he's within his rights to do so (at least during duck hunting season). If he wants to put his sentiments on poster board and parade around the streets with it, nobody should stop him. That doesn't mean A&E is obligated to pay him to star in a television show.
luciddream
Question is... when does it cross the line into Hate Speech and is justified by some.
We've become a timid country afraid to damage the delicate skin of anyone whom might be within earshot.