Duck Dynasty Strangeness - Sorry

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by James1982

 

No, dammit. Just no.

Quote me what he said. Then tell me what offends you. Is it that he shared his recollection of what he experienced? Should he not share personal experience?

What is it that makes you angry about that?

I really expected far more insight from you, BFFT. I don't believe I've ever spoken with you in a thread before, but if I read a post I'm impressed with, and look over at the member, your name has been there quite frequently, so please don't take that as an insult.

I think you merely misunderstood the my OP, don't feel bad, evidently you aren't alone judging by the other replies to this thread.

Anyway,

What he said didn't offend me, as that's a pretty difficult thing to do. I couldn't care less about what his opinions or feelings are. I do, however, care about how society and the country as a whole RESPONDS to his opinions and feelings, because that has an impact on me personally.

It is my belief that American society (can't talk on other countries, as I don't have several decades experience in them) is nearly totally controlled and manipulated by behind the scenes powers. This hysteria over the man's comments, over the trayvon thing, over EVERYTHING these days is manufactured. People are worked up, and controlled. I'm trying to figure out WHAT they are trying to do right now, as they seem to be missing an opportunity to whip up racial tension, something they love doing.

Are a few people here spitballing about the true motives and methods of these people going to solve the worlds problems? Nothing that profound. But everything starts from people examining the world around them. If you share my views that society is being manipulated in the manner I describe, which it seems you do based on your posting history, you can understand why your post wasn't actually a reply to my OP, and why I expected better.

This last part is in general and not directed at you:

It seems people read the words, but don't hear the message. When I say "why aren't his black-comments more of an issue than his gay ones" you read "His black comments should be an issue, and people should be offended by it" I speak plainly, don't make inferences you aren't qualified to make.

reply to post by James1982


I think if you would quote exactly what he said in his "black comments", you will see why I responded with pure frustration instead of insight. There is nothing to add insight to, because his "black comments" weren't what you were claiming they were in your OP. He really had no "black comments" other than recounting his personal experience of not really seeing them being mistreated.

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by James1982

 

I think if you would quote exactly what he said in his "black comments", you will see why I responded with pure frustration instead of insight. There is nothing to add insight to, because his "black comments" weren't what you were claiming they were in your OP. He really had no "black comments" other than recounting his personal experience of not really seeing them being mistreated.

I can totally understand responding with frustration, I'm a pretty bad offender myself. Trying to work on it though.

His exact quote:

"I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once,""

Honestly, I do not believe him for a single second. I'm sure every single person alive has seen everybody around them mistreated at one point or another, for one reason or another. It's completely at odds with history and reality, and if he is truly being honest, it shows his idea of what "mistreatment" is doesn't jive with most people.

There was a time were blacks were treated badly in this country. I am not sorry for it, as I did not perpetrate it. I feel no guilt or responsibility. But I still can and do recognize there WAS a time where their treatment wasn't acceptable, it DID happen, today's overzealous blacks who think they know what suffering or oppression is, without ever experiencing it in the manner those that came before them did, don't override the fact that there was a time that the feeling of being a victim was actually a reality, not an ideal imposed by "cultural leaders"

While I detest the modern day "civil rights" issues, claiming that blacks were happy and not victimized during a period of a time where they WERE legally, and socially second class citizens is totally dishonest.

Even if he REALLY never witnessed any victimization of blacks, which I don't believe for a single second, he is still making statements he isn't qualified to make. How can he think he has the right to judge the happiness of a whole race of people, spread over a massive country, based on the interaction with a few farm workers in his area?

"Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues."

The suffering of past generations does not imbue current generations with any sort of entitlement, in my opinion, but refusing to accept the truth of the past, and even worse promoting ignorant views on that truth is something I cannot respect at all.

That's my personal opinion of the situation, but this thread wasn't really supposed to be about that. I evidently failed, like always, at making a thread that actually prompts any meaningful discussion. I just must not have a knack for it or something. Might as well let this one die.

I don't live in the US and I never saw "Duck Dynasty", so in the previous two days I read some articles in my spare time and watched one episode on YouTube.

I can't really say by my experience that the black remarks were much less discussed than the gay remarks.

Maybe it has to do with the viewership, and they probably have a larger gay closet fan-base who like the uncomplicated, paramilitary masculinity, than they have a black fan-base.
I think the sons are quite hot, and it's so endearingly camp watching these guys act all bushwhacked, while they are multimillionaire yuppies who made their family fortune from a phallic device that mimics the mating call of ducks.

Either way, it seems like a deliberately manufactured program, image and controversy.

reply to post by badgerprints


What a ridiculously large amount of proudly partisan drivel.

I counted 3 fallacies and 4 misinterpretations.

Not even going to waste my time counterquoting because I'm sure you're firm in your "beliefs" that deny plain facts.

Please continue derailing the thread with your political trolling.

reply to post by James1982


I am not clear on the point of your thread. If any of the premise is that Phil Robertson is a racist, I stand by my harsh assessment. That is a big scarlet letter to paint someone with, and if you do brand them a racist you better be damned right about.

In this case, all there is in reinterpreting words based on the premise that he is lying. Nothing indicates he is lying, other than your own incredulity. I come from "white trash", myself. Oilfield trash is what we are known as. And in the 80's, there was no money in the oilfield. I understand how he could go through life not personally seeing it. Especially if he wasn't looking for it.

I think a worthwhile discussion would be how media has become the "vector" that the meme is passed through. In this case, the "racist" and "gay bashing" memes, which are typically easy to infect the populace with, did not work.

Wouldn't be surprised to see him accused of pedophilia next. Keep throwing mud and see if something sticks.

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by James1982

 

I am not clear on the point of your thread. If any of the premise is that Phil Robertson is a racist, I stand by my harsh assessment. That is a big scarlet letter to paint someone with, and if you do brand them a racist you better be damned right about.

In this case, all there is in reinterpreting words based on the premise that he is lying. Nothing indicates he is lying.

I think a worthwhile discussion would be how media has become the "vector" that the meme is passed through. In this case, the "racist" and "gay bashing" memes, which are typically easy to infect the populace with, did not work.

Wouldn't be surprised to see him accused of pedophilia next. Keep throwing mud and see if something sticks.

No no no, not trying to paint him a racist. Personally I feel he's probably a big ignorant on some things, but so are we all.

My point is that usually the media and the manipulators use any and all excuses to whip up racial tension given even the slightest chance. His racial comments seem like they would have been the focal point of this whole thing, with his comments on homosexuals being a side note.

I was wishing to examine the reasons for the racial issue NOT being taken advantage of more than it is. There is definitely coverage of his racial comments, and maybe it's just a perception thing, but it seems the vast majority of outrage and discussion is about the comments on homosexuals, not blacks.

The only reason I made this thread, is because I was asking several people I know this exact same question. I commented how I was surprised that his racial comments weren't blown out of proportion, guess what they said? They weren't even aware he made racial comments, only the ones about homosexuals. Which basically backed up my point, the racial issue is seemingly on the back-burner, which seems odd.

reply to post by James1982


First, I did edit my post whie you were responding.

I think you and I both ask questions here that could be answered by the same revelation.

You are asking why the race card wasn't played first? That IS a good question. I think that the public at large is pretty sick of race being used, honestly. Short of a Mel Gibson moment, people seem more numb to that lately, maybe due to the social equality seen in urban areas post 2008. Who knows.

I think that more often than not, these distractions create opportunity for a sleight of hand. The right hand is over here worried about gay bashing (the minority du jour)....whats the left hand doing?

reply to post by James1982


As a Muslim, I have to chime in here a bit and give my neutral opinion on all of this.

Neutral opinions are good by the way because they let you see what your emotions don't. So listen to me carefully.

Ive heard both sides of the argument and I can safely say that they are both, unequivocally, correct in their own ways.

We shouldn't bash people because they expressed their opinions, even if their opinions are in reality disruptive, divisive, and insulting.

We should also not bash people because they got offended from someone elses opinion.

Get my drift?

Both sides of the argument have a right to say what they feel like saying, except for bashing each other for saying it. Thats just nonsense.

Oh, and corporate America owns the right to kick a man from their job if they express socially nonpleasing remarks in public. Those are just the rules, so maybe Phil felt that talking to GQ didn't mean he was harming his company's policies. But that just says there was a misunderstanding or miscommunication on both sides.

I don't understand why people are jumping the gun saying: ITS ALL A BIG EFFIN CONSPIRACY TO TAKE AWAY OUR RIGHTS! when in reality its just daily drama, it happens everywhere all over this country. This time it just happened to happen to a famous person. So whaT?

Here is a tip, its called a manufactured controversy, its reality TV 101.

Viewership falling? have a girl punched in the face (jersey shore)
Having a hard time in ratings? Just tell honey boo boo to put butter on her spaghetti.
Duck calls getting boring? and on and on they go. Folks sure do fall
for this stuff.

bloodreviara
Here is a tip, its called a manufactured controversy, its reality TV 101.

Viewership falling? have a girl punched in the face (jersey shore)
Having a hard time in ratings? Just tell honey boo boo to put butter on her spaghetti.
Duck calls getting boring? and on and on they go. Folks sure do fall
for this stuff.

Exactly. Which is why it's surprising that they didn't blow the racial issue into a giant thing like they normally do.

That's the subject I was attempting to discuss.

Got any ideas?

He never said blacks are less than human. He never said racism or slavery or segregation is ok. He never said he dislikes or doesn't trust black people. He didn't say the n word.

He said that he personally never saw black people mistreated. That's all. What are we supposed to say? "You liar! You saw black people being mistreated...and you liked it!!!" ?

Most of us were not around back then. So we don't know. And none of us followed Mr Robertson around from birth so we do not know what he saw.

Whenever the phrase "Jim Crow days" or "black slavery" is mentioned, we automatically have these images pop up in our mind of white people beating on black people, burning crosses in front lawns, and a whole slew of ugly images... I have no doubt these things happened. But I don't think they happened everywhere at every second of the day. Some people are mean and some people are kind. It was white people after all who ended slavery so there must have been a lot of kind people around back then, actually. Its just we only think about the bad. The bad was horrible, no doubt. But don't fool yourself into believing there were no kind white people. I'd be willing to bet there were even kind slave owners and that not every slave was beaten and or raped. If they were kind then why did they even own slaves? I don't know maybe because it was normal. They were treated like work animals, which again is horrible, but not every person is cruel to their work animals. In the future, we may be considered barbaric...

People in the world are starving, suffering, being beaten and raped, have no clean water or medicine...yet many of us are buying 5 or more presents for each family member and ccelebrating in our homes together...actually CELEBRATING while millions are without decent shelter and food. This is the age of the Internet. We KNOW good and well what is going on! There is no excuse. We have the ability to end world hunger and poverty. Yet we bitch and complain about our dinner at a restaurant being late or less than perfect when it arrives. Why? Because it's "normal". Just like slavery and Jim Crow laws were normal. Does that mean each of us is cruel and cold hearted? And it's not just white people to blame this time. No its everyone. In America and around the world there are millionaires of every ethnicity.

I'm not a millionaire. I live in the American version of poverty. No vehicle of my own, bad credit, earn less than 10,000 a year etc... yet I along with all of you reading this i bet, are 1% ers. That's how poor most of the world is. As poor as I am in America, I'm extremely wealthy compared to 99% of the people living on this planet.

So, if I can survive comfortably like this, imagine if everyone did. Imagine if we all got ONE present for Christmas and birthdays. And there was a 10-20 dollar limit, and homemade gifts that cost next to nothing were the norm. Imagine where all that extra money could go.

If we look back and see only the bad, what will our descendants think of us? They will have more documentation if the interwebs still exist. They will see the greed the obesity while others starve right before there eyes just as we see it today. But at least they will see that there were also a lot of kindhearted people because that will be documented too.

So, in conclusion, I would have to say there have always been kind and cruel people. And it's very possible that Mr Robertson himself did not witness mistreatment of black people. The laws in place WERE a form of mistreatment but that is not what he was talking about. It could also be that he did not see many black people at all. Or like some mentioned, perhaps he never heard black people complain because they were afraid to complain in front of a white person. Also, he was not that old so he may not remember everything or he did not know how to properly recognize all forms of mistrestment. Anyway there are plenty of reasons to believe he is telling the truth as he sees it and that his remarks were not racist at all. Simply a recollection of what he saw. I actually think it's pretty crazy that people don't believe him. You actually believe that blacks were being spit on and pushed around constantly everywhere? That's rediculous. Slavery and racism is bad enough as it is. Let's not make it worse by adding fairy tales as if every white person was some evil bastard who beat and lynched and raped blacks at every opportunity. I am not sure but I really don't think he is was advocating a return to Jim Crow days... He was just telling what he saw. Nothing more nothing less. Today black people have more rights and advantages than ever before. Yet the flames of racism are being fanned openly and freely like never before. So, it may very well be true that the black people are complaining a lot more now than in Jim Crow days. The reasons for that may be they were afraid to back then and are allowed and encouraged to today, but that doesn't change the fact. And that's all he was doing was stating a fact as he knew it to be true. There's nothing terrible about anything he said. I read the article but I don't even watch the show. Never seen more than a minute or two of it. So I'm not a fan. Just a guy who wants everyone to get along and drop the petty bs and focus on REAL issues. Like the millions currently suffering. So, I invite you to join me in American poverty! But you'll still be a 1% ers so...you still have to feel guilty. Until we make everyone a 1% er! Er, wait, how would that work? I dunno, but everyone can have food, decent shelter, clean water and medicine! It's doable! We can just leave this silly racism crap in the past where it belongs! I DEMAND for there to be all these different races. I'm white and I very much enjoy being around all people! I like the way foreigners talk, I love black people's sense of humor and attitude same with all colors of people! I wwould NEVER want to miss out on experiencing this mixture of cultures! I very much appreciate the Asians sense of respect and honor. I would never want to live in a world without "that" thing that we all bring to the table. We would be missing out on so much if even one culture ceased to exist. I mourn for those that are extinct or near extinct... and I know it's possible we may all be one color one day and I both yearn for, and mourn, that day... I guess that is all for now! Merry Christmas!

3n19m470
He never said blacks are less than human. He never said racism or slavery or segregation is ok. He never said he dislikes or doesn't trust black people. He didn't say the n word.

He said that he personally never saw black people mistreated. That's all. What are we supposed to say? "You liar! You saw black people being mistreated...and you liked it!!!" ?

I'm sorry that you wasted so much time on that text wall based on lack of knowledge.

He also said that black people were happier before the civil rights movement and that he is "with the blacks because he is white trash".

Kind of sounds like he's saying black people are all just a tanned version of white trash.

I'd be pretty insulted myself if I was likened to a bunch of morons sitting around making duck calls on a terrible TV program, but I ultimately think that this whole issue is pathetic and forgettable at best.

The show was never good to begin with. It's not funny, it's not insightful, it's certainly not intellectually stimulating. It's just awful. People are just choosing to be outraged based on their pre-determined chips on their shoulders surrounding the PC issues, and I mean that for both the left and the right. It's pathetic.

Time to grow up, nation.

I think its so funny that a good ol boy from Monroe is getting so much attention because he is a so called anti-homosexual and racist fella.

I can tell you exactly what he meant by his "racist statement".

Despite what TV and movies and the media would have you believe, there weren't constant lynching/beating/kidnapping of black folks back in the 1960's Louisiana. The whole state was really in the great depression still. Folks were still plowing with mules around there. Mr. Duck Dynasty grew up in the same exact part of the state as my dad did. They were all farmers there. Whites and blacks all lived around there. They all had fruit/vegetable stands and were all dirt poor. Country black folks are generally hard working, respectful (to white folks and black folks both, not just one or the other) and don't constantly harp on about racism and how white folks are evil. Race was something that was really a non issue because everyone in the area was poor, money was the equalizer for them all.

Its a start contrast to what many of the younger black folks these days seem to think. The most racist folks I know arent white folks, or older black folks, they're the younger black folks.

If Paula Deen lived back in the 60's and said she had said the N-word before, nobody at all, white or black would have given a scrap. Fast forward to today where she merely said that she had said that word before.....back in the eighties no less, and was totally demonized by the media as a racist in no time.

TheRegal
reply to post by badgerprints

 

What a ridiculously large amount of proudly partisan drivel.

I counted 3 fallacies and 4 misinterpretations.

Not even going to waste my time counterquoting because I'm sure you're firm in your "beliefs" that deny plain facts.

Please continue derailing the thread with your political trolling.

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

Yeah,
It really takes a lot of accusations, derision and dismissal make you feel better when someone says it how it is and cuts too close to the bone.
Political trolling? Have fun with that.

badgerprints
Yeah,
It really takes a lot of accusations, derision and dismissal make you feel better when someone says it how it is and cuts too close to the bone.
Political trolling? Have fun with that.

Alright, I'll bite I guess since you're so eager to actually know "how it is".

Christmas has been expunged from damn near everything and people still celebrate it no matter how much the left tries to wipe it out.

Christmas is everywhere and it's not "the left" trying to wipe it out. It's a small group of loud secularists who don't see a place for government recognition of one semi-religious holiday. If an independent company/person/organisation wants to use a specific religion, nobody cares. They only care when it's the government.

Abortion is legal and more than 50 MILLION babies have been legally put to death by tolerant choice since the seventies

Fetuses aren't babies.

...in a country with only 330 million. That means that nearly one in 3 American women is a murderer.

2 fallacies here.

Firstly, your math is wrong because you're assuming that the same population and the same people have all been here since the 70s.

Secondly, murder is a legal definition, and if the government doesn't recognize abortion as murder, then it isn't murder.

A 50,000,000 body count beats every mass murdering regime in history hands down. That's a VICTORY for the left!

It's also not murder. Fact.

The country is printing money so they can pay a third of our population to sit on their asses and do nothing.

Oh a third of the population collects financial aid and every single one of those people sit on their ass doing nothing? Show me the eveidence or kindly shut up indefinitely. That's absolute nonsense. Grow up.

And, of course, your figure is opposed to the people in the military who march around and do nothing for the people paying them, right? The American military which accounts for, oh, just half of the entire world's military spending budgets. Let's never bring that up; it's not a part of your faction's pre-determined mindset.

They want to own and control what you THINK.

This is why Phil is under such scrutiny. Not because of what he's done but because of what he thinks.
His opinion, and most of your opinions, are not acceptable to the media elite and the leftist agenda because they do not conform.

Conform or perish.

Oh my God you actually managed to make a comment that was actually on topic. Look at you go!

The thing about idiots, including Phil, is that they think they have opinions. These aren't opinions at all, actually, they are direct conflictions with peoples' realities. You cannot "disagree" with a lifestyle -- it's not an argument, it's a state of being. It's preferential. There's nothing to have an opinion about. It's hilarious to me how many people come in here and say his "right to free speech is being violated". It's not. Your right to free speech protects you from the government, not an independant broadcasting company. The idiot can say whatever he wants, and A&E can tell him he's being innappropriate and that they'd rather not have him attached to their public image.

Be yourself.
Speak your mind.

Unless you're not on "the right", of course.

When the left tries to silence you, speak louder. Pity them. And move on.

"Be stubborn, never listen to valid reasoning, and make sure you're denying plain facts and valid arguments so that general society perceives you as a total moron and the only place you can find social acceptance is in social currency on right-dominated political forums.".

The left and right are both retarded, sorry -- equally.

This thread was about a specific part of a certain circumstance with a dude and you chose to roam in here and beat your ideological drum. If you can't stay on topic, don't pretend to participate; all you're doing is ranting about your partisan subscription to a group-think and it's for from magnanamous. Very disrespectful to the original poster who was actually seeking meaningful discussion, not your adolescent political trolling. Get a life.

reply to post by TheRegal

I'm sorry that you wasted so much time on that text wall based on lack of knowledge.

With a condescending opening shot like this, you sure better deliver the goods, Santa.

He also said that black people were happier before the civil rights movement and that he is "with the blacks because he is white trash".

Kind of sounds like he's saying black people are all just a tanned version of white trash. as you put it,

Perhaps it does. But as it was a hanging quote sans context, it would appear you brought that judgment with you tucked into the pre-determined chip on your shoulder you mention later on because he doesn't actually say anything about black people in general, just the one's he was working with.

To me, with my pre-determined chip that is programmed to read the text to see what it actually says instead of what it ‟kind of” says, my take away is that he said the blacks that he (being white trash) was hoeing cotton with, were happy because they were Godly.

Of course, ymmv and apparently has.

I'd be pretty insulted myself if I was likened to a bunch of morons sitting around making duck calls on a terrible TV program, but I ultimately think that this whole issue is pathetic and forgettable at best.

Assuredly, because being insulted is what it's all about, whether it is warranted or not. But, hey, what if those ‟morons” and their ‟terrible” program were gay?

How would you feel when your oh, so insensitive opinion about this ‟pathetic and forgettable” issue was deemed hate speech and utterly marginalizing to boot and you were suddenly seen as a moronic bigot who hated gays and a racist to boot?

By any sane method of measurement, your statements here are far more hateful than anything he said. Luckily for you, the less than sane PC blade only cuts one way and you are not held to the same standard as those you deem inferior morons. Can you imagine not being enlightened and having to take sensitivity training and be stigmatized and all that? The horror.

BlueMoonJoe

Assuredly, because being insulted is what it's all about, whether it is warranted or not. But, hey, what if those ‟morons” and their ‟terrible” program were gay?

How would you feel when your oh, so insensitive opinion about this ‟pathetic and forgettable” issue was deemed hate speech and utterly marginalizing to boot and you were suddenly seen as a moronic bigot who hated gays and a racist to boot?

Are you serious?

You're trying to create an alternate reality where calling someone a moron based on a PERSONAL PREFERENCE is the same as calling someone a moron based on THEM ACTUALLY BEING A MORON.

Honestly, I could eat a bowl of alphabet soup and defocate a better argument than the one you just presented.

"How would I feel if... [insert scenario that I would never be ignorant enough to enter here]". I wouldn't feel anything, because I would never say that a TV program is bad because there are gay people on it. I'm not a fossil who parrots idiotic rhetoric disguised as "opinions" like this is still the 1860s.

Unless you're saying: if this show were exactly the same as it is now, except that these rednecks were gay. I would still say the same thing about them, stupid morons sitting around doing duck calls, and it's not funny, not stimulating, and boring as hell. Anyone who would liken it to homophobia would be a complete and utter moron, and their fallacious "opinion" on the matter wouldn't affect me. Do you think everyone who says that they hate Perez Hilton is labeled a "homophobe"? They aren't. The guy is a reject. Your point is missing here.

TheRegal

Christmas is everywhere and it's not "the left" trying to wipe it out. It's a small group of loud secularists who don't see a place for government recognition of one semi-religious holiday.

Like you said, a small group of loud secularists. The left is comprised of small loud groups who support each others agenda to the point that they need to in order to attack the right and garner votes.
That is exactly what the left is and all of these small groups with specific agendas vote together.
Most of them don't even like or trust each other but they've banded together to tear down the majority of the population using politics in hopes that they will be able to emerge strong enough as individual factions to destroy each other in the endgame.
Not a bad strategy except they rely on destroying the most productive portion of society to achieve their goals.

Fetuses aren't babies.

In your left handed thinking they aren't. but you still kill em dead.
You get points or miles or something when you kill a fetus?
After doing in 50 million it seems like someone should have won a toaster or something.

2 fallacies here.

Firstly, your math is wrong because you're assuming that the same population and the same people have all been here since the 70s.

Secondly, murder is a legal definition, and if the government doesn't recognize abortion as murder, then it isn't murder.

Murder, killing, aborting, yep they're still dead.
No need to get into too many numbers, average female life expectancy, years of legal abortion, many more than 50 million, 150-165 million American women. Yep, nearly one in 3 has a confirmed kill.

A 50,000,000 body count beats every mass murdering regime in history hands down. That's a VICTORY for the left!

It's also not murder. Fact.

It is a body(fetus) count. Fact.

The country is printing money so they can pay a third of our population to sit on their asses and do nothing.

Oh a third of the population collects financial aid and every single one of those people sit on their ass doing nothing?

I will revise that,
One third of the income in the US comes from government in the form of entitlements or paycheck.
Since the government is only in existence, at this point to perpetuate it's existence, about a fourth of them collect free cash and the rest work very hard to squander the rest. IE 1/3rd of the country consumes without contributing to the tax base. It ads up to a total contribution of nothing.
A bit general but you want specifics when the big picture is so easy to see.

And, of course, your figure is opposed to the people in the military who march around and do nothing for the people paying them, right? The American military which accounts for, oh, just half of the entire world's military spending budgets. Let's never bring that up; it's not a part of your faction's pre-determined mindset.

Yeah,
Two wars, 8 years in. I was infantry and have seen my share. I have no problem saying our country has wasted trillions on crap and cost a lot of lives in the bargain. I've fought for the right to have that opinion.
Or can't I have that opinion because being in two wars isn't my reality?

They want to own and control what you THINK.

This is why Phil is under such scrutiny. Not because of what he's done but because of what he thinks.
His opinion, and most of your opinions, are not acceptable to the media elite and the leftist agenda because they do not conform.

Conform or perish.

Oh my God you actually managed to make a comment that was actually on topic. Look at you go!

The thing about idiots, including Phil, is that they think they have opinions. These aren't opinions at all, actually, they are direct conflictions with peoples' realities. You cannot "disagree" with a lifestyle

This is YOUR fallacy.
Most humans disagree with someones lifestyle.
Near 7 billion of them and they all would laugh in your face if you told them they didn't have an opinion because it conflicted with your "reality"

When the left tries to silence you, speak louder. Pity them. And move on.

"Be stubborn, never listen to valid reasoning, and make sure you're denying plain facts and valid arguments so that general society perceives you as a total moron and the only place you can find social acceptance is in social currency on right-dominated political forums.".

The left and right are both retarded, sorry -- equally.

I really like how you use the words moron and retarded to show how valid your reasoning is.
But no, you miss the point.
I always listen. It is the best way to find out what the left is trying to hide.
WHEN THE LEFT TRIES TO SILENCE YOU, SPEAK LOUDER.
Because you are saying something they want kept quiet.

This thread was about a specific part of a certain circumstance with a dude and you chose to roam in here and beat your ideological drum.

The ideological point is the only point needed here because the entire issue is ideological.

A "part of a certain circumstance with a dude" may be all you perceive as being arguable, but that's because you don't want the big picture to be discussed.

My "off topic" comments and "drum beating" are very valid. They point out the big picture in this issue which is that YOU and the left don't want people to have their own opinions.

You even go as far as to assert that these people don't even have opinions because they involve opinions of someones lifestyle.
You actually presume to tell people what opinions they can and cannot have if their opinion "conflicts with someone else's reality?"

That's a real twisted way of telling people what they can and cannot think.

It's total nonsense yes...but you do it very convincingly.

Merry Christmas.

badgerprints
This is YOUR fallacy.
Most humans disagree with someones lifestyle.
Near 7 billion of them and they all would laugh in your face if you told them they didn't have an opinion because it conflicted with your "reality"

I'm going to stick with this point alone because it's actually on topic. I'm sorry you're having such a hard time finding other threads to express your partisan rage on, but this is how online forums work. We discuss the topic of the thread -- not every issue that any single person has beef with. That is not "the left trying to silence people", it's called human argument etiquette. Get real.

Anyways:

o·pin·ion
[uh-pin-yuhn] Show IPA

noun

a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

This is why it's not actually an opinion. People call anti-homosexuality an opinion to make it seem like they have grounds to say anything bad about it because opinions have a certain social protection. The problem is, there is absolute certainty about homosexuality. They just like the same gender. That's it. It's not a grey issue, there's no warrant for an "opinion" at all because it's a plain fact. Some men like men. Some women like women. There is no grounds for disagreement.

An idiot might say "it's my opinion that homosexuality is a choice", and he/she would be wrong -- it's not an opinion at all, it's just incorrect. Gay people exist; it's finite. If you want to "disagree", you'd have to argue that lions and badgers sit and ponder which gender they wish to mate with. Guess what? They don't, and they have homosexual members of the species.

And that's not my opinion, so go ahead and "argue" it all you want, it won't change that reality.

People only say they "disagree with the gay lifestyle" because they don't want to flat-out say what the truth of it is; "I hate gay people", in other words, "I'm an ignorant jackass who has never actually spoken to a gay person for more than 5 minutes (if that) before judging their entire lifestyle. I'm void of perspective and can't be taken seriously.".