Page 161 of 166 FirstFirst ... 61111151159160161162163 ... LastLast
Results 1,601 to 1,610 of 1658

Thread: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E (W: 742)

  1. #1601
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 11:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    It is still a fact that it is a sin. You can't change that.
    Hold up a sec.

    Whether whatever it is you're talking about is a sin is entirely subjective. What is or is not a sin is never fact, because the answer to that question is always dependent on perspective.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #1602
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Hold up a sec.

    Whether whatever it is you're talking about is a sin is entirely subjective. What is or is not a sin is never fact, because the answer to that question is always dependent on perspective.
    Not really.
    He was the one speaking.
    He was speaking about his christian beliefs.
    It is a sin in those beliefs. That is a fact.
    It is a fact he was speaking about.
    It is objective within those beliefs.

    We also, on the outside of those beliefs, generally know that it is a sin in those beliefs.
    We also, on the outside of those beliefs, do not dictate what is or isn't a sin in those beliefs.

    Those of us on the outside of, our belief's matters not, it is still a sin.

    Which is what he was speaking about.

    The whole previous point being, regardless of the other person trying to deflect with such nonsense, was that saying something is a sin, is not disparaging of the individual.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  3. #1603
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 11:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Not really.
    He was the one speaking.
    He was speaking about his christian beliefs.
    It is a sin in those beliefs. That is a fact.
    It is a fact he was speaking about.
    It is objective within those beliefs.

    We also, on the outside of those beliefs, generally know that it is a sin in those beliefs.
    We also, on the outside of those beliefs, do not dictate what is or isn't a sin in those beliefs.

    Those of us on the outside of, our belief's matters not, it is still a sin.

    Which is what he was speaking about.

    The whole previous point being, regardless of the other person trying to deflect with such nonsense, was that saying something is a sin, is not disparaging of the individual.
    I agree with that - in the context of "what Robertson believes", homosexuality is a sin.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  4. #1604
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    It isn't a comparison to after the construction of the entitlement state, just the state of mind of the black people he grew up picking cotton with. Also note that "pre civil-rights" are the words of the author, not Robetson. when he speaks he talks about "pre-entitlement". Since you say that others don't understand the language I would advise you actually pay attention to Phil Robertson's language and not let the author's incorrect headline sway you into reading something that Robertson didn't say.

    Is it that hard for you to grasp that even though things were hard in 1950s Louisiana that people still managed to be happy?

    But look at it this way: would you say that inner city poor blacks who have access to the entitlement state are "happy"?
    Actually it is comparison. To say after this, this, is a comparison. Your comparing before and after. It's pretty simple. And When Robertson repeated his words, to make sure he understood the question, he cup house to answer it, thus making the comparison.

    I would be skeptical of addressing such a question, as happiness is rather subjective. But I would say minorities are better off today than under Jim Crow. I would not present wildly delusional and inaccurate answer Phil did.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #1605
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Wrong. You do not understand the language being used and are injecting your own bias into it.
    Neither he, the person answering the question, or the questioner, say then as compared to now.

    He did not say then as compared to now. The questioner did not say then compared to now.

    He was speaking specifically to the period of time he was asked about.

    He made no such comparison.


    If we we discussing the Precambrian period of time would you illogically argue we were trying to make a comparison between then and the Cambrian?
    Of course you wouldn't. We would be speaking a specific time period. Not a comparison.

    Which shows your assertion regarding Phil to be nothing more than the manifestation of garbage in your thoughts.
    Wrong, pre means before. When he repeated the question, he choose to answer it. He spoke to ore and post. That's a comparison. Sorry.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #1606
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I would not present wildly delusional and inaccurate answer Phil did.
    1. His statement was of his personal experience. You can make any claim that it was delusional or inaccurate.
    2. You wouldn't present wildly delusional and inaccurate answers? That is apparently all you have provided.


    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Wrong, pre means before. When he repeated the question, he choose to answer it. He spoke to ore and post. That's a comparison. Sorry.
    Yes your reply is sorry as it is wrong.

    The question was about a specific time period, just as the answer was.
    No comparison was made. None.

    To say a comparison was made is dishonest garbage, and nothing more than the result of convoluted and biased thoughts.
    Last edited by Excon; 12-30-13 at 08:15 AM.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  7. #1607
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Actually it is comparison. To say after this, this, is a comparison. Your comparing before and after. It's pretty simple. And When Robertson repeated his words, to make sure he understood the question, he cup house to answer it, thus making the comparison.
    I don't think he was being serious while answering it, and shame on Magary trying to pose qhuestions in such a way as to be able to obviously parse, and twist their answers meaning later. But allow me to illustrate this way....I'll use emoticons to aid in the illustration...

    When Magary asks the question, and Phil repeats the question to him clearly, he is displaying a little subdued shock that Magary would ask such a stupid question, so he then answers thusly

    'They were giddy, they were happy, they were not singing the blues...'

    See how that works?

    Like if I asked you why 'all liberals hate freedom'? and you answer

    " all liberals, you say, hate freedom?"

    ' oh yeah, They're communists, they're Nazi's, lamo, they can't stand you walking around free. '

    Now, would anyone believe that you were in fact saying that liberals were communists, Nazi's, or hated your freedom? No. But that is what you are doing to Phil Robertson, and it is dishonest.

    I would be skeptical of addressing such a question, as happiness is rather subjective. But I would say minorities are better off today than under Jim Crow. I would not present wildly delusional and inaccurate answer Phil did.
    Would it be fair to say that in America in the late 50's/early 60s, that there possibly could have been some black people that were not into the strife? That were not concerned with what was going on with the publicized struggle? That just simply wanted to live their lives and be left alone, and could have very well have been happy in their compartmentalized situation at the time, and couldn't have cared less about what was happening in Selma, or Atlanta, or DC for that matter? And if you have to say honestly that this is possible, then why is it impossible for you and other liberals believe that these could have been the blacks that a young Phil Robertson was in contact with?

    Why don't you stop pretending that you know the thoughts, and hearts of every black person in the United States 50 plus years ago....It's insulting, and it is dishonest.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  8. #1608
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,696

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Actually it is comparison. To say after this, this, is a comparison. Your comparing before and after. It's pretty simple.

    False. That would require comparative language such as "happier". Unfortunately for your argument the comparative term "happier" only exists in the headline written by someone other than Phil Robertson.

    If I say you were "happy" yesterday morning I am not comparing you to any other time, I am simply making an observation of your state of mind.


    And When Robertson repeated his words, to make sure he understood the question, he cup house to answer it, thus making the comparison.

    Again false. Without the comparative language there is no comparison. He was simply bearing witness to the black people he grew up with who he said were happy and Godly which the insane left took to mean he's a racist.


    I would be skeptical of addressing such a question, as happiness is rather subjective. But I would say minorities are better off today than under Jim Crow. I would not present wildly delusional and inaccurate answer Phil did.

    Phil's answer was drawn from and with regard to the black people he grew up with as a dirt poor child picking cotton. If you have to change your wording to "better off" then you really can't object to Phil's statement as Phil has experience and you don't regarding how happy people were on the farms where he worked. Notice how you have just severed the connection in your own answer between "better off" and "happy", it's time you do the same for Robertson's answer.

    Here in lies the tragic flaw of your side of the argument. Phil Robertson speaks of happiness, your side reads it as "better off" and let the person who wrote the headline force a comparison that Robertson never made.

    In other words, your side is the perfect image of raging, illogical intolerance that you pretend to defend the world against.
    Last edited by jmotivator; 12-30-13 at 09:22 AM.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  9. #1609
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    False. That would require comparative language such as "happier". Unfortunately for your argument the comparative term "happier" only exists in the headline written by someone other than Phil Robertson.

    If I say you were "happy" yesterday morning I am not comparing you to any other time, I am simply making an observation of your state of mind.





    Again false. Without the comparative language there is no comparison. He was simply bearing witness to the black people he grew up with who he said were happy and Godly which the insane left took to mean he's a racist.





    Phil's answer was drawn from and with regard to the black people he grew up with as a dirt poor child picking cotton. If you have to change your wording to "better off" then you really can't object to Phil's statement as Phil has experience and you don't regarding how happy people were on the farms where he worked. Notice how you have just severed the connection in your own answer between "better off" and "happy", it's time you do the same for Robertson's answer.

    Here in lies the tragic flaw of your side of the argument. Phil Robertson speaks of happiness, your side reads it as "better off" and let the person who wrote the headline force a comparison that Robertson never made.

    In other words, your side is the perfect image of raging, illogical intolerance that you pretend to defend the world against.

    RIGHT ON!!!! That is exactly right....And couldn't have summed it up better....

    Note to libs on this thread....Read this from JM, live it, love it! This is what is happening exactly.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  10. #1610
    Sage
    Lovebug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,880

    Re: 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson suspended by A&E

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    False. That would require comparative language such as "happier". Unfortunately for your argument the comparative term "happier" only exists in the headline written by someone other than Phil Robertson.

    If I say you were "happy" yesterday morning I am not comparing you to any other time, I am simply making an observation of your state of mind.





    Again false. Without the comparative language there is no comparison. He was simply bearing witness to the black people he grew up with who he said were happy and Godly which the insane left took to mean he's a racist.





    Phil's answer was drawn from and with regard to the black people he grew up with as a dirt poor child picking cotton. If you have to change your wording to "better off" then you really can't object to Phil's statement as Phil has experience and you don't regarding how happy people were on the farms where he worked. Notice how you have just severed the connection in your own answer between "better off" and "happy", it's time you do the same for Robertson's answer.

    Here in lies the tragic flaw of your side of the argument. Phil Robertson speaks of happiness, your side reads it as "better off" and let the person who wrote the headline force a comparison that Robertson never made.

    In other words, your side is the perfect image of raging, illogical intolerance that you pretend to defend the world against.
    A more eloquent speaker would have replaced happy with content, but here people are, putting words in the man's mouth in order to find fault, for what? To elevate themselves by looking down their noses at someone who is different.
    Interestingly, most people are happy (content) until we tell them they are not. Seems to be very lucrative these days.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •