• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Status
Not open for further replies.
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

That's very true, and I have not said that A&E couldn't do what they've done. However, their right to do what they've done doesn't mean they didn't do it in response to him excercising his freedom to express his opinion...aka freedom of speech.

A&E exercised its own first amendment rights.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

The quote is in this thread several times. He said start with homosexuality and go from there, then listed bestiality. Its a comparison any way you slice it. He then went on to paraphrase a verse from Romans, but that verse doesn't mention bestiality, it was merely a list of sins common in Roman society that Paul was telling them they needed God's grace to be forgiven for. There is no way to look at his comment, especially if you have any knowledge of scripture at all (which Phil obviously does), and not read it as he was making that comparison.

It reads like a list of what he thinks are sins, I don't see a comparison of one to the other...no matter how you slice it.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

A&E exercised its own first amendment rights.

So, now it's a first amendment issue, huh?
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

A&E exercised its own first amendment rights.

To be gutless in defense of a family that makes them millions.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Oh yeah, forgot about that part lol

And to top it off now, some Republican House Candidate down in Louisiana is now calling Phil Robertson "the Rosa Parks of our generation". I swear, you can't make this **** up.

GOP Congressional Candidate: Duck Dynasty Star Is 'Rosa Parks Of Our Generation'

I mean come on, don't you remember how Christians have to sit in the back of the bus and use different water fountains? The South is full of non-Christian only bathrooms..
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

To be gutless in defense of a family that makes them millions.

A&E made millions before the Duck Dynasty family, and they'll continue to make millions after.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

And to top it off now, some Republican House Candidate down in Louisiana is now calling Phil Robertson "the Rosa Parks of our generation". I swear, you can't make this **** up.

GOP Congressional Candidate: Duck Dynasty Star Is 'Rosa Parks Of Our Generation'

I mean come on, don't you remember how Christians have to sit in the back of the bus and use different water fountains? The South is full of non-Christian only bathrooms..

I saw that ... utterly laughable.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Wait second here I kinda disagree here. If one works for widget factory x making widgets. And gets interviewed stating an opinion contrary to their employers POV on what ever issue they should have protections. After it does not affect the product. In the ducks case image is the product. And what the duck did can impact the product

and you think he contradicted the image of the show?
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

People just don't like him anymore. All the non-hillfolk have had enough. We can find pig hunters or something.

Yea, people just dont like him any more. Hahahahahahaha, you cant be that dumb.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

This isn't my opinion -- this is what the First Amendment means. Even if it doesn't affect the product, your employer doesn't have to keep you around if they don't want to be associated with your (the royal you) brand of speech.

As long as your not on the clock one can say whatever they want IMHO. Barring disbarring the product.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

I saw that ... utterly laughable.

Why is it laughable?
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

I didn't say that. :shrug:

Post 130 -
mac said:
.and speaking of controversial issues at work doesn't automatically grant them the right to fire you.

Post 131
mac said:
It's not incorrect, you have the right to free speech as guaranteed by the first amendment. It may not always be sensible to do so, but you have it.

Post 126
mac said:
Any time you are punished for expressing an opinion, it's a First Amendment free speech issue....even if the the first amendment doesn't offer a specifically prevent it.


So you've said that companies can't fire you for what you say. But they can.

But hey, if you think you didn't say that, who am I to quibble? lots of other people did.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

So, now it's a first amendment issue, huh?

Way to misconstrue the argument. Duck guy exercised his first amendment rights -- nobody said he didn't. "First amendment issue," in the context of this discussion, means "were his first-amendment rights violated." Don't be so dishonest.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

That is irrelevant. Anytime you speak publicly on any subject you are representing your company if you are identified as working for them. If they don't like something you say, you can be fired for it. Welcome to the real world.

Bull****. I can say whatever the hell I want, and my boss cant fire me for it.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Bull****. I can say whatever the hell I want, and my boss cant fire me for it.

You must be your own boss then.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Yea, people just dont like him any more. Hahahahahahaha, you cant be that dumb.

He was a nice old silly guy in a clown outfit. Now he's an ignorant hateful butthole.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Bull****. I can say whatever the hell I want, and my boss cant fire me for it.

Challenge people at work to fight and see what happens.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Bull****. I can say whatever the hell I want, and my boss cant fire me for it.

Union?
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Post 130 -


Post 131


Post 126



So you've said that companies can't fire you for what you say. But they can.

But hey, if you think you didn't say that, who am I to quibble? lots of other people did.

I didn't say once that they can not fire you. Not once. The closest I said is "doesn't automatically grant them the right to fire you." Which it doesn't, in the sense that companies are always legally protected in doing so.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Any time you are punished for expressing an opinion, it's a First Amendment free speech issue....even if the the first amendment doesn't offer a specifically prevent it.

So...Martin Bashir?
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Way to misconstrue the argument. Duck guy exercised his first amendment rights -- nobody said he didn't. "First amendment issue," in the context of this discussion, means "were his first-amendment rights violated." Don't be so dishonest.

If you punish someone for expressing an opinion, you are violating their first amendment right to free speech. That violation isn't always enforceable through law, though. There is nothing dishonest about that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom