• 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!

'boycott a&e' facebook support page for phil robertson gets over 1m likes

This is all just a flatulence of narratives, rhetorical nonsense from both sides being thrown at each other to silence the other's point of view.

Is it bigoted to call homosexuality a sin, similar to any other sin? Not if you believe in sin.
Is it bigoted to suggest that practicing homosexuality by all common sense accounts appears to be antithetical to evolutionary mechanisms? No.
Is it bigoted to want to protect traditional marriage from homosexual marriage? No, it's a matter of perspective and opinion.
Is it bigoted to suggest that all things being equal, a home with a loving biological mother and biological father is superior to a loving home with a biological mother/father homosexual couple? No, it's a matter of opinion, and color me unconvinced that a bunch of psychologists with skin in the game pretend it is the same, or that children don't need both a mother and father in their lives.
Is it bigoted to point out the seedy subcultural, and dangerous aspects of a homosexual lifestyle? No, it's perfectly valid, even if uncomfortable to hear.
Is it bigoted to campaign and lobby your government to prevent the institutionalization of homosexuality in our schools? No, this is America.
Is it bigoted to say that homosexuality is a mostly chosen lifestyle? No, plenty of evidence to suggest it is, and no scientifically verifiable evidence that it is not. In short the jury is still out.

What is a bigot? A bigot is someone that holds a position of belief in spite of evidence of proof to the contrary.

So can we all just stop throwing out the rhetorical terms like bigot please?

Tim-
 
A&E started a show with a bunch of southerners and now people are surprised that they are Christian and not really gay friendly. Gee, how did they miss that?


You probably missed an earlier post where I said that A&E shouldn't be surprised at the opinions he espoused. I also said that A&E was happy to make money on them as well, which is a bit hypocritical IMO.
 
A Facebook petition isn't worth the paper it's written on.
 
Is it possible, even remotely, that this is just a marketing scheme to get these a-holes AND the crappy tv station some seriously expansive and FREE publicity???
 
Is it bigoted to say that homosexuality is a mostly chosen lifestyle? No, plenty of evidence to suggest it is, and no scientifically verifiable evidence that it is not. In short the jury is still out.

3Triplefacepalm.png


The amount of ignorance here is astronomical.
 
faux outrage, war on Christmas, homophobic, now cruz and palin and jindal--soon klayman..
even O'Reilly criticized DUCK for condemning others and sitting as their judge, going against the Gospel of Luke .
 
Is it possible, even remotely, that this is just a marketing scheme to get these a-holes AND the crappy tv station some seriously expansive and FREE publicity???

I don't think so.
 
I don't think so.

Have you ever heard so many people and/or news outlets talking about A&E or those moronic doofuses in camo before this "incident" ????

They're getting one major boat-load of attention.
 
This is all just a flatulence of narratives, rhetorical nonsense from both sides being thrown at each other to silence the other's point of view.

Is it bigoted to call homosexuality a sin, similar to any other sin? Not if you believe in sin.

Depends on who you say it to....

Is it bigoted to suggest that practicing homosexuality by all common sense accounts appears to be antithetical to evolutionary mechanisms? No.

Using your intuition to determine evolutionary mechanisms isn't bigoted, just ignorance.

Is it bigoted to want to protect traditional marriage from homosexual marriage? No, it's a matter of perspective and opinion.

History speaks for itself, it's not a matter of opinion. Marriage like we see in the last few hundred years is much different than it used to be. Your "tradition" has changed and it can survive other changes.

If allowing gays to marry somehow affects your marriage, you have issues in your marriage.....Furthermore, Churches are free to deny gays based on their dogma, but your church cannot block gays from societal or marriages in religions that accept gays....

Is it bigoted to suggest that all things being equal, a home with a loving biological mother and biological father is superior to a loving home with a biological mother/father homosexual couple?

I want you to picture the red "X" from Family Feud. Wrong again. I'd take the time to provide evidence to this fact if I thought, for one second that you could be convinced to the contrary....Instead I'll settle for just telling you're categorically wrong.

No, it's a matter of opinion, and color me unconvinced that a bunch of psychologists with skin in the game pretend it is the same, or that children don't need both a mother and father in their lives.

Yet another unqualified assertion.....The most important thing is that a child has parents that love them and nurture them. Two moms or two dad that love and care for their child, is better than 1 mom or 1 dad....Or a mom and a dad that are abusive or neglectful.

Is it bigoted to point out the seedy subcultural, and dangerous aspects of a homosexual lifestyle? No, it's perfectly valid, even if uncomfortable to hear.

And heturosexuals don't have similar seedy subcultural lifestyles?

Is it bigoted to campaign and lobby your government to prevent the institutionalization of homosexuality in our schools? No, this is America.

I'm not aware of "institutionalization" of homosexuallity in schools. Feel free to point out what your talking about.

Is it bigoted to say that homosexuality is a mostly chosen lifestyle? No, plenty of evidence to suggest it is, and no scientifically verifiable evidence that it is not. In short the jury is still out.

What non-Christian sponsored, peer reviewed evidence do you have to offer to support this claim? (the sponser is less important than peer review).

What is a bigot? A bigot is someone that holds a position of belief in spite of evidence of proof to the contrary.

Your walk'in a fine line.....

So can we all just stop throwing out the rhetorical terms like bigot please?

Sure, can you please offer evidence to the avalanche of assertions you just made?
 
Last edited:
Depends on who you say it to....



Using your intuition to determine evolutionary mechanisms isn't bigoted, just ignorance.



History speaks for itself, it's not a matter of opinion. Marriage like we see in the last few hundred years is much different than it used to be. Your "tradition" has changed and it can survive other changes.

If allowing gays to marry somehow affects your marriage, you have issues in your marriage.....Furthermore, Churches are free to deny gays based on their dogma, but your church cannot block gays from societal or marriages in religions that accept gays....



I want you to picture the red "X" from Family Feud. Wrong again. I'd take the time to provide evidence to this fact if I thought, for one second that you could be convinced to the contrary....Instead I'll settle for just telling you're categorically wrong.



Yet another unqualified assertion.....The most important thing is that a child has parents that love them and nurture them. Two moms or two dad that love and care for their child, is better than 1 mom or 1 dad....Or a mom and a dad that are abusive or neglectful.



And heturosexuals don't have similar seedy subcultural lifestyles?



I'm not aware of "institutionalization" of homosexuallity in schools. Feel free to point out what your talking about.



What non-Christian sponsored, peer reviewed evidence do you have to offer to support this claim? (the sponser is less important than peer review).



Your walk'in a fine line.....



Sure, can you please offer evidence to the avalanche of assertions you just made?

I don't happen to agree that homosexuality is necessarily a choice, but I do find interesting seizing on this one assertion rather than on the avalanche.
 
How many of them clicked "like" because they were forwarded that image with an inaccurate quote that made it look like A&E was firing him for basically nothing?

How many clicked "enroll" on Obamacare.guv and got kicked off the site?

Don't it suck that Robertson has more fans than Obamacare?
 
First time I've ever heard the noun intellect used as a verb.

Ohh, the irony — the intellectual irony.

Intellect is being used as a noun in that sentence, not a verb.
 
Intellect is being used as a noun in that sentence, not a verb.

I meant to say adjective.

He said:

Gardener said:
Considering the intellect prowess of most of them, I certainly wouldn't underestimate the number.

And no, he didn't use intellect as a noun in that sentence. He used it as an adjective.

It modifies the noun prowess.
 
I meant to say adjective.

Really it should be "intellectual prowess", which would make more sense and then certainly an adj describing prowess, but I guess it's correct either way.
 
1.4 million bible thumpers, bigots and rednecks showing their support for the hatred of gays. Why would anyone be surprised?

Dude was brave enough to share his own, harmless belief and everyone crucifies him for telling his truth. I guess everyone should just lie and pretend for the T.V about serious things that deserve the respect of sharing his truth honestly?
 
Depends on who you say it to....



Using your intuition to determine evolutionary mechanisms isn't bigoted, just ignorance.

Intuition? How about we play, and you tell me of an evolutionary mechanism that would support a primarily homosexual method for admixing genes? Yeah thought so..



History speaks for itself, it's not a matter of opinion. Marriage like we see in the last few hundred years is much different than it used to be. Your "tradition" has changed and it can survive other changes.

Can it? Social changes like this rarely yield results quickly. However, we can look at nations that have exclusively embraced homosexualism such as the Netherlands for clues; we see an increase of out of wedlock births in the last 15 years to the tune of 50%. In other words, marriage, as it was in Holland, doesn't seem to mean what it used to. Holland's population, like many European nations is being propped up by Muslim immigration. ironic, eh?


If allowing gays to marry somehow affects your marriage, you have issues in your marriage.....Furthermore, Churches are free to deny gays based on their dogma, but your church cannot block gays from societal or marriages in religions that accept gays....

So? How does opposing it make someone a bigot?



I want you to picture the red "X" from Family Feud. Wrong again. I'd take the time to provide evidence to this fact if I thought, for one second that you could be convinced to the contrary....Instead I'll settle for just telling you're categorically wrong.


Convenient, and how thoughtful of you, but frankly, I've forgotten more about the topic of homosexuality both scientifically, and psychologically, than you'll ever know. All you can do is exactly what I stated which is point to studies that are methodologically flawed as to be mostly useless, and scientific hypothesis' that are not reproducible, rest mostly on conjecture, and assumptions, and as of yet, entirely 100% unverifiable. Next?



Yet another unqualified assertion.....The most important thing is that a child has parents that love them and nurture them. Two moms or two dad that love and care for their child, is better than 1 mom or 1 dad....Or a mom and a dad that are abusive or neglectful.


Yes, that's why I qualified my statement with all things being equal.. I am aware and I agree that a loving parent, or parents that truly care for their children are better than those that don't, but isn't that stating the obvious. I try not to be pretentious when making assertions, as not to be impolite to my audience.



And heturosexuals don't have similar seedy subcultural lifestyles?


The difference in that our seedy side doesn't define us as a group.



I'm not aware of "institutionalization" of homosexuallity in schools. Feel free to point out what your talking about.



And yet you come at me as if I'm some ignorant knuckle dragging know nothing, and yet, you're barely aware of what's actually happening right now in many states. Indoctrination by presenting a singular rosey viewpoint of homosexuality without a qualified alternative opinion is institutionalizing by definition.



What non-Christian sponsored, peer reviewed evidence do you have to offer to support this claim? (the sponser is less important than peer review).


Peer review by an APA sponsored group or publication with skin in the game is as equally meaningless when attempting to unveil the truth. You're psychological peer review is as equally religious as any Christian opinion. They both rely on a faith in their opinions and speculation.



Your walk'in a fine line.....


No, you and others that knee jerk into anyone that disagrees with you are the ones walking the line, and I'd wager that I've proven that in regards to calling people bigots like dishing out candy, you've crossed the line, and I am here to put you back over it.



Sure, can you please offer evidence to the avalanche of assertions you just made?


All available evidence, on BOTH sides of the issue is haphazard, flawed, poorly misunderstood, and based on one's belief that they really wish it to be true. Whether it is true or can be verified as true doesn't seem to matter to those with skin in the game. I have no skin in the game, I am not a homosexual, nor do I care what they do on their own time, and I believe they have a right to be left alone as long as they're not hurting anyone, but I can't stand when the left attempts to brow beat those in opposition if nothing other than their own belief system, because under it all, and if you take the wrapping off, it's all just really a wanting to believe what they want to believe, but no authoritative reason to do so.

Good night,


Tim-
 
Dude was brave enough to share his own, harmless belief and everyone crucifies him for telling his truth. I guess everyone should just lie and pretend for the T.V about serious things that deserve the respect of sharing his truth honestly?

Once again, people are not offended by him saying that he is a Christian and as a Bible believing Christian, he believes homosexuality is a sin. It's not some attack on his religious beliefs. What people are offended about is his comparing homosexuality to bestiality. When you basically equate the two lesbian chicks down the road that have been living together for a decade to some sicko that rapes his dog, people will get offended. What part of that is so difficult to grasp??
 
Intuition? How about we play, and you tell me of an evolutionary mechanism that would support a primarily homosexual method for admixing genes? Yeah thought so..

You obviously have no idea how evolution works. Evolution does not concern itself with culture and social norms. Gay and lesbian people are physically capable of reproduction and they do reproduce. Thus any genetic basis for their sexual preference can be passed on to subsequent generations. For example, there are plenty of self-loathing closeted social conservatives that have managed to have large families just the same.

Moreover, if you are a Christian, then evolution is wholly incompatible with it. So I am not sure why you are using that as an argument.
 
Last edited:
You must not have looked too hard- it was all over the morning major networks. I saw it on ABC's 'Good Morning America'....

I saw a lot of references to a backlash, but, honestly, Breitbart.com was, at the time, the only source that mentioned the viral Facebook boycott page in the headline.
 
Back
Top Bottom