• 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!

Phil Robertson returns to A&E

disneydude said:
There are many instances throughout the jurisprudence history of this country where the Court has had to deal with conflicting rights. Why do you believe the civil rights legislation of the 50's-60's to be "bad law".
Click to expand...

Because private discrimination is one of the most important aspects of human life.
 
Fenton said:
Oh I hope A & E sues them for breach of contract. Man I hope they do, and I hope the left continues to pile on the Robertson Family and the Patriarch of that family.

You people are just taking all the rope you need so to speak.
Click to expand...

You hope they get sued? I guarantee you that A & E can afford much better lawyers.

If you're pinning the GOP's electoral hopes to Phil Robertson, you guys must be getting REALLY desperate.
 
Fenton said:
I just countered your arbitrary judgment with my own.

Sarah Palin isn't responsible for this mess, or Millions losing their insurance, or millions being introduced to perpetual unemployment. That's on you folks, and the administration you continue to defend.
Click to expand...

This has nothing to with Obamacare. Seriously, how many nonsequiturs can you throw out in this thread.

For the record, Sarah Palin is also not responsible for WWII or 9/11. Which have as much to do with this thread as Obamacare or "Guam sinking."
 
rocket88 said:
You hope they get sued? I guarantee you that A & E can afford much better lawyers.

If you're pinning the GOP's electoral hopes to Phil Robertson, you guys must be getting REALLY desperate.
Click to expand...

Agreed on that last, at most this event is just another indicator of the difference between what the left imagines is the will of the people and the actual.

And A&E's "better lawyers" wouldn't allow a suit to get past the dreaming stage, they'd settle in a heartbeat. But it's foolish to suppose the network is going to give up it's biggest ratings draw for a few folks who don't watch the show to begin with and never will. Especially considering the sponsors are coming out in support of Phil.
 
disneydude said:
The problem is..many of the so called "Christian" groups are not content to keep religion in churches...
Click to expand...

No, we're not going to do this. We are obligated to stand against evil in all places. Standing against unnatural sex is one of these evils.
 
TheNextEra said:
That's a definite possibility. The other is that this whole thing was staged as a publicity stunt and both A&E and the Duck Dynasty crew were in on it.

No matter what though, I agree, it is due to the almighty dollar no matter what possibility is correct.
Click to expand...

That's kind of a wild accusation. :lol:
 
Texmex said:
No, we're not going to do this. We are obligated to stand against evil in all places. Standing against unnatural sex is one of these evils.
Click to expand...

You are just like the Pharisees that Christ spoke about.....sad...those who scream the loudest about being "Christian" are those who know him the least.
 
disneydude said:
Not it isn't. There are many instances throughout the jurisprudence history of this country where the Court has had to deal with conflicting rights. Why do you believe the civil rights legislation of the 50's-60's to be "bad law".

There is no "Constitutional crisis" in disallowing people to use their religion as a ploy to do that which the Constitution and anti-discrimination laws prohibit. Religion was never meant to be used as a means to get around the law.
Click to expand...

Civil Rights legislation wasn't bad law, but the perverted interpretations through judges who have lost their footing on basic first principles of the Constitution has produce bad precedence. They are engaged in government mandated morality. When a court of law can “prohibit” the free exercise of your religion (and that includes your religious beliefs), the government has just violated the First Amendment. In essence, the government has taken away your right to choose your belief system and forced you to comply with the belief system of the government’s choosing or another individual. This becomes inequity of the law when one belief system is held in more high regard than another. We've talked a lot about the cake decorator that was ordered by the Colorado judge to “cease and desist” from "same-sex couple discrimination" even though what the judge ruling did was force the baker either violate his conscience and not practice his beliefs and bake the cakes for gays or stop baking wedding cakes which means he won't be able to support his family. This is reprehensible especially when the judge cited "hurt feelings" of the gay couple in determining his ruling. How much longer will it be before we see doctors drug into court because they refuse to do an abortion because it is against their moral conscience? Or how long will it be before groups like GLAAD through their bullying tactics will be able to drag a priest, rabbi, minister or any other religious leadership that teaches homosexuality is a sin claim discrimination/defamation at the pulpit and be successful? There's a reason legislation has already been proposed in the House with many sponsors that will stop this inequality of the law. It won't go anywhere while Harry Reid is still over the Senate and Obama is in the White House but some day it will be passed.
 
disneydude said:
You are just like the Pharisees that Christ spoke about.....sad...those who scream the loudest about being "Christian" are those who know him the least.
Click to expand...

You know nothing about the bible or Christian beliefs. Please refrain from acting like you do.
 
Texmex said:
You know nothing about the bible or Christian beliefs. Please refrain from acting like you do.
Click to expand...

I find that many non-believers know the bible better than believers.
 
How many?
 
vesper said:
Civil Rights legislation wasn't bad law, but the perverted interpretations through judges who have lost their footing on basic first principles of the Constitution has produce bad precedence.
Click to expand...

The first "principles" of the Constitution determined a black was 3/5ths of a person and that women did not have the right to vote.
 
winston53660 said:
The first "principles" of the Constitution determined a black was 3/5ths of a person and that women did not have the right to vote.
Click to expand...

If it were not for slave owners, that 3/5ths would have been 0/5ths.
 
winston53660 said:
Well ain't that just awfully generous of them
Click to expand...

It was quite selfish of them actually, which is the odd part. If they had their way they would have counted as one full person.
 
scatt said:
It was quite selfish of them actually, which is the odd part. If they had their way they would have counted as one full person.
Click to expand...

Well thanks for the history lesson. Irregardless they were still slaves.
 
winston53660 said:
The first "principles" of the Constitution determined a black was 3/5ths of a person and that women did not have the right to vote.
Click to expand...

For the purpose of representation, somehow the faux historians seem to leave that part out.
 
clownboy said:
For the purpose of representation, somehow the faux historians seem to leave that part out.
Click to expand...

Thank you captain obvious. Most people even with the most elementary education already know that.
 
winston53660 said:
Thank you captain obvious. Most people even with the most elementary education already know that.
Click to expand...

Interesting, YOU didn't appear to in your response. Now we know your education level, thanks for filling us in.
 
rocket88 said:
They miscalculated what they stood to lose. It has nothing to do with "free speech" of course, just that A&E makes more money. It's the American way.
Click to expand...

you realize free speech as a concept exists independently of the first amendment? The former is rather broad and can certainly apply to a case where non-govt groups are trying to censor speech through economic boycott, the later involves the govt
 
Texmex said:
You know nothing about the bible or Christian beliefs. Please refrain from acting like you do.
Click to expand...

I know far more than you would ever hope to. I am Christian but absolutely not "Christian". I find that most "Christians" practice a completely perverted religion that has nothing to do with Christ.
 
disneydude said:
I know far more than you would ever hope to. I am Christian but absolutely not "Christian". I find that most "Christians" practice a completely perverted religion that has nothing to do with Christ.
Click to expand...

yeah, the other side of the coin likely feels the same about you: welcome to the world of widely interpretive texts
 
disneydude said:
I find that most "Christians" practice a completely perverted religion that has nothing to do with Christ.
Click to expand...

This explains your total lack of understanding concerning the Gospel or the Scripture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom