• 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]

mac said:
Is one instance of a "wrong" any less a "wrong" because another "wrong" occurred?
Click to expand...

No, but it does show inconsistency on both sides. The same people that are outraged by this, weren't outraged by those on the left that have been fired for speaking their mind and beliefs.

I have no problem with someone holding the opinion that someone shouldn't be fired for speaking their belief as long as it is consistent. Likewise I have no problem with those that believe a company has the right to fire someone if their speak harms the company. I just think incredible biasness gets in the way when its someone on the left or right that does it and there are people on both sides that are hypocrites about it.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Dr. Chuckles said:
actually claims to religous fredoms usually need to be validated historically and doctrinally, as to prevent people from making such random claims
Click to expand...

Who are you to judge or question someone's religion? The spaghetti monster knows ALL!
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

TheNextEra said:
Who are you to judge or question someone's religion? The spaghetti monster knows ALL!
Click to expand...

There are people all over this forum judging and questioning Robertson's religion. Why aren't you demanding the same answer from them?...speaking of consistancie-n-all!
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

WCH said:
You don't have anything
No one is hiding behind their religion especially not Phil Robertson.
Click to expand...
Depends on your definition of "hiding". If someone uses their religion as an excuse to attack gays, they're hiding behind it as they take their pot shots much like they would a rock. Phil speaks as if he has no mind of his own but rather is simply a puppet of the words written in the Bible.

That's cowardly, IMO.

It's saying, "Homosexuals are evil sinners. But, that's not me saying it; it's the Bible."

You don't call that "hiding"?
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

apdst said:
There are people all over this forum judging and questioning Robertson's religion. Why aren't you demanding the same answer from them?...speaking of consistancie-n-all!
Click to expand...

Sure point them out and I'll comment on them if it makes you happy. Now if you'll post showing your support for Bashir being able to comment, that will prevent you from being a hypocrite.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

calamity said:
Depends on your definition of "hiding". If someone uses their religion as an excuse to attack gays, they're hiding behind it as they take their pot shots much like they would a rock. Phil speaks as if he has no mind of his own but rather is simply a puppet of the words written in the Bible.

That's cowardly, IMO.

It's saying, "Homosexuals are evil sinners. But, that's not me saying it; it's the Bible."

You don't call that "hiding"?
Click to expand...

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

calamity said:
Depends on your definition of "hiding". If someone uses their religion as an excuse to attack gays, they're hiding behind it as they take their pot shots much like they would a rock. Phil speaks as if he has no mind of his own but rather is simply a puppet of the words written in the Bible.

That's cowardly, IMO.

It's saying, "Homosexuals are evil sinners. But, that's not me saying it; it's the Bible."

You don't call that "hiding"?
Click to expand...

He said the most loving thing anyone could say, and citing words of the Bible is acknowledging the authority of the living God. The alternative would be to say " I don't care, go to hell".
That is the difference between him and guys like Baldwin, who actually spew hatred for the sake of hating.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Lovebug said:
He said the most loving thing anyone could say, and citing words of the Bible is acknowledging the authority of the living God. The alternative would be to say " I don't care, go to hell".
That is the difference between him and guys like Baldwin, who actually spew hatred for the sake of hating.
Click to expand...

The most loving thing he could say was that he couldn't comprehend how a guy could like another guy's butthole? Give me a break.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

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

calamity said:
Depends on your definition of "hiding". If someone uses their religion as an excuse to attack gays, they're hiding behind it as they take their pot shots much like they would a rock. Phil speaks as if he has no mind of his own but rather is simply a puppet of the words written in the Bible.

That's cowardly, IMO.

It's saying, "Homosexuals are evil sinners. But, that's not me saying it; it's the Bible."

You don't call that "hiding"?
Click to expand...

No, I call it citing Biblical authority. And what you suggest is "puppetry" I call faithful paraphrasing of Scripture.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Mason66 said:
He was relaying his experience. You can't take that away from him.
Click to expand...

The sad thing is that in all the decades since he had his experience where he thought "blacks were happy" - or in his words "They’re singing and happy. " he never went back and re-thought things.

His comments re black people were the most offensive to me, as bad as the others were. He has some kind of made-up utopia in his mind, and he never questioned it, through all the days of civil rights struggles and all the things we've fought for.

"gee, a black person sang, so they must have been happy" (to paraphrase his words)

Yes, I found his words offensive. As far as it being "his experience" - just goes to show, one man's view of the world is not necessarily accurate.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

TheNextEra said:
No, but it does show inconsistency on both sides. The same people that are outraged by this, weren't outraged by those on the left that have been fired for speaking their mind and beliefs.

I have no problem with someone holding the opinion that someone shouldn't be fired for speaking their belief as long as it is consistent. Likewise I have no problem with those that believe a company has the right to fire someone if their speak harms the company. I just think incredible biasness gets in the way when its someone on the left or right that does it and there are people on both sides that are hypocrites about it.
Click to expand...

agree. Well-said.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

pbrauer said:
I have been wondering if A&E knew of his controversal views...

By Scott CollinsDecember 20, 2013, 4:55 p.m.

Anyone looking at the "Duck Dynasty" uproar may wonder why A&E didn't warn Phil Robertson about the dangers of talking too much to reporters.

But it now looks like they did.

Robertson, the long-bearded patriarch of the clan of Louisiana duck-call merchants, is on "hiatus" from filming episodes of the No. 1-rated cable reality show after giving a GQ magazine interview where he made anti-gay remarks and questioned the need for the civil-rights movement. GLAAD and theNAACP, among others, condemned the comments. But thousands of fans - and even Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal - have rushed to his defense, touching off the latest skirmish in the national culture war. Late Thursday, the family said it might not want to continue the show without Phil.

The scandal has turned into the kind of tempest network executives feared all along. A&E knew of Robertson's controversial views - expounded in videotaped sermons and elsewhere - before the show premiered in spring 2012, and warned him not to overshare on hot-button topics such as gay rights and race relations, according to a producer familiar with the situation. Phil and other family members also probably signed contracts containing "morals clauses" in which they promised to, among other things, avoid anything that would embarrass or bring shame to A&E or the brand. Such clauses are standard in the entertainment and sports industries.

More at: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much - latimes.com

​


​
Click to expand...


Leave it to the LATimes, or other liberal edited papers to get it wrong, and skew the premise of the debate, using "un named" sources...."A producer familiar with the situation"? Yeah right. :roll: Just another jackass looking to comment, that has no more weight than you or I as far as his opinion.

But, what is striking in your OP here is how intentionally misleading the LATimes is being here....

"...interview where he made anti-gay remarks and questioned the need for the civil-rights movement."

He did neither.

In the first part on homosexuality, Robertson's answer to a direct question about sin was to simply list homosexuality among a list is sins, like adultery, and promiscuity. It is only the hysterical over reaction of intolerance by such groups like GLAAD, that have distorted his answer to make this anything of the sort, something that GLAAD is famous for in the first place.

The second, answer about blacks in his area growing up during the civil rights era, was also being distorted and taken out of context here. He was speaking of his own experiences growing up very poor, and working side by side with the black people he was working side by side with....Not some generalization of all black people like the article, and you Pete make it sound like.

In short, this whole thing is a concoction of the liberal left feigning outrage at something that is just not there. The twisting, of content, as well and intent is astounding.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Kobie said:
The most loving thing he could say was that he couldn't comprehend how a guy could like another guy's butthole? Give me a break.
Click to expand...

I don't think he sees himself as an eloquent speaker, ever.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

paddymcdougall said:
The sad thing is that in all the decades since he had his experience where he thought "blacks were happy" - or in his words "They’re singing and happy. " he never went back and re-thought things.

His comments re black people were the most offensive to me, as bad as the others were. He has some kind of made-up utopia in his mind, and he never questioned it, through all the days of civil rights struggles and all the things we've fought for.

"gee, a black person sang, so they must have been happy" (to paraphrase his words)

Yes, I found his words offensive. As far as it being "his experience" - just goes to show, one man's view of the world is not necessarily accurate.
Click to expand...

Well because you live in a free country, well mostly free, you have the option of being ofended over the most insignificant things, and you chose to be ofended.

Why would his later experiences change his memories?

Did you ever go to McDonald's as a kid? Do you have happy memories of that? Now you know that the food is fattening and causing many people health problems, but does that knowledge change your memories?
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

nota bene said:
No, I call it citing Biblical authority. And what you suggest is "puppetry" I call faithful paraphrasing of Scripture.
Click to expand...

I call it "I don't give a rat's ass." What he said is not excusable because it's in the Old Book Of Jewish Fairy Tales.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Lovebug said:
I don't think he sees himself as an eloquent speaker, ever.
Click to expand...

I certainly hope not.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Kobie said:
I call it "I don't give a rat's ass." What he said is not excusable because it's in the Old Book Of Jewish Fairy Tales.
Click to expand...

Let's see if you can articulate it...IOW, what exactly in what he said in context offends you so? I mean to the point of saying your own offensive things about a far bigger group of people as you did here.

Here is the quote in context, and you tell me...

What does repentance entail? Well, in Robertson’s worldview, America was a country founded upon Christian values (Thou shalt not kill, etc.), and he believes that the gradual removal of Christian symbolism from public spaces has diluted those founding principles. (He and Si take turns going on about why the Ten Commandments ought to be displayed outside courthouses.) He sees the popularity of Duck Dynasty as a small corrective to all that we have lost.

“Everything is blurred on what’s right and what’s wrong,” he says. “Sin becomes fine.”

[Interviewer question]What, in your mind, is sinful?

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”



Read More Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Gives Drew Magary a Tour
Click to expand...
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

"“Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”"

What's offensive? In his religion, anyone who meets any of those criteria go to hell. I find that offensive. I don't think any of those (except maybe swindler and it would depend on the swindle) make you automatically an evil person.

He's also grouping people who happen to love someone of the same gender in with greedy, drunk, slandering swindlers. I disagree with that grouping and find it offensive.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Mason66 said:
Well because you live in a free country, well mostly free, you have the option of being ofended over the most insignificant things, and you chose to be ofended.

Why would his later experiences change his memories?

Did you ever go to McDonald's as a kid? Do you have happy memories of that? Now you know that the food is fattening and causing many people health problems, but does that knowledge change your memories?
Click to expand...


Because most of us learn and grow through life and our later experiences do influence how we remember things, or the context of our memories.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

mac said:
Where did he say he listed all the sins? Care to post the apology?
Click to expand...

Typical CON Quibble... :roll:

He was asked 'What in your mind is sinful' the simple Christian answer is 'anything against the teachings from the Good Book'.

But Phil seems to have an axe to grind so he got to it. Murder is usually a biggie to most Christian folks I know, I live in the bible belt bigtime, but ol' Phil must be butt hurt from some part of his drunken, druggie days.

You can't be THAT lazy! The 'apology' of sorts is all over the interwebz, go to HuffPo if no place else. Now that there is a Redneck uprising, he is doing his Gandalf imitation and a hearty, 'You shall not pass!' :doh
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

paddymcdougall said:
Because most of us learn and grow through life and our later experiences do influence how we remember things, or the context of our memories.
Click to expand...

Because he learned later what was really happening, that would change his memory of those particular people as being happy?

I don't think so.

A memory is a memory.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

ecofarm said:
No one said vagina or anus was the most important thing. Just that vagina is better and that's a fact.
Click to expand...

The only fact that I get out of this is that you've never had anal sex.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom