• 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]

Robertson's biggest mistake with that quote was saying "they," as if he really had his finger on the pulse of the black community in early-60s Louisiana, and acting as if that was representative of the entire south. If he had just said "the people I knew," obviously not a first instinct, he's likely fine.

I don't think his racial comments were all that offensive. Ignorant, to be sure, but not offensive ... I'm willing to give him the BOTD that maybe he didn't know anyone adversely affected by Jim Crow. In certain areas of the South (mostly small towns where the white people weren't total assholes), it wasn't unheard of for the white folk to just ignore those laws. I think his gay comments were far worse than his racial comments.

I think his boiling homosexuality down to a preference for ass instead of the V is far more ignorant than saying that he, personally, didn't know any black folks who were upset about racist laws. He was born in 1946; the CRA didn't come down the pike until 1964; the last of Jim Crow ended in 1965. We don't know at what age he was pickin' cotton with the Negro folk. And the JC laws were far worse in the cities than they were in certain small towns (and, of course, they were far worse in OTHER small towns that I wouldn't go to NOW if I was a black guy).

He never said "blacks were happier before civil rights;" he also was an idiot for implying that because the few he knew weren't upset, that it was a representative sample of anything other than his anecdotal ignorant bull**** and acting like everything was hunky dory.
 
Last edited:
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Robertson's biggest mistake with that quote was saying "they," as if he really had his finger on the pulse of the black community in early-60s Louisiana, and acting as if that was representative of the entire south. If he had just said "the people I knew," obviously not a first instinct, he's likely fine.
Not at all.
"They" refers to those he knew.
As in, his personal experience.
Saying anything else about it is reading way too much into it.
It is a person choosing to see that which is not there.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Not at all.
"They" refers to those he knew.
As in, his personal experience.
Saying anything else about it is reading way too much into it.
It is a person choosing to see that which is not there.

Robertson's biggest mistake with that quote was saying "they," as if he really had his finger on the pulse of the black community in early-60s Louisiana, and acting as if that was representative of the entire south. If he had just said "the people I knew," obviously not a first instinct, he's likely fine.

I don't think his racial comments were all that offensive. Ignorant, to be sure, but not offensive ... I'm willing to give him the BOTD that maybe he didn't know anyone adversely affected by Jim Crow. In certain areas of the South (mostly small towns where the white people weren't total assholes), it wasn't unheard of for the white folk to just ignore those laws. I think his gay comments were far worse than his racial comments.

I think his boiling homosexuality down to a preference for ass instead of the V is far more ignorant than saying that he, personally, didn't know any black folks who were upset about racist laws. He was born in 1946; the CRA didn't come down the pike until 1964; the last of Jim Crow ended in 1965. We don't know at what age he was pickin' cotton with the Negro folk. And the JC laws were far worse in the cities than they were in certain small towns (and, of course, they were far worse in OTHER small towns that I wouldn't go to NOW if I was a black guy).

He never said "blacks were happier before civil rights;" he also was an idiot for implying that because the few he knew weren't upset, that it was a representative sample of anything other than his anecdotal ignorant bull**** and acting like everything was hunky dory.

Because this might be going off-topic, I decided to make a separate topic on this because it is something that has tickled my curiosity bone. Feel free to join in if you like:

We're Black People Better Off Before Integration?
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Because I think it's relevant:

3_421717.jpg
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

No he isn't saying any such thing.
That is an absurd take on his answer to a question.


:naughty
The onus is on you to prove your claim true, not on me to prove it untrue.
As it stands, it is nothing more than a lie.


First of all? :doh :lamo
First of all you are being ridiculous with such a claim.
He was speaking of his own personal experience.
And the blues being invented many years earlier has nothing to do with supporting your ridiculous claim.







He never said any such thing.

This is nothing more than the manifestations of your convoluted and biased thoughts.
There you go, making unsubstantiated assertions. One after another.

We know what Phil said. We k ow the racial history around what he said. There is no denying the reality. Phil is either a dumb ass or a racist, or maybe both.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

I'm a huge fan of the teachings of Christ. I'm just not a hypocrite like most American Christians.

In what way? Because through your words in this thread I don't see those teachings getting through to you in any sense other than your contempt for Christians as a group. So unless you are talking about being a huge fan in terms of studying the teachings for some academic thought exercise, then I don't believe a word of what you are saying here. I mean, think about it, in the same sentence you claim to be a student of Jesus' teachings, you call his followers hypocrites. So, do me a favor, and don't blaspheme any more in trying to make your bigoted argument. You don't know what you are talking about, and don't understand a crucial component of using scripture, which is belief in, and practice of. In fact the bible speaks of people like you as well....

"as also in all his zepistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures."

2Peter 3:16

Nonsense. It's clear that Robertson is saying "Blacks can't handle freedom." What else is he saying, when he says they were happier before civil rights?

All you have to do is simply show where he states either, "Blacks can't handle freedom", or "...They [blacks] were happier before civil rights." Short of that, you have nothing other than you forming your own conclusion, and putting words in his mouth.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

In what way? Because through your words in this thread I don't see those teachings getting through to you in any sense other than your contempt for Christians as a group. So unless you are talking about being a huge fan in terms of studying the teachings for some academic thought exercise, then I don't believe a word of what you are saying here. I mean, think about it, in the same sentence you claim to be a student of Jesus' teachings, you call his followers hypocrites. So, do me a favor, and don't blaspheme any more in trying to make your bigoted argument. You don't know what you are talking about, and don't understand a crucial component of using scripture, which is belief in, and practice of. In fact the bible speaks of people like you as well....

"as also in all his zepistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures."

2Peter 3:16



All you have to do is simply show where he states either, "Blacks can't handle freedom", or "...They [blacks] were happier before civil rights." Short of that, you have nothing other than you forming your own conclusion, and putting words in his mouth.

If Jesus was their preacher, most people in the US would quit going to his church. Here.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PWSmcR4Dxdg

I've already provided Phil's quote. It's up above, a few posts back.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Is this your pastor?

Jesus is my pastor.

I just don't believe him to be God, like you all do. In fact, I believe worshiping Christ as God is Idolatry.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Jesus is my pastor.

I just don't believe him to be God, like you all do. In fact, I believe worshiping Christ as God is Idolatry.

So you go to a Hispanic church? ;)
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

There you go, making unsubstantiated assertions. One after another.

We know what Phil said. We k ow the racial history around what he said. There is no denying the reality. Phil is either a dumb ass or a racist, or maybe both.
Wrong.
My assertions are substantiated by what he said. He was speaking of personal experience in reference to an asked question. Nothing more.

On the other hand - what you think you know and what you actually know are two separate things.

The things you think you know in this case are manifestations of your own convoluted and biased thoughts.
Nothing more than that.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Jesus is my pastor.

I just don't believe him to be God, like you all do. In fact, I believe worshiping Christ as God is Idoltry.

Well then, I have to wonder if you even watched this video at all. Or, if you just saw the title and posted to make a point, again wrongfully judging those around you, and holding yourself up as a "better" Christian, or a "better" person, than someone else because of your own prideful conceit.

You commit sin when you try and hold yourself out there as more an authority on God's word than someone else, then you are wrong from the start before you even write a word, or open your mouth.

We are all sinners, none perfect, but I don't believe Jesus, or any rational person today is down with the whole "I'm a better Christian than you" crap, and to tell you the truth, I have little stomach for people like you that approach their faith that way.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Wrong.
My assertions are substantiated by what he said. He was speaking of personal experience in reference to an asked question. Nothing more.

On the other hand - what you think you know and what you actually know are two separate things.

The things you think you know in this case are manifestations of your own convoluted and biased thoughts.
Nothing more than that.

Nonsense. Read his words again. He clearly states blacks were happier before...you know, happier back before they could vote or drink from public water fountains.

I'm not sure how you spin that to be a statement of love, coming from a good Christian soul. But it's not reality.

He said Blacks were happier under Jim Crow. And, that's just insane.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Nonsense. Read his words again. He clearly states blacks were happier before...you know, happier back before they could vote or drink from public water fountains.

I'm not sure how you spin that to be a statement of love, coming from a good Christian soul, but it's not reality. He said Blacks were happier under Jim Crow. And, that's just insane.
You are being absurd. He said no such thing. These are manifestations of your own convoluted and biased thoughts.

He made before comment.
He was asked a question. He answered it with his personal experience. Nothing more than that.

There is no reference to "all", and no comparison.
 
Last edited:
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Robertson's biggest mistake with that quote was saying "they," as if he really had his finger on the pulse of the black community in early-60s Louisiana, and acting as if that was representative of the entire south. If he had just said "the people I knew," obviously not a first instinct, he's likely fine.

I don't think his racial comments were all that offensive. Ignorant, to be sure, but not offensive ... I'm willing to give him the BOTD that maybe he didn't know anyone adversely affected by Jim Crow. In certain areas of the South (mostly small towns where the white people weren't total assholes), it wasn't unheard of for the white folk to just ignore those laws. I think his gay comments were far worse than his racial comments.

I think his boiling homosexuality down to a preference for ass instead of the V is far more ignorant than saying that he, personally, didn't know any black folks who were upset about racist laws. He was born in 1946; the CRA didn't come down the pike until 1964; the last of Jim Crow ended in 1965. We don't know at what age he was pickin' cotton with the Negro folk. And the JC laws were far worse in the cities than they were in certain small towns (and, of course, they were far worse in OTHER small towns that I wouldn't go to NOW if I was a black guy).

He never said "blacks were happier before civil rights;" he also was an idiot for implying that because the few he knew weren't upset, that it was a representative sample of anything other than his anecdotal ignorant bull**** and acting like everything was hunky dory.

I'll buy this. It's possible that he meant less than what his words implied.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

I'll buy this. It's possible that he meant less than what his words implied.
His words do not imply anything other then their straight forward meaning of his personal experience.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

You are being absurd. He said no such thing. These are manifestations of your own convoluted and biased thoughts.

He made no reference to before.
He was asked a question. He answered it with his personal experience. Nothing more than that.

There is no reference to "all", and no comparison.
He referred to a time "pre", which is before, by definition. He also used an absurd broad brush by saying cotton picking folk were happy.

He was 18 in 1964, when the Civil Rights Act was passed, 22 when MLK caught a bullet. It's not hard to figure out that the Jim Crow days are the golden years in which he refers.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

He referred to a time "pre", which is before, by definition. He also used an absurd broad brush by saying cotton picking folk were happy.
:naughty
No. He was asked a question about that time period. What do you think "You say" means? He is responding to a question asked. "Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy?"
He is answering a question of his own personal experience of that time. Not making any comparison.


He was 18 in 1964, when the Civil Rights Act was passed, 22 when MLK caught a bullet. It's not hard to figure out that the Jim Crow days are the golden years in which he refers.
:doh What you are "figuring" are manifestations of your own convoluted and biased thoughts.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

:naughty
No. He was asked a question about that time period. What do you think "You say" means? He is responding to a question asked. "Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy?"
He is answering a question of his own personal experience of that time. Not making any comparison.


:doh What you are "figuring" are manifestations of your own convoluted and biased thoughts.
After 18 Phil goes from star QB to teacher to bar owner...his cotton picking days had to be prior to 1964, that's pre-civil rights and during Jim Crow. It's not rocket science.

However, I'm sure that defending his comments takes some effort. :roll:
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

After 18 Phil goes from star QB to teacher to bar owner...his cotton picking days had to be prior to 1964, that's pre-civil rights and during Jim Crow. It's not rocket science.

However, I'm sure that defending his comments takes some effort. :roll:
:doh
And again. There was nothing wrong with what he said. It was his person experience at the time.

If you find anything wrong with it, it is a manifestation of your your own deluded and biased thoughts.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Really? Good to know the OT "got it right when it commands parents bring disobedient children to the town square for a good old fashioned stoning :roll:
Deuteronomy 21:18-21 KJV - If a man have a stubborn and rebellious - Bible Gateway

Didn't Jesus in the NT stop a stoning, saying that those with no sins should cast the first stone? Seems to me this is in direct conflict with the OT.

Whoops...apdst.

Sigh. I should be used to people being so ignorant of the Bible by now.

Jesus is the word of God made flesh. He brought the New Testament to the people of the Earth. Your argument that Jesus contradicts the Old Testament is like claiming that Einstein contradicted Newton. There is no contradiction, only further revelation. Jesus came to let us know that death is not for us to decide, but for God. We will die a spiritual death in sin, we lose ever lasting life. There is still punishment for the lazy drunkard of a son, it's just not for us to dole out.

You don't have to believe this, but in not believing you needn't be so oblivious and ignorant to the the beliefs of others in the process.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

:doh
And again. There was nothing wrong with what he said. It was his person experience at the time.

If you find anything wrong with it, it is a manifestation of your your own deluded and biased thoughts.
I and others notice this new trend where religious folks use freedom of religion to discriminate. I'm quite sure Jesus would not approve, but Phil is just another member of that false church of Christ which takes away the rights of others in the name of their Idol.

Across the country, we are seeing hospitals, insurance companies, pharmacies, and other health care entities discriminate against women by denying basic care – like birth control, emergency contraception, and abortion – in the name of religion. Many of these institutions receive taxpayer funding. The ACLU works to ensure that women are not denied information and the health care they need because of the religious views of their health care providers.

We have seen a recent spate of cases in which religiously affiliated schools have fired women for getting pregnant while single or for using IVF. These cases are suggestive of a past when women were routinely pushed out of the workplace because of pregnancy. Such discrimination is now illegal, even if religiously motivated.

In many states, businesses are barred by law from discriminating against customers based on their sexual orientation, as well as based on race, religion, or other legally protected categories. Increasingly, we see business owners claiming that they do not have to follow these laws but can instead refuse to provide services – including lodging, wedding dresses, and photography services – because the owners object to same-sex relationships. In addition, we see social service organizations that receive government funding deny services to same-sex couples. Everyone is entitled to their own religious beliefs, but when you operate a business or run a publicly funded social service agency open to the public, those beliefs do not give you a right to discriminate.

https://www.aclu.org/using-religion-discriminate

Makes you wonder if Phil discriminates against non-Christians and Gays at Duck Command. Someone should find out and then sue his ass into poverty.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

I and others notice this new trend where religious folks use freedom of religion to discriminate. I'm quite sure Jesus would not approve, but Phil is just another member of that false church of Christ which takes away the rights of others in the name of their Idol.



Makes you wonder if Phil discriminates against non-Christians and Gays at Duck Command. Someone should find out and then sue his ass into poverty.
:lamo:doh:lamo
Deflecting with irrelevancy, is still deflecting.
 
Last edited:
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

The mistake here in our liberals of the forum's thinking is the same mistake the biased author of the article makes, and puts IN his article....From the GQ article on the opening page the author starts off painting a picture of a backwoods redneck, that he obviously doesn't understand, and in fact looks down on for his way of life....He starts the article saying this....

"How in the world did a family of squirrel-eating, Bible-thumping, catchphrase-spouting duck hunters become the biggest TV stars in America?"

squirrel eating? bible thumping?

Both of these descriptors are used to paint a negative picture of rural Americans, or people of faith. Then in the next sentence of the article Magary extends his confused slur to the general viewership of the show by describing those who watch as:

"And what will they do now that they have 14 million fervent disciples?"

"fervent disciples" is used to describe them IMO, to paint the picture of extremists could be the only people tuning in.
It's insulting to say the least, but don't let our feathers get ruffled, we don't have that right according to leftists that distort, dissemble, and twist his words in the article, all for the sake of manufacturing a contrived controversy.

In the opening plate setting load of Bull that this Magary sets up is this one....

"Out here in these woods, without any cameras around, Phil is free to say what he wants. Maybe a little too free. He’s got lots of thoughts on modern immorality, and there’s no stopping them from rushing out. Like this one:

“It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”

Perhaps we’ll be needing that seat belt after all."

Is this guy for real? Oh, so witty...."there's no stopping them" He's the goddamn interviewer for Christ sake, he set him up to hear what Robertson had to say, and knew what he would say on this, then the "Perhaps we'll be needing that seat belt..." comment is just crap, what a tool.

As for what Phil said there, he only said that HE prefers women....But in Magary's mind that is wrong, and can't understand obviously how someone could be heterosexual. He's an idiot.

Then just the next paragraph down he set's Phil up to be a southern bigot as well by asking him what he thought of living in the south during the civil rights era....But he doesn't show the question/answer as an honest reporter would do, instead, he has his answer, and with editorial licence chop's it up to say, or imply what HE (Magary) wants to get across about Phil:

"Phil On Growing Up in Pre-Civil-Rights-Era Louisiana
“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”

This comment was inserted in the middle of describing how Phil went to LouTech, and dropped out giving his QB spot to Terry Bradshaw...So, what it's relevance was to begin with is not clear, unless you know that the article was a hit piece aimed at painting this guy as some sort of Racist/Homophobe/Redneck.

It is Magary who inserted the "Pre civil rights" tag to the comment, NOT Phil. And Phil makes it clear that his experience was what HE saw with his own eyes, not the overall movement, and treatment of the times....

All this is, are liberals using this article designed to deliver a manufactured outrage into the lap of those special interest groups like GLAAD, and HRC that they knew would get all flustered over the mere mention that someone is heterosexual, instead of gay, and they succeeded.

How dumb that liberals can't read in context, or look at the interview with fairness in what is quote, and what is added to stir them up....IOW, a real lack of critical thinking on their part...
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Jesus is my pastor.

I just don't believe him to be God, like you all do. In fact, I believe worshiping Christ as God is Idolatry.


Many who worship Jesus are simply following he teachings:


John 10:7-9

7 So Jesus said to them again, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep.

8 “All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them.

9 “I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom