• 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.
1. Some reason?
Phil Robertson Was No Fan of Chicago, Either | NBC Chicago

Phil is apparently so ignorant, he thinks all Mormons are from SLC Utah. :lol:

One might say it is the height of hypocrisy for you to fault Phil Robertson for lumping all Mormons together when your vile hatred spewed through this entire thread is of the singular purpose of lumping all Christians together... and one would be right to say so.

2. Sorry, but you defending Phil's quote stating that 20-year-old females will pick your pocket and are bad options for marriage but fifteen and sixteen year-olds are A-OK is such a lost cause, you really ought just back away. Unless, of course, you want to reinforce the stereotype about redneck Christians thinking a woman should be barefoot pregnant and ignorant. Not to mention, insulting all women who are in their twenties out there. :lol:

You have been shown that your characterization of the quote, and who it was directed to, was completely wrong. Learn to accept your error with dignity.
 
Only semantically (and for the wrong reasons).

factually by the definition of the word and for 100% accurate reasons

once again you dodged and ran from the question, i wonder why?
ill ask again

remind me what factual things you have supporting your argument against facts?
 
One might say it is the height of hypocrisy for you to fault Phil Robertson for lumping all Mormons together when your vile hatred spewed through this entire thread is of the singular purpose of lumping all Christians together... and one would be right to say so.
Not all Christians...just hose who like to hurl the word "sin" around while pointing their finger at a sexual orientation minority.


You have been shown that your characterization of the quote, and who it was directed to, was completely wrong. Learn to accept your error with dignity.
No it wasn't. But, spin away, Maestro.
 
Whether A & E is damaging A & E, remains to be seen. It is not a stand alone network and the other brands could be damaged.

Yeah, so? That is not the on show on the A & E network.

So...stop acting like Robertson committed a crime. He has an opinion; he expressed it; you don't like it; welcome to the real world.

Like it, or not, not everyone is going to be ok with homosexuality. Pressuring people to remain silent about their negative views of homosexuality is no different than pressuring gays to remain silent about being gay.
 
Nope yours are.
Even Phil agrees with me.
Phil? You mean the guy who never saw Blacks being mistreated throughout all his years of living in the Jim Crow South? Yeah, he's credible :roll:
 
So...stop acting like Robertson committed a crime. He has an opinion; he expressed it; you don't like it; welcome to the real world.
Phil has every right to say any stupid thing he wants. No crime. And A&E can fire him, rehire him and promote him all they want to. And, gays can boycott if they want to. And, anyone can watch or not watch the Dynasty thing as much or as little as they choose to as well.

Like it, or not, not everyone is going to be ok with homosexuality. Pressuring people to remain silent about their negative views of homosexuality is no different than pressuring gays to remain silent about being gay.
Being "OK" with homosexuality should not really be the issue. Hell, I'm not "OK" with it. But, I'm not going to tell Homosexuals that they are sinners who will be sent to hell unless they start ****ing girls either. They are what they are, and not by choice. It's thier lot in life to be attracted to the same sex. THat, to me, sounds like quite a burden already.
 
Not all Christians...just hose who like to hurl the word "sin" around while pointing their finger at a sexual orientation minority.

But Christians also claim everyone sins. Why is the specific sin they are referencing important? I mean, unless you have some odd obsession with homosexuality. It is just one of many sins.

by the definition

Yeah, that is why semantics work.
 
Phil? You mean the guy who never saw Blacks being mistreated throughout all his years of living in the Jim Crow South? Yeah, he's credible :roll:
How sad.
His personal experience is his personal experience.
You have nothing but absurd doubt, which is meaningless.
 
I'm sorry, but pre is before. It's a comparison. It's simple communication.
He answered a question of a specific time period about his personal experience. He made no such comparison.


Fox News isn't specific? I'm sorry, but you're just closing your eyes.
Fox news? iLOL :doh
Name the actual source and provide the clause you say exists, or stop with the absurdities.
 
How sad.
His personal experience is his personal experience.
You have nothing but absurd doubt, which is meaningless.
It takes a lot of head burying in the sand to have missed Blacks being mistreated in Louisiana back in the 50's and early 60's.
 
It takes a lot of head burying in the sand to have missed Blacks being mistreated in Louisiana back in the 50's and early 60's.

Unless you lived in an extremely simple living, rural area.
 
It takes a lot of head burying in the sand to have missed Blacks being mistreated in Louisiana back in the 50's and early 60's.
That is your assumption.
By his own experience - Not where he lived.
 
But Christians also claim everyone sins. Why is the specific sin they are referencing important? I mean, unless you have some odd obsession with homosexuality. It is just one of many sins.
If a Christian got up in my face and called me a sinner, I'd punch him in his. Instantly.

I guess, I just have a hard time with some religious whackjob accusing anyone of being a sinner, regardless what the supposed sin happens to be.
 
good move backing off the lie you posted

again simply provide any FACTS you have to support your false claims, even ONE will do

FACTS:

no content in MY conversation was ignored, if you disagree post factual proof
no assumption were made by ME, if you disagree post factual proof

your two statements are wrong.
"Stating they are sins, is not making a comparison."
"and you would also be wrong if you are asserting that he equated the two behaviors"

PROOF:


Comparison
: the act of suggesting that two or more things are similar ]or in the same category
Comparison - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he put them all in the same category thus factually comparing them

: to treat, represent, or regard as equal, equivalent, or comparable
Equate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he did treat them, represent them and regard them as comparable sins

Facts, links and definitions destroy your two statements and prove them wrong, as always, I ASK AGAIN, if you disagree simply post any facts you have that prove otherwise and simply quote me making the assumptions made up

one shred of factual evidence you cant do it
:doh
:lamo
Saying I posted a lie is a lie.
Your assertions are still wrong as previously shown.
It doesn't look like you will admit it though.
What a shame.
 
Last edited:
If a Christian got up in my face and called me a sinner, I'd punch him in his. Instantly.

I believe that you would batter someone for speaking. Absolutely.

I personally would not. But my supported positions and way I act are not based in hysterical emotions, so that might be the difference.

I'm not buying it.

Must be those emotions kicking back in.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, that is why semantics work.

which makes your previous statments 100% factually wrong, thanks for finally admitting that
 
I believe that you would batter someone for speaking. Absolutely.

I personally would not. But my supported positions and way I act are not based in hysterical emotions, so that might be the difference.
Invade my personal space and I may just shoot you. No one has the right to get in another person's face. I'll take my chances with a jury on that.
 
:doh
:lamo
Stop telling lies.
Your assertions are still wrong as previously shown.
It doesn't look like you will admit it though.
What a shame.


again simply provide any FACTS you have to support your false claims, even ONE will do

FACTS:

no content in MY conversation was ignored, if you disagree post factual proof
no assumption were made by ME, if you disagree post factual proof

your two statements are wrong.
"Stating they are sins, is not making a comparison."
"and you would also be wrong if you are asserting that he equated the two behaviors"

PROOF:


Comparison
: the act of suggesting that two or more things are similar ]or in the same category
Comparison - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he put them all in the same category thus factually comparing them

: to treat, represent, or regard as equal, equivalent, or comparable
Equate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he did treat them, represent them and regard them as comparable sins

Facts, links and definitions destroy your two statements and prove them wrong, as always, I ASK AGAIN, if you disagree simply post any facts you have that prove otherwise and simply quote me making the assumptions made up

one shred of factual evidence you cant do it
 
But Christians also claim everyone sins. Why is the specific sin they are referencing important? I mean, unless you have some odd obsession with homosexuality. It is just one of many sins.



Yeah, that is why semantics work.

It's a politically correct sin. Politically correct sins are off limits.
 
again simply provide any FACTS you have to support your false claims, even ONE will do

FACTS:

no content in MY conversation was ignored, if you disagree post factual proof
no assumption were made by ME, if you disagree post factual proof

your two statements are wrong.
"Stating they are sins, is not making a comparison."
"and you would also be wrong if you are asserting that he equated the two behaviors"

PROOF:


Comparison
: the act of suggesting that two or more things are similar ]or in the same category
Comparison - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he put them all in the same category thus factually comparing them

: to treat, represent, or regard as equal, equivalent, or comparable
Equate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he did treat them, represent them and regard them as comparable sins

Facts, links and definitions destroy your two statements and prove them wrong, as always, I ASK AGAIN, if you disagree simply post any facts you have that prove otherwise and simply quote me making the assumptions made up

one shred of factual evidence you cant do it
:lamo
Yep. Exactly as I said. Your assertions were wrong.

The constant ignoring of the facts makes your postings wrong each and every time.

Fact: You were already told that they both being sins was not the comparison being discussed or the alleged comparison that has folks in an uproar.
You assumed and were wrong because of the assumption
He did not equate homosexuality to bestiality. Saying so is a lie. He made no such comparison.
He said they were sins. That is all.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom