• 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

Select what represents your view?

  • I don't agree with Phil's comments and he had no right saying it.

    Votes: 4 3.8%

  • I don't agree with Phil's comment's but defend his right to say it.

    Votes: 41 39.4%

  • I agree with Phil's comments and defend his right to say it.

    Votes: 26 25.0%

  • A&E had no right to suspend Phil.

    Votes: 3 2.9%

  • A&E has a right to suspend Phil but I don't agree with it.

    Votes: 44 42.3%

  • A&E has a right to suspend Phil and I agree with it.

    Votes: 26 25.0%

  • It's a question of "freedom of speech" and very important.

    Votes: 13 12.5%

  • Phil's beard is too weird, which makes him a slave to fame.

    Votes: 12 11.5%
  • Total voters
    104
  • Poll closed .
Dezaad said:
Are you saying I should be tolerant of bigotry? What other specific bigoted positions do you think people should be tolerant of?
Click to expand...
You're the arbiter of right and wrong?

Or, is right and wrong decided via popular opinion, subject to change on the whims of popular opinion?
 
Dezaad said:
Are you saying I should be tolerant of bigotry? What other specific bigoted positions do you think people should be tolerant of?
Click to expand...

See, I believe that you can think anyway you please because frankly nobody can get inside another's head anyway. But you apparently want to mind control people? If it's not breaking the law what are you really talking about?
 
radcen said:
You're the arbiter of right and wrong?

Or, is right and wrong decided via popular opinion, subject to change on the whims of popular opinion?
Click to expand...

Right and wrong is established through reason. It's been a long, slow slog to rip right and wrong out from under the auspices of religion, but slowly and relentlessly, reason is prevailing. Religion is being dragged, kicking and screaming the whole way, toward reasonable positions.

Do I get to say child rape is ok, and you just go "Well, no one is the arbiter of right and wrong, so maybe child rape is ok..."? I seriously doubt it. There are things that are demonstrably wrong. Bigotry is one of those things.

Popular opinion most comports with reason in a population trained to reason. Ours is not especially good at it, but it is doing so so.
 
grip said:
See, I believe that you can think anyway you please because frankly nobody can get inside another's head anyway. But you apparently want to mind control people? If it's not breaking the law what are you really talking about?
Click to expand...

No, I don't. You are taking a leap there that is simply not warranted. I do, however, want to shame people who are bigoted. Just like we shame people who are bigoted by being racist.
 
Dezaad said:
No, I don't. You are taking a leap there that is simply not warranted. I do, however, want to shame people who are bigoted. Just like we shame people who are bigoted by being racist.
Click to expand...

I can get on board with the idea of using a lack of approval to humiliate someone acting stupid. It's the "forcing" people to behave properly beyond what the law calls for that disturbs me.
 
I disagree very strongly with what he said, but I'll fight to the death for his right to say it.

That said, he doesn't have a right to stand on someone else's soapbox to say it, A&E has every right to fire him for what he said, and I support their decision to do so.
 
grip said:
I can get on board with the idea of using a lack of approval to humiliate someone acting stupid. It's the "forcing" people to behave properly beyond what the law calls for that disturbs me.
Click to expand...

I really don't know how you define "forcing", but whatever.
 
Dezaad said:
I really don't know how you define "forcing", but whatever.
Click to expand...


You're the one that said "forcing". See below....



Dezaad said:
Trying to force others to accept the correct view is never easy, but it is to right thing to do. There are still people who think Blacks are an inferior race, and they believe this due to their religious doctrine BTW, and we don't make social allowances for them. Bigotry is what it is, and it should never be socially acceptable, even when it is mixed up with religion. Perhaps especially when it is mixed up in religion.
Click to expand...
 
grip said:
You're the one that said "forcing". See below....
Click to expand...

I guess I meant "force" differently than you mean "force". And I only advocated specific actions that you seem to agree with by your own statements, so I am not sure why you didn't see that. What is it that you think I am advocating? Putting them in concentration camps or something?

No. I meant "force" in response to and in the same meaning as the article I was referring to used it. Social pressure applied to the situation. That is all.
 
Dezaad said:
I guess I meant "force" differently than you mean "force". And I only advocated specific actions that you seem to agree with by your own statements, so I am not sure why you didn't see that. What is it that you think I am advocating? Putting them in concentration camps or something?

No. I meant "force" in response to and in the same meaning as the article I was referring to used it. Social pressure applied to the situation. That is all.
Click to expand...


This is the kind of communication that people should practice that leads to agreement and understanding.

I had a friend that used to be brutally honest with me telling me when I had a correctable flaw. I absolutely hated hearing the criticism all the time but after awhile it practically disappeared. I asked "what's wrong don't you love me anymore, being sarcastic?" The response was "there's just not that much wrong anymore." Can't tell you how good that made me feel from such a critique.

The world will always be at odds with differing opinions though it doesn't mean we can't get along?
 
Dezaad said:
Right and wrong is established through reason. It's been a long, slow slog to rip right and wrong out from under the auspices of religion, but slowly and relentlessly, reason is prevailing. Religion is being dragged, kicking and screaming the whole way, toward reasonable positions.

Do I get to say child rape is ok, and you just go "Well, no one is the arbiter of right and wrong, so maybe child rape is ok..."? I seriously doubt it. There are things that are demonstrably wrong. Bigotry is one of those things.

Popular opinion most comports with reason in a population trained to reason. Ours is not especially good at it, but it is doing so so.
Click to expand...
The view on child rape as being bad hasn't changed over time. Poor example.

While probably not intending to say so, what you're saying is that old is wrong and new is good. But, is it really? Not necessarily. Just one example:

Religion... the Bible... says to practice personal fiscal responsibility. Don't live beyond one's means, and so on. Today's popular culture accepts and teaches that personal debt is ok, and that purchasing luxury items beyond one's means is perfectly fine.

Is that the kid of "reason" where we have supposedly evolved beyond religion that you're talking about?

It must be, as anything religion is bad and anything contradicting religion is good.
 
radcen said:
The view on child rape as being bad hasn't changed over time. Poor example.

While probably not intending to say so, what you're saying is that old is wrong and new is good. But, is it really? Not necessarily. Just one example:

Religion... the Bible... says to practice personal fiscal responsibility. Don't live beyond one's means, and so on. Today's popular culture accepts and teaches that personal debt is ok, and that purchasing luxury items beyond one's means is perfectly fine.

Is that the kid of "reason" where we have supposedly evolved beyond religion that you're talking about?

It must be, as anything religion is bad and anything contradicting religion is good.
Click to expand...

No. It is still reason to live within one's means. The fact that people are not trained to reason (as I already pointed out) is not a flaw of reason.

It is irrelevant that one 'wrong' has always been recognized to be 'wrong', and another has not. Genocide had 'always' been considered permissible, until reason squashed it. God even commanded Old Testament characters to perform it. Then religion followed along after reason and said, "ok, it's not ok", and twisted their scriptures to admit that it was not ok.
 
Grand Mal said:
He shoulda kept his trap shut about his fundamentalist religious beliefs. He was entertainment when he was just quaint and funny but as soon as he beaked off like that he became lunatic-fringe and creepy.
Click to expand...


The interviewer from GQ asked him the questions directly and really seemed to enjoy Phil's company. So are you simply misinformed?
 
Dezaad said:
Are you saying I should be tolerant of bigotry? What other specific bigoted positions do you think people should be tolerant of?
Click to expand...

The reality is that everyone is tolerant of bigotry, it just depends on their moral belief of whether or not that bigotry is justified. You demonstrate this wonderfully here. You demonstrate a clear cut intolerance of those that share a different opinion than yourself, as have others on this thread. However, you morally feel your bigotry is justified because you feel the target of your bigotry is morally bad...thus it justifies your bigotry to you.

Which is frankly no different than the staunch christians who justify their bigotry towards homosexuality. They too, just like you, base it off their own moral view and code and judge the situation based on that.

That's the funy thing when people throw out words like bigotry or discrimination or other such things as some kind of universal "bad" word. They're not inherently bad, it largely depends on the context and view point of the individual doing them and how they justify it in their own minds.
 
Dezaad said:
Bigotry is one of those things.
Click to expand...

No, bigotry is not "demonstrably wrong"....your clear, unquestioned, indisputable bigotry on display currently that you've defended and proclaimed as just is a shining example of a contradiction between what you said above and what you've said earlier in this thread.

You are acting completely and utterly bigotted...and you've declared that bigotry to be completely okay because it's aimed at something you find to be "demonstrably wrong". Therefore showing that you DON'T believe bigotry, in and of itself, is demonstrably wrong.
 
Dezaad said:
I really don't know how you define "forcing", but whatever.
Click to expand...

"Trying to force others to accept the correct view is never easy, but it is to right thing to do"

Based on the context in which you used it I would believe you'd be using the definition of either:

- coercion or compulsion, esp. with the use or threat of violence.

or

- make (someone) do something against their will.

Since the sentence wouldn't make sense if you were meaning "use strength or energy as an attribute of physical action" or "make a way through or into by physical strength"

Since YOU used the word and you seem to be acting as if the actual definitions aren't what you meant, perhaps YOU can provide what you meant by "force"?
 
grip said:
I tend to personally agree but it's actually part of a larger social issue. I posted this statement on another thread to make the point.

"I believe the outcry from the conservatives on this issue is oriented in a sudden public shift in opinion on the acceptance of homosexuality. And not just the lack of condemnation but the political movement towards SSM. I often hear about Gay activists pushing an agenda, which is probably true to some degree and this unsettles the traditionalists.

I live in the south and hear my redneck acquaintances saying "it's too much Gay, too fast". I've often preached in the forums for the pro LGBT supporters to slow their roll or there will be a social divide and organized blowback. Especially with the PC control over speech. Let people have the time to adjust and freedom to vocally resist, so that a happy middle can be achieved.

The Cracker Barrel has already gotten such a massive negative response that they put Phil's items back on the shelves.

Hating or preaching against homosexuality is not going to make it go away. It's been around since before biblical times. And trying to force others to accept your orientation on every level is not a realistic goal."
Click to expand...

People are free to hate and speak out against homosexuality. They don't have to accept it ever, they just can't do anything about it. That's about it.

There is some interesting social trends that can be examined from this event since it is national and that could show some overall trends and demographics. But the overall attention that is being paid towards this issue isn't so much along along those lines and I fear that it's just distraction. At worst, it's been a brilliant publicity stunt.
 
Dezaad said:
Are you saying I should be tolerant of bigotry? What other specific bigoted positions do you think people should be tolerant of?
Click to expand...

Not tolerant, you don't have to like or accept. You cannot force anything though. People are free to be stupid and to express their stupidity.
 
Dezaad said:
Right and wrong is established through reason. It's been a long, slow slog to rip right and wrong out from under the auspices of religion, but slowly and relentlessly, reason is prevailing. Religion is being dragged, kicking and screaming the whole way, toward reasonable positions.

Do I get to say child rape is ok, and you just go "Well, no one is the arbiter of right and wrong, so maybe child rape is ok..."? I seriously doubt it. There are things that are demonstrably wrong. Bigotry is one of those things.

Popular opinion most comports with reason in a population trained to reason. Ours is not especially good at it, but it is doing so so.
Click to expand...

You can say that child rape is OK, and I am free.to say "man that guy is a sick bastard". What you cannot do is rape a child.
 
Nothing, he gave an honest answer to a question during an interview. If he had been opining on an unsolicited soapbox it may be different, but berating him for answering a question honestly is simply ludicrous.
 
WCH said:
The interviewer from GQ asked him the questions directly and really seemed to enjoy Phil's company. So are you simply misinformed?
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, who knows, maybe we all are. Maybe the guy's smarter than he seems- maybe he's tired of doing the show and wanted to go out with a bang.
I'll damn betcha the GQ guy was enjoying it. Probably they both knew, in general terms, where the interview was going to go.
 
Grand Mal said:
Yeah, well, who knows, maybe we all are. Maybe the guy's smarter than he seems- maybe he's tired of doing the show and wanted to go out with a bang.
I'll damn betcha the GQ guy was enjoying it. Probably they both knew, in general terms, where the interview was going to go.
Click to expand...

So did Phil. :)

Like I said before, Phil probably thought if he could save one God-less baby progressive it would be well worth it.
 
WCH said:
So did Phil. :)

Like I said before, Phil probably thought if he could save one God-less baby progressive it would be well worth it.
Click to expand...

Well, we appreciate the thought but I doubt my salvation will be from his hands.
 
Ikari said:
People are free to hate and speak out against homosexuality. They don't have to accept it ever, they just can't do anything about it. That's about it.

There is some interesting social trends that can be examined from this event since it is national and that could show some overall trends and demographics. But the overall attention that is being paid towards this issue isn't so much along along those lines and I fear that it's just distraction. At worst, it's been a brilliant publicity stunt.
Click to expand...

You're on track with what it means and how it's being played out. But the Robertson's are representative of a conservative/religious view point that feels suppressed and afraid to speak out due to the politically charged nature of the issue. Some say it's pure social bigotry, while others believe it's only an expression about commending positive concepts. The less credence the opponents give to the comments the less effect they have.
 
grip said:
You're on track with what it means and how it's being played out. But the Robertson's are representative of a conservative/religious view point that feels suppressed and afraid to speak out due to the politically charged nature of the issue. Some say it's pure social bigotry, while others believe it's only an expression about commending positive concepts. The less credence the opponents give to the comments the less effect they have.
Click to expand...

Of course the conservative/religious viewpoint "feels suppressed." A rampant persecution complex is a hallmark of modern American "conservatism."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom