Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 0:33:03 GMT -5
If he spoke in support of homosexuality, he still would have faced the consequences for his words, just from a different section of people So he would have still been suspended for saying homosexuality is great? Do you honestly think that if no one through a fit about it that A&E would have brought him back? Also saying that what he said is ignorant is the exact attack christians mention when saying Christianity is the only thing free to bash. If someone on here went on to say that all homosexuals are ignorant bigots do you think members here would let it go? It's an opinion. Only thing is lately with this politically correctness crud the only thing you're allowed to bash is Christianity. I don't ask or want any homosexuals fired or suspended or underpaid. I would not fire someone for having an opinion no matter the opinion. Unless it's something actually extreme like they wish all ____ would die. As long as your opinion is non threatening I am fine with it. I'll respect it. I may not agree with it but I am fine with you having it. I want equal rights. I want to be able to follow my god and speak and do what he asks as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. In fact I want anyone to be able to follow or believe or do whatever they want as long as no one else is hurt. Did he threaten anyone? Did he specifically call out only homosexuality? NO. I may think he shouldn't have said the following though in such words though, “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.” However is that worth indefinitely suspending a man? Also take 10 guys who have gotten indefinitely suspended. You'll notice 9 out of the ten never got to go back. All it is, is a PC way of saying you are fired. If you're going to say something, be sure you can face the consequences, if you can't, don't say it. Did he seriously think saying that would be ok? Did he seriously think that noone would say anything about that? If he did he's a friggin idiot that needs to be smacked in the face until he gets some common sense. He can believe what he wants about homosexuality, that's not the point, but if he seriously thought he could say that and not face any consequences for it he's a dumbass.
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Dec 19, 2013 0:53:20 GMT -5
So he would have still been suspended for saying homosexuality is great? Do you honestly think that if no one through a fit about it that A&E would have brought him back? Also saying that what he said is ignorant is the exact attack christians mention when saying Christianity is the only thing free to bash. If someone on here went on to say that all homosexuals are ignorant bigots do you think members here would let it go? It's an opinion. Only thing is lately with this politically correctness crud the only thing you're allowed to bash is Christianity. I don't ask or want any homosexuals fired or suspended or underpaid. I would not fire someone for having an opinion no matter the opinion. Unless it's something actually extreme like they wish all ____ would die. As long as your opinion is non threatening I am fine with it. I'll respect it. I may not agree with it but I am fine with you having it. I want equal rights. I want to be able to follow my god and speak and do what he asks as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. In fact I want anyone to be able to follow or believe or do whatever they want as long as no one else is hurt. Did he threaten anyone? Did he specifically call out only homosexuality? NO. I may think he shouldn't have said the following though in such words though, “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.” However is that worth indefinitely suspending a man? Also take 10 guys who have gotten indefinitely suspended. You'll notice 9 out of the ten never got to go back. All it is, is a PC way of saying you are fired. If you're going to say something, be sure you can face the consequences, if you can't, don't say it. Did he seriously think saying that would be ok? Did he seriously think that noone would say anything about that? If he did he's a friggin idiot that needs to be smacked in the face until he gets some common sense. He can believe what he wants about homosexuality, that's not the point, but if he seriously thought he could say that and not face any consequences for it he's a dumbass. This.
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on Dec 19, 2013 0:54:25 GMT -5
I heard about this earlier and knew it was going to get worse for him and rightfully so.. I don't know if others saw what else he said in the GQ article but here it is: www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-duck-dynasty-phil-robertson-sounds-off-on-gays-20131218,0,6319736.story In a quote that may raise even more eyebrows than his feelings about gays, Robertson claims he "never" saw black people mistreated during the pre-civil rights era in his home state, and strongly suggests that African Americans were more content under Jim Crow. "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," he said. "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.” -_-
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Dec 19, 2013 1:07:27 GMT -5
I heard about this earlier and knew it was going to get worse for him and rightfully so.. I don't know if others saw what else he said in the GQ article but here it is: www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-duck-dynasty-phil-robertson-sounds-off-on-gays-20131218,0,6319736.story In a quote that may raise even more eyebrows than his feelings about gays, Robertson claims he "never" saw black people mistreated during the pre-civil rights era in his home state, and strongly suggests that African Americans were more content under Jim Crow. "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," he said. "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.” -_-
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 1:19:01 GMT -5
I heard about this earlier and knew it was going to get worse for him and rightfully so.. I don't know if others saw what else he said in the GQ article but here it is: www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-duck-dynasty-phil-robertson-sounds-off-on-gays-20131218,0,6319736.story In a quote that may raise even more eyebrows than his feelings about gays, Robertson claims he "never" saw black people mistreated during the pre-civil rights era in his home state, and strongly suggests that African Americans were more content under Jim Crow. "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," he said. "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.” -_- Confused Jeff Hardy is confused. Well then... I don't think anything can really be said about that. Um..I know someone's opinion shouldn't make the news but when you're in the public eye you must expect this kind of scrutiny. But damn, that's just sad.
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on Dec 19, 2013 1:19:44 GMT -5
Another gem: “For the sake of the Gospel, it was worth it… All you have to do is look at any society where there is no Jesus. I’ll give you four: Nazis, no Jesus. Look at their record. Uh, Shintos? They started this thing in Pearl Harbor. Any Jesus among them? None. Communists? None. Islamists? Zero. That’s 80 years of ideologies that have popped up where no Jesus was allowed among those four groups. Just look at the records as far as murder goes among those four groups.” So I guess nobody was killed in the name of Jesus?
|
|
That 80s Guy
Main Eventer
Gnarly!
Joined on: Nov 6, 2010 14:29:43 GMT -5
Posts: 1,546
|
Post by That 80s Guy on Dec 19, 2013 1:23:46 GMT -5
It's no longer a free speech country we live in. The people bitch to the corporations, the corporations cave in and you lose free speech. What he said was easily disagreeable, and although his own belief it's stupid. However he should not be ed over because of his opinion. It's becoming more and more difficult to voice any opinion in the world we live in because of political correct BABIES and CHILDREN who can't take a comment and scream bigotry, racism, bullying or whatever else they feel. No one has a spine anymore. There is no thick skin. We are now a culture of weak pussies who can not take any comment because this younger generation was never smacked in the mouth and told to shut the up when they were misbehaving. -- I couldn't have said it any better! Well done!
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Dec 19, 2013 1:33:30 GMT -5
Another gem: “For the sake of the Gospel, it was worth it… All you have to do is look at any society where there is no Jesus. I’ll give you four: Nazis, no Jesus. Look at their record. Uh, Shintos? They started this thing in Pearl Harbor. Any Jesus among them? None. Communists? None. Islamists? Zero. That’s 80 years of ideologies that have popped up where no Jesus was allowed among those four groups. Just look at the records as far as murder goes among those four groups.” So I guess nobody was killed in the name of Jesus?
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 1:42:09 GMT -5
Ha! Funny, god also says not to judge people but okay. But hey, to each his own. Yet Jesus did it left and right. And 2 Peter says he left a model for us to follow his footsteps closely. He called the Pharisees white washed graves, Vipers, and Snakes. Oh yeah he left Christians the model to judge people. Make no mistake about that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 7:17:41 GMT -5
I don't watch Duck Dynasty but it sickens me how nobody is allowed to have an opinion anymore because society is so weak.
Free speech be damned! He said something "we" don't agree with!
Weak.
|
|
|
Post by ztj_wwf on Dec 19, 2013 7:35:43 GMT -5
You gotta remember that, in the United States of America, you only have freedom of speech unless you say something that's deemed offensive.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Dec 19, 2013 7:50:18 GMT -5
Another gem: “For the sake of the Gospel, it was worth it… All you have to do is look at any society where there is no Jesus. I’ll give you four: Nazis, no Jesus. Look at their record. Uh, Shintos? They started this thing in Pearl Harbor. Any Jesus among them? None. Communists? None. Islamists? Zero. That’s 80 years of ideologies that have popped up where no Jesus was allowed among those four groups. Just look at the records as far as murder goes among those four groups.” So I guess nobody was killed in the name of Jesus? He's referring to the Nazis that had "God with us" on their belt buckles? I love when Christians try to use that argument. How convenient that he left out the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, the Salem witch trials, and the Holocaust. For the record, the persecution card is REALLY getting stale.
|
|
StingerSplash
Main Eventer
Give em' the Scorpion Death Drop.
Joined on: Jun 6, 2009 11:30:40 GMT -5
Posts: 3,976
|
Post by StingerSplash on Dec 19, 2013 8:25:10 GMT -5
I feel the same way he does. Guess I should be suspsended too.
Words like 'bigot' are thrown around way too much, and those who plea for 'tolerance' are the first to jump down someone's throat when that person says something they don't agree with.
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Dec 19, 2013 8:37:34 GMT -5
So he would have still been suspended for saying homosexuality is great? Do you honestly think that if no one through a fit about it that A&E would have brought him back? Also saying that what he said is ignorant is the exact attack christians mention when saying Christianity is the only thing free to bash. If someone on here went on to say that all homosexuals are ignorant bigots do you think members here would let it go? It's an opinion. Only thing is lately with this politically correctness crud the only thing you're allowed to bash is Christianity. I don't ask or want any homosexuals fired or suspended or underpaid. I would not fire someone for having an opinion no matter the opinion. Unless it's something actually extreme like they wish all ____ would die. As long as your opinion is non threatening I am fine with it. I'll respect it. I may not agree with it but I am fine with you having it. I want equal rights. I want to be able to follow my god and speak and do what he asks as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. In fact I want anyone to be able to follow or believe or do whatever they want as long as no one else is hurt. Did he threaten anyone? Did he specifically call out only homosexuality? NO. I may think he shouldn't have said the following though in such words though, “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.” However is that worth indefinitely suspending a man? Also take 10 guys who have gotten indefinitely suspended. You'll notice 9 out of the ten never got to go back. All it is, is a PC way of saying you are fired. If you're going to say something, be sure you can face the consequences, if you can't, don't say it. Did he seriously think saying that would be ok? Did he seriously think that noone would say anything about that? If he did he's a friggin idiot that needs to be smacked in the face until he gets some common sense. He can believe what he wants about homosexuality, that's not the point, but if he seriously thought he could say that and not face any consequences for it he's a dumbass. I agree that he should be prepared to face consequences for things he says, and he is. My point is that people getting upset over these comments are pretty silly. Now the other comments in this thread about black people, well...funny we havent heard anything about that yet. But then again, anyone who is shocked that old redneck, hunting, christian, praying, grandpa isn't really down with homosexuality and is kind of racist, is naive as hell
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 10:08:18 GMT -5
"Free Speech" doesn't give you the freedom to say whatever you want and not face the consequences for your words, and "he's religious" isn't an excuse for him not having common sense enough to know when to shut up. He didn't get suspended for his "Christian Beliefs", he got suspended for being an idiot and not having enough common sense to know he should keep something to himself, especially since it was for a public interview and he's such a public figure. You can believe what you want, but sometimes it's best to keep your opinion to yourself, especially if you have fame and the opinion will be seen publicly, and if you don't, don't be surprised when something happens because of it. If his viewpoints were the opposite would you say the same thing? People who support homosexuality should keep it to themselves? To answer your question…the tv station absolutely wants them to be quiet on either side of the issue (opposing/supportive), they want them for entertainment & not reality. They want them to have no opinion on any major issue & to simply be a silly family comedy that people watch to laugh. I think there is a difference if his viewpoints are the opposite & here's why. In the view of public opinion, you are allowed to support something, but it is frowned upon to make harsh statements toward other groups that show inconsiderate behavior. It wouldn't matter if he was saying he didn't understand male homosexuality, or another religion…he was on the side of judgment toward a large group of people with his words - judging why they aren't normal. I am not gay, but I am for equality. Despite that, he has every right to his opinion. But the tv station has a right to protect itself from fear of backlash, boycotts, & a right to show their own stance toward certain groups (the gay community, etc.). Many people in Hollywood are Jewish, but I guarantee if someone of Jewish beliefs blasted other religions for 'sinning' by living life in an opposing way, the same thing would happen. The show is not reality, it is scripted entertainment & they don't want to offend any group…they don't want intolerance to shine through goofy characters that are meant to make people laugh. He can say, all day long, that it's just his religious beliefs & views, but the network doesn't have to support that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 10:32:35 GMT -5
If you're going to say something, be sure you can face the consequences, if you can't, don't say it. Did he seriously think saying that would be ok? Did he seriously think that noone would say anything about that? If he did he's a friggin idiot that needs to be smacked in the face until he gets some common sense. He can believe what he wants about homosexuality, that's not the point, but if he seriously thought he could say that and not face any consequences for it he's a dumbass. I agree that he should be prepared to face consequences for things he says, and he is. My point is that people getting upset over these comments are pretty silly. Now the other comments in this thread about black people, well...funny we havent heard anything about that yet. But then again, anyone who is shocked that old redneck, hunting, christian, praying, grandpa isn't really down with homosexuality and is kind of racist, is naive as hell You're right that no one should be shocked. I think the reason it isn't silly to be upset (for me) is that he comes off as intolerant & despite saying 'it's just not what I would do,' he follows it up with 'unnatural' - meaning that something is wrong with them. To me (who isn't even gay), I can see why people take offense. He obviously believes that the gay community is making a choice to be gay & that they should leave that life…which is also why his words sting so much to that community. I respect the guy's right to an opinion & even his strength in his religious beliefs, it just will always anger people to show your lack of understanding in opposing lifestyles & speak (in what's believed by some) to be a hateful manner.
|
|
koreygunz
Main Eventer
Elite Trader
287 Refs in WFClassifieds and counting
Joined on: Jun 18, 2006 15:31:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,697
|
Post by koreygunz on Dec 19, 2013 10:33:08 GMT -5
Whether people want to accept it or not, a persons religious beliefs mold their personal views. The Bible explicitly refers to homosexuality as sin. So if you believe in the bible, you believe homosexuality is a sin. So if someone asks you about your views on sin or homosexuality, and your views are compatible to your religious beliefs, your answer would be similar to his. Phil didn't ask GQ to come to his house so he could make a rant on homosexuality. He was asked a question and answered honestly. That's free speech. He's not a bigot just because his opinion or belief is different than yours. And he's right! In todays world, sin seems acceptable and you're labeled a bigot if you stand against it. Miley Cyrus can twerk half naked on stage and sing lewd lyrics, but a guy speaks against homosexuality and is demonized for it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 10:41:03 GMT -5
If his viewpoints were the opposite would you say the same thing? People who support homosexuality should keep it to themselves? To answer your question…the tv station absolutely wants them to be quiet on either side of the issue (opposing/supportive), they want them for entertainment & not reality. They want them to have no opinion on any major issue & to simply be a silly family comedy that people watch to laugh. I think there is a difference if his viewpoints are the opposite & here's why. In the view of public opinion, you are allowed to support something, but it is frowned upon to make harsh statements toward other groups that show inconsiderate behavior. It wouldn't matter if he was saying he didn't understand male homosexuality, or another religion…he was on the side of judgment toward a large group of people with his words - judging why they aren't normal. I am not gay, but I am for equality. Despite that, he has every right to his opinion. But the tv station has a right to protect itself from fear of backlash, boycotts, & a right to show their own stance toward certain groups (the gay community, etc.). Many people in Hollywood are Jewish, but I guarantee if someone of Jewish beliefs blasted other religions for 'sinning' by living life in an opposing way, the same thing would happen. The show is not reality, it is scripted entertainment & they don't want to offend any group…they don't want intolerance to shine through goofy characters that are meant to make people laugh. He can say, all day long, that it's just his religious beliefs & views, but the network doesn't have to support that. **Also, what if he brings that into the workplace, or just having that out there brings an opinion of him as hateful towards co-workers? What if there are gay camera operators/producers/script writers/tv executives? They could then sue the tv station for putting them in an environment where they feel harassed or will want to simply leave because the station is not supportive of all types of people. He isn't being suspended because he is Christian (being suppressed)….he's being suspended because he allowed his religion/personal views to impact his job where co-workers could be emotionally impacted by his actions - if you want to look at it from an HR view.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 10:42:51 GMT -5
Whether people want to accept it or not, a persons religious beliefs mold their personal views. The Bible explicitly refers to homosexuality as sin. So if you believe in the bible, you believe homosexuality is a sin. So if someone asks you about your views on sin or homosexuality, and your views are compatible to your religious beliefs, your answer would be similar to his. Phil didn't ask GQ to come to his house so he could make a rant on homosexuality. He was asked a question and answered honestly. That's free speech. He's not a bigot just because his opinion or belief is different than yours. And he's right! In todays world, sin seems acceptable and you're labeled a bigot if you stand against it. Miley Cyrus can twerk half naked on stage and sing lewd lyrics, but a guy speaks against homosexuality and is demonized for it. there were supporters of Miley Cyrus's twerking? I thought it was general consensus that she was shamed for it.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Dec 19, 2013 10:57:31 GMT -5
It's no longer a free speech country we live in. The people bitch to the corporations, the corporations cave in and you lose free speech. What he said was easily disagreeable, and although his own belief it's stupid. However he should not be ed over because of his opinion. It's becoming more and more difficult to voice any opinion in the world we live in because of political correct BABIES and CHILDREN who can't take a comment and scream bigotry, racism, bullying or whatever else they feel. No one has a spine anymore. There is no thick skin. We are now a culture of weak pussies who can not take any comment because this younger generation was never smacked in the mouth and told to shut the up when they were misbehaving. This is my sentiment as well. Everyone has a platform, soap box, or parade and it's become reverse discrimination on a number of levels. I don't think it's natural for everyone to like each other, it's certainly unrealistic to think we should all agree with one another, and this fantasy world we live in where everyone just holds hands and hugs is impacting everyday freedom. Let's also take into account where this guy comes from and his background. It was a different time and a different world. So everyone on their high horse needs take perspective into consideration, which I'm sure they will not. Plenty of people in this world have a problem with homosexuality, and while I don't personally share that opinion, I certainly don't have a problem with those who do have that opinion. Why? Because this world is made up of people who hate each other. We are constantly at odds or war with the world. Not just Americans but everyone is fighting over power, religion, oil, and for us to pretend that basic animal fire doesn't burn inside us is absolutely hysterical. The gay community can hate and be just as disrespectful as the Christian community because at the end of the day we're all humans. That being said, Phil is a now a big time celebrity, whether they like it or not. So what he says in the media is going to resonate with millions of people. I honestly don't think he's coming from a hateful place when I read that, but rather sharing his overall thoughts on how society has gone to sh*t, which I won't disagree with on a number of levels. I just think the cast needs to come together and protect Phil on this one. Issue a statement saying he didn't mean anything by it but mostly refuse to do new episodes without him. If A&E thinks they are in a position of power with a show like Duck Dynasty, they're on drugs. This isn't a debate for me about being gay, or black, or certainly not bigotry. This to me is just over sensitive America crying about something else so their platform stays relevant and we have something newsworthy to talk about. I mean seriously, Southern Christian has problem with homosexuality is kind of a yawner at this point imo.
|
|