Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:37:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 13:48:44 GMT -5
This has everything to do with free speech. Had he said this on TV on the show's network, then I may be inclined to agree with you. And yes, I always say and do what I want. One of the joys of being self-employed. Freedom of speech doesn't give you freedom to say whatever you want, whenever you want, however you want with no consequences for your words. You may not be responsible for your words and actions, but other people have that responsibility in their lives and have to live up to it, and he didn't and is facing the consequences for it. Freedom of speech means exactly what you just said it doesn't.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:37:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 13:52:40 GMT -5
Freedom of speech doesn't give you freedom to say whatever you want, whenever you want, however you want with no consequences for your words. You may not be responsible for your words and actions, but other people have that responsibility in their lives and have to live up to it, and he didn't and is facing the consequences for it. Freedom of speech means exactly what you just said it doesn't. No, being ignorant and lacking responsibility for you, your family, your friends, and your employer means exactly what I said. Freedom of speech doesn't somehow protect you when you run your mouth and say stupid crap because you don't want to face the consequences of your actions.
|
|
Revvie®
Main Eventer
Somewhere between Reality, and the Absurd
Joined on: Jun 29, 2005 1:04:26 GMT -5
Posts: 4,327
|
Post by Revvie® on Dec 19, 2013 13:53:17 GMT -5
Freedom of Speech is not free from company dismissal from employment. Also it is not free from others freedom of speech to contest it.
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Dec 19, 2013 14:07:38 GMT -5
So because he believes in what is clearly stated in the bible, he gives a horrible name to christianity? What's sad is when we who believe are made to believe we should start changing what the bible says to match up with what the rest of the world thinks. Where doe the Bible say: "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." Yea, I don't see it there either. I'll agree that he could have expressed his views much better. No arguement there.
|
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Dec 19, 2013 14:07:59 GMT -5
It's sad that so many people are clueless as to the actual meaning of freedom of speech; it's freedom from government persecution, not persecution from your peers. Nowhere is it written that you can't be derided or fired for spewing your ass-backwards views.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:37:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 15:14:38 GMT -5
I respect your opinion & would never try to change minds or say that you're wrong, but I'll play devil's advocate on the "changing the bible" topic (to quote for the millionth time people that always use this example)…the bible mentions how to treat slaves So, by the logic of not changing anything whatsoever in the bible….that law/ethical view would never have been changed (not just non-whites were slaves, but the idea of slavery was acceptable) Does this mean that all Christians must support slavery? I think it's a book that is up for extreme subjectivity in interpreting its meaning among believers. Heck, e ven the versions we have now have changed over time, due to people adjusting their translations/interpretations, based on their opinion of what was said.Leviticus 20:13 - "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." Does this mean that all Christians should support death of homosexual actions? I'm not saying by any means that the Bible is somehow supportive of homosexuality. It isn't, but for me personally…I think there's a lot in the Bible (killing people for prostitution, homosexuality, whipping a slave a certain amount of times being ok if they don't die, proper procedure for pimple popping) -- that just isn't necessarily meant to be set in stone for all eternity & is adjustable to change ones opinions based on each individual's translation/interpretation. Not everyone has to read it & get the same out of it on every single issue. The scripture you quoted is old testament. People seem to not understand the difference between Old and New. It's two different covenants. The old testament way of addressing things was before Christ. Once he came, things changed. Hence the new testament. Homosexuality is addressed in the new testament. Being put to death is no longer tied to it. There's a lot more that I could say but I know religon is a touchy subject. I have nothing but respect for others' views, so it isn't a touchy subject with me…but I definitely get where you're coming from on that assessment. I know the difference between new & old testament, but I just meant that as an example of what is in the Bible & what some people hold onto when they say they 'believe the Bible word for word & accept everything within it' (at least some orthodox Jews - so not Christians but some religious followers of the Bible keep the Old Testament as what should be). Poor example for Christians - even though some will carry part of old testament views. I'm not saying that the New Testament favors homosexuality…just that its interpretation/translation has changed based on who/when it was acknowledged - very subjective since it's based on personal beliefs.
|
|
Thunder
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
WFWF Record: 59-60-1
Joined on: Aug 6, 2003 9:44:07 GMT -5
Posts: 2,941
|
Post by Thunder on Dec 19, 2013 15:18:04 GMT -5
The backlash on this story really annoys me due to how many people don't get what freedom of speech means. To put it simply:
His freedom of speech was not violated.
Were the same people who are upset now upset that Martin Bashir lost his job after the comments he made about Sarah Palin? No! You had tons of people, including Palin herself, wanting Bashir fired, and didn't act like his freedom of speech was being violated. That's because it wasn't being violated, just like this situation. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of avoiding any consequences,
If someone walks into their boss' office and calls him a dick, he can be fired for it. In fact, I bet he would be. He has the freedom to walk in there and say it, but his employer can also get rid of him for something he says.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Dec 19, 2013 15:22:18 GMT -5
What a ing ignorant moron. This is just sickening. Anyway, according to a lot of people he has a right to his opinions. Okay, that means I have a right to mine and nobody should get on my case for it because I'm allowed freedom of speech, right? Well, I think all Christians are bigoted, ignorant morons with no intelligence whatsoever. Same with Muslims and every other religious idiot out there. How do you like that for free speech? Here's the thing though. Religion is a personal choice, homosexuality is not. Criticizing homosexuals for the way they are born would be no different than criticizing someone's race. If he were to make racist comments, EVERYBODY would be on his case, and defending his right to free speech would go right out the window. But when it involves homosexuality, he has a right to his opinion. ING HYPOCRITES
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Dec 19, 2013 15:37:25 GMT -5
What a ing ignorant moron. This is just sickening. Anyway, according to a lot of people he has a right to his opinions. Okay, that means I have a right to mine and nobody should get on my case for it because I'm allowed freedom of speech, right? Well, I think all Christians are bigoted, ignorant morons with no intelligence whatsoever. Same with Muslims and every other religious idiot out there. How do you like that for free speech? Here's the thing though. Religion is a personal choice, homosexuality is not. Criticizing homosexuals for the way they are born would be no different than criticizing someone's race. If he were to make racist comments, EVERYBODY would be on his case, and defending his right to free speech would go right out the window. But when it involves homosexuality, he has a right to his opinion. ING HYPOCRITES See, that's where the problem lies in this whole discussion - now you're just matching uninformed ignorance with uninformed ignorance, leaving absolutely no room for understanding whatsoever.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:37:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 16:03:07 GMT -5
I don't see people being boycotted because they said something against straight people. I don't see the news media flaming someone because they say they don't like straight sex or find it disgusting. You're creating a false equivalency - the only public attacks are when someone straight criticizes or even comments on gay topics or behavior.
And I completely disagree with you that it is "natural". The gay men that I have known, and I've known a lot in my business, are very nice men by and large - great in fact, but I would call them...well, I guess...sexually intellectually- disabled. That's probably the phrase I would use. They were dominated by their moms and generally had weak or absent dads. Many were sexually abused as kids/teens. I think they never made the jump that straight boys do from thinking of girls as "icky", probably because they're too attached for good or bad to their moms, to thinking of women in sexual terms. Gay men, for all their physical practices with each other, however acrobatic they may become, lol, are sexually immature. I've seen it, over and and over and over again.
Bottom line for me - we can argue about this repeatedly. As I've said before, I don't care what gays do and I think they become dysfunctional with women at such a young age that they feel like they were "born that way". Which is fine with me. But I am tired of hearing that this is "normal" or that we should enshrine this unfortunate dysfunction with laws equating it to heterosexual marriage. And I'm glad that people are FINALLY starting to openly talk about REALITY instead of the pretense that we are forced to assume with the media and all these PC groups.
People, whatever you think, just be honest. And try to be reasonable and kind to each other. That's the best we can do.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Dec 19, 2013 16:07:21 GMT -5
What a ing ignorant moron. This is just sickening. Anyway, according to a lot of people he has a right to his opinions. Okay, that means I have a right to mine and nobody should get on my case for it because I'm allowed freedom of speech, right? Well, I think all Christians are bigoted, ignorant morons with no intelligence whatsoever. Same with Muslims and every other religious idiot out there. How do you like that for free speech? Here's the thing though. Religion is a personal choice, homosexuality is not. Criticizing homosexuals for the way they are born would be no different than criticizing someone's race. If he were to make racist comments, EVERYBODY would be on his case, and defending his right to free speech would go right out the window. But when it involves homosexuality, he has a right to his opinion. ING HYPOCRITES See, that's where the problem lies in this whole discussion - now you're just matching uninformed ignorance with uninformed ignorance, leaving absolutely no room for understanding whatsoever. I was trying to prove a point.
|
|
|
Post by JC Motors on Dec 19, 2013 16:36:24 GMT -5
Well if saying the N word 20 years ago got Paula Deen fired, than you should get fired for saying anti gay statements
|
|
|
Post by moocow on Dec 19, 2013 17:41:50 GMT -5
things like this are a good reminder that the internet is still full of bungholes by defending this guy.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Dec 19, 2013 17:45:41 GMT -5
I don't see people being boycotted because they said something against straight people. I don't see the news media flaming someone because they say they don't like straight sex or find it disgusting. You're creating a false equivalency - the only public attacks are when someone straight criticizes or even comments on gay topics or behavior. And I completely disagree with you that it is "natural". The gay men that I have known, and I've known a lot in my business, are very nice men by and large - great in fact, but I would call them...well, I guess...sexually intellectually- disabled. That's probably the phrase I would use. They were dominated by their moms and generally had weak or absent dads. Many were sexually abused as kids/teens. I think they never made the jump that straight boys do from thinking of girls as "icky", probably because they're too attached for good or bad to their moms, to thinking of women in sexual terms. Gay men, for all their physical practices with each other, however acrobatic they may become, lol, are sexually immature. I've seen it, over and and over and over again. Bottom line for me - we can argue about this repeatedly. As I've said before, I don't care what gays do and I think they become dysfunctional with women at such a young age that they feel like they were "born that way". Which is fine with me. But I am tired of hearing that this is "normal" or that we should enshrine this unfortunate dysfunction with laws equating it to heterosexual marriage. And I'm glad that people are FINALLY starting to openly talk about REALITY instead of the pretense that we are forced to assume with the media and all these PC groups. People, whatever you think, just be honest. And try to be reasonable and kind to each other. That's the best we can do. When did you get your PHD in Psychology? And homosexuality is a choice? What about all the animals that exhibit homosexuality? They obviously didn't choose it, so why are humans different? Saying that homosexuality is a choice is one of the most ignorant statements a person can make. Well if saying the N word 20 years ago got Paula Deen fired, than you should get fired for saying anti gay statements Exactly. Everyone was up in arms about her racist comment and no one came to her defense about free speech. Why should this guy get a pass?
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Dec 19, 2013 18:17:51 GMT -5
Freedom of speech doesn't give you freedom to say whatever you want, whenever you want, however you want with no consequences for your words. You may not be responsible for your words and actions, but other people have that responsibility in their lives and have to live up to it, and he didn't and is facing the consequences for it. Freedom of speech means exactly what you just said it doesn't. A more ignorant statement has not been said in this thread. I can't walk up to a cop and say "I'm gonna shoot you in the face" and not expect to have handcuffs thrown on me and taken to a precinct for booking. I can't walk into a movie theater on opening night for an anticipated movie, say Star Wars Ep. 7, and shout "FIRE!!" and not expect to be arrested for creating a panic scene.
|
|
motleyspoisongun
Main Eventer
14 USA Refs & 1 UK Ref
Joined on: Oct 4, 2006 13:26:28 GMT -5
Posts: 2,073
|
Post by motleyspoisongun on Dec 19, 2013 18:22:39 GMT -5
you know what the ed up part about things like this is, is if a homosexual said "It seems like, to me, an anus is more desirable than a womans vagina. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! He’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying?" and straight people won't get into heaven. there would be no ing problem. Same way as if a straight guy happens to say cocksucker its a supposed homophobic slur but if a homosexual happened to call a straight guy a **** licker, I highly doubt there would be any backlash with straight people saying oh no, he used a heterosexual slur. everyone in this world is just so damn touchy, no wonder the younger generation have no backbone
|
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Dec 19, 2013 18:36:26 GMT -5
you know what the ed up part about things like this is, is if a homosexual said "It seems like, to me, an anus is more desirable than a womans vagina. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! He’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying?" and straight people won't get into heaven. there would be no ing problem. Same way as if a straight guy happens to say cocksucker its a supposed homophobic slur but if a homosexual happened to call a straight guy a **** licker, I highly doubt there would be any backlash with straight people saying oh no, he used a heterosexual slur. everyone in this world is just so damn touchy, no wonder the younger generation have no backbone The difference is, there's no history of discrimination against straight people just for being straight. It's similar to why the word "cracker" doesn't hold the same punch that the n-word does. (BTW, I'm not saying that any of that would be right, I'm just saying, it's not like it's a problem straight people have to put up with on a daily basis.)
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on Dec 19, 2013 19:02:42 GMT -5
you know what the ed up part about things like this is, is if a homosexual said "It seems like, to me, an anus is more desirable than a womans vagina. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! He’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying?" and straight people won't get into heaven. there would be no ing problem. Same way as if a straight guy happens to say cocksucker its a supposed homophobic slur but if a homosexual happened to call a straight guy a **** licker, I highly doubt there would be any backlash with straight people saying oh no, he used a heterosexual slur. everyone in this world is just so damn touchy, no wonder the younger generation have no backbone The difference is, there's no history of discrimination against straight people just for being straight. It's similar to why the word "cracker" doesn't hold the same punch that the n-word does. (BTW, I'm not saying that any of that would be right, I'm just saying, it's not like it's a problem straight people have to put up with on a daily basis.) Exactly. And plus I can't recall a notable LGBT person going off on straight people in general.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 20:37:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 21:18:30 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. y Yes but there is a difference between Jesus and a hillbilly.
|
|
|
Post by JC Motors on Dec 19, 2013 21:45:29 GMT -5
Funny thing that The Salvation Army is very anti gay and the amount of slamming they got for the Gay Parents should be put to death comment was like nothing compared to what Phil Robertson got for his comment on gays. Duck Dynasty should just be cancelled now
|
|