I support Phil of Duck Dynasty

[IrishLax]

Since there seems to be so much support for free speech if I may exercise some here:

I am simply stunned by the level of support for this crackpot. Black people were so much happier before civil rights, they were "singing and happy". Holy mother of god!
I am really tired of those using religion to couch what is nothing but bigotry and racism. Anyone who thinks these are simply heartfelt beliefs inspired by love of Jesus is either blind or an ostrich by choice. We all know what this fella thinks about gays & blacks and I would wager those same feelings inspired by love of jesus also go to immigrants, Mexicans, arabs, jews, and most likely liberals and Yankees.

But its all good according to many of the posts on this thread because his religion informs his views--give me a break guys.

We are all free to be as bigoted as we want , I for one have little patience for ignorant jesus freaks but if I spout those views on my television show I can expect the ownership or the sponsers not to be thrilled with my continuing employment.

It's funny because this is literally the least tolerant and most bigotted post in this thread BY FAR... yet you're calling out others for being bigots. The irony is unbelievable.

Ignore "Jesus freaks" for a second... let's say you have a strict Muslim who makes statements according to his religious beliefs that would be seen by some as anti-women's or anti-gay rights. Is he not allowed to have those beliefs either? Or is just "Jesus freaks" that you're a closed-minded bigot towards?

 

[wizards8507]

Why is no one discussing Robertson's comments on black people?

Because saying you lived and worked with black people in the 1960s and that they were generally happy isn't a racist thing to say.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

It's funny because this is literally the least tolerant and most bigotted post in this thread BY FAR... yet you're calling out others for being bigots. The irony is unbelievable.

Ignore "Jesus freaks" for a second... let's say you have a strict Muslim who makes statements according to his religious beliefs that would be seen by some as anti-women's or anti-gay rights. Is he not allowed to have those beliefs either? Or is just "Jesus freaks" that you're a closed-minded bigot towards?

The Non-PC crowd should love the guy for calling it as he sees though, right?

 

[tussin]

Since there seems to be so much support for free speech if I may exercise some here:

I am simply stunned by the level of support for this crackpot. Black people were so much happier before civil rights, they were "singing and happy". Holy mother of god!
I am really tired of those using religion to couch what is nothing but bigotry and racism. Anyone who thinks these are simply heartfelt beliefs inspired by love of Jesus is either blind or an ostrich by choice. We all know what this fella thinks about gays & blacks and I would wager those same feelings inspired by love of jesus also go to immigrants, Mexicans, arabs, jews, and most likely liberals and Yankees.

But its all good according to many of the posts on this thread because his religion informs his views--give me a break guys.

We are all free to be as bigoted as we want , I for one have little patience for ignorant jesus freaks but if I spout those views on my television show I can expect the ownership or the sponsers not to be thrilled with my continuing employment.

And in turn, you submitted the most hate-filled post of this thread.

This viewpoint is exactly what is wrong with our culture right now. You supposedly are a champion of tolerance and acceptance, yet go on to ramble about the "crackpots" that are "ignorant Jesus freaks." Riiiight, he also hates Arabs and Jews because he feels homosexuality is a sin. Talk about hypocrisy....

 

[pkt77242]

That's already been outlined in at least a half dozen posts on the first page.

Let's play the counter for a second... why do you think they were right to suspend him? I disagree with Phil and have never watched Duck Dynasty... I'm still really uncomfortable with someone getting suspended or fired for stating what they consider religious beliefs.

Do you think that someone should have to hide their religious beliefs if they're a public figure? If so, what about non-public figures?

As a public figure you do lose some of the ability to express your beliefs without getting fired because you can harm your employers image with your comments. So basically if you have the opportunity to get interview either for print or for television are at risk. The truth is that if he had worded it differently, such as "as a Christian man I believe that homosexuality is wrong" and he left it at that, we aren't having this conversation. How he phrased it greatly increased the blowback on this one.

As a general rule non-public figures should not have it infringed unless it is done at work. Most workplaces don't let you talk about religion or politics for a reason but what they do on their own time should not be used to fire them.

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

That's already been outlined in at least a half dozen posts on the first page.

Let's play the counter for a second... why do you think they were right to suspend him? I disagree with Phil and have never watched Duck Dynasty... I'm still really uncomfortable with someone getting suspended or fired for stating what they consider religious beliefs.

Do you think that someone should have to hide their religious beliefs if they're a public figure? If so, what about non-public figures?

I still don't see them but alright.

I think they were right to suspend, and I guess this necessarily involves making some assumption on why they suspended him, because A&E has stated that they quite strongly disagree with sentiments in his comments. With the popularity of Duck Dynasty if they don't want people to associate the beliefs of Phil Robertson with the beliefs of the network then this seems like the move to make.

I agree that it's uncomfortable to think of someone getting in trouble for speaking about something they believe is a religious belief but this is an issue that has a lot of cultural and political significance outside of the religious context. I don't think a network wanting a figure from their hit series to not say things they many people will find offense is forcing him to hide his religious beliefs. In fact, although I've never watched the show, I understand that the religious beliefs of the family are highlighted and praised through the series. There is a difference to me between celebrating your religion and what was said in this interview.

Again, I understand the fear of being "punished" for your beliefs but I just don't see that as the central issue here.

 

[Emcee77]

That's already been outlined in at least a half dozen posts on the first page.

Let's play the counter for a second... why do you think they were right to suspend him? I disagree with Phil and have never watched Duck Dynasty... I'm still really uncomfortable with someone getting suspended or fired for stating what they consider religious beliefs.

Do you think that someone should have to hide their religious beliefs if they're a public figure? If so, what about non-public figures?

Well, no one can be, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, right? I'm not an employment lawyer but I don't think that's what happened here.

I don't know what kind of contract Phil and A+E had, but I have to imagine that there is some provision that says that if Phil does something that is embarrassing to the network, they can pull him off the air.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

Because saying you lived and worked with black people in the 1960s and that they were generally happy isn't a racist thing to say.

The implication of that statement is that black people are worse off without Jim Crow laws.

 

[wizards8507]

We are all free to be as bigoted as we want , I for one have little patience for ignorant jesus freaks but if I spout those views on my television show I can expect the ownership or the sponsers not to be thrilled with my continuing employment.

Cover up, your tolerance is showing.

Here's a thought... CHANGE THE DAMN CHANNEL. That's the problem with you hardcore leftists. You demand tolerance but if something goes against your precious world view, it's not enough to let it be. You want it banned, gone, dunzo. You want government "out of the bedroom" when it comes to gay marriage, but firmly INSIDE the bedroom when you're demanding free birth control. "Live and let live" doesn't exist for you.

 

[IrishLax]

As a public figure you do lose some of the ability to express your beliefs without getting fired because you can harm your employers image with your comments. So basically if you have the opportunity to get interview either for print or for television are at risk. The truth is that if he had worded it differently, such as "as a Christian man I believe that homosexuality is wrong" and he left it at that, we aren't having this conversation. How he phrased it greatly increased the blowback on this one.

As a general rule non-public figures should not have it infringed unless it is done at work. Most workplaces don't let you talk about religion or politics for a reason but what they do on their own time should not be used to fire them.

Absolutely. Legally, as a "public figure" you actually forfeit quite a bit of your rights and I'm OK with that. It makes sense. I'm not even sure A&E really had another move except to suspend Phil as a message that they don't share his beliefs.

 

[wizards8507]

The implication of that statement is that black people are worse off without Jim Crow laws.

Okay. Let me get this straight.

Phil is lambasted because he's too blunt about homosexuality.

But when it comes to his racism, he's cryptic and subtle such that Title2114 has to make inferences.

You can't have it both ways. Phil said that, as a man, he finds a women's vagina to be much more appealing than a man's anus. You can't get much more blunt than that. If he were going to say something racist, I think it would have been more along the lines of "black people are the spawn of the devil" than "my black coworkers in the 60s were generally happy."

He was ASKED about race relations growing up in the segregated south. He answered honestly. Given the question, what should he have said? "Everyone I knew was miserable and the Klan ran absolutely everything and thank God for Barack Hussein Obama MM MMM MM." That wasn't what he experience, so that would be a lie.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

Okay. Let me get this straight.

Phil is lambasted because he's too blunt about homosexuality.

But when it comes to his racism, he's cryptic and subtle such that Title2114 has to make inferences.

How is it subtle in any way?

 

[Buster Bluth]

I commend A&E for having values and sticking to them. I also commend Chick-Fil-A for having values and sticking to them.

Getting offended by someone else's lifestyle, which doesn't harm anyone, isn't what I'd call values.

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

Okay. Let me get this straight.

Phil is lambasted because he's too blunt about homosexuality.

But when it comes to his racism, he's cryptic and subtle such that Title2114 has to make inferences.

You can't have it both ways. Phil said that, as a man, he finds a women's vagina to be much more appealing than a man's anus. You can't get much more blunt than that. If he were going to say something racist, I think it would have been more along the lines of "black people are the spawn of the devil" than "my black coworkers in the 60s were generally happy."

He was ASKED about race relations growing up in the segregated south. He answered honestly. Given the question, what should he have said? "Everyone I knew was miserable and the Klan ran absolutely everything and thank God for Barack Hussein Obama MM MMM MM." That wasn't what he experience, so that would be a lie.

Tact is a virtue, some say

 

[IrishLax]

I still don't see them but alright.

I think they were right to suspend, and I guess this necessarily involves making some assumption on why they suspended him, because A&E has stated that they quite strongly disagree with sentiments in his comments. With the popularity of Duck Dynasty if they don't want people to associate the beliefs of Phil Robertson with the beliefs of the network then this seems like the move to make.

I agree that it's uncomfortable to think of someone getting in trouble for speaking about something they believe is a religious belief but this is an issue that has a lot of cultural and political significance outside of the religious context. I don't think a network wanting a figure from their hit series to not say things they many people will find offense is forcing him to hide his religious beliefs. In fact, although I've never watched the show, I understand that the religious beliefs of the family are highlighted and praised through the series. There is a difference to me between celebrating your religion and what was said in this interview.

Again, I understand the fear of being "punished" for your beliefs but I just don't see that as the central issue here.

Really good post. The bolded is what makes me uncomfortable. I'm not really sure where I come down on this because I disagree with what he said and respect A&E's need as a business to do what they did, but the bolded is what has me uneasy... they knew he was very Christian. They highlight that in the show. They profit off of that. What exactly did they think his beliefs were? What did they think he was going to say? It's not like they were holding him up as a progressive mind and then he came out with what he said and they had to go "oh snap... we can't support that..." Just seems a bit disingenuous for A&E to run a show on this family and highlight their "Christian values" and then the moment they get blowback on a character espousing them in an unpopular manner it's cover your ass time.

 

[wizards8507]

How is it subtle in any way?

KNOWING HAPPY BLACK PEOPLE ISN'T RACIST.

 

[wizards8507]

Getting offended by someone else's lifestyle, which doesn't harm anyone, isn't what I'd call values.

No one was offended. He was asked point-blank what he thinks is sinful. Not "what offends you." "What is sinful?"

He answered.

 

[Buster Bluth]

But Rack Em I know you're pretty knowledgeable about Catholicism, so I have an honest question for you: what exactly did Jesus say about homosexuality?

 

[alohagoirish]

The truth hurts is what we have here. You all needed to hear this.

Yes there is a liar--Mr Robinson is the liar--he grew up in a color blind world where there was no mistreatment of blacks. My god what a self serving load of crap. If you believe that your either naïve or a fool.

As far as muslim views on women---they get no shield from me because the Koran may justify what is pure misogynism and gender oppression ! A cultural disgrace in so many muslim countries and a shocking lack of social evolution in this the 21st century.

Religion simply is not some carte blanche that allows freedom to insulate you from human morality.

 

[Buster Bluth]

No one was offended. He was asked point-blank what he thinks is sinful. Not "what offends you." "What is sinful?"

He answered.

I'm not talking about Phil. I could give a shit what that hick thinks.

It's only a sin because 5,000 years ago Jews were offended by it and made their fake god be against it.

 

[IrishLax]

Well, no one can be, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, right? I'm not an employment lawyer but I don't think that's what happened here.

I don't know what kind of contract Phil and A+E had, but I have to imagine that there is some provision that says that if Phil does something that is embarrassing to the network, they can pull him off the air.

As a spokesperson/public figure I know you forfeit a lot of the typical protections typically (whether implicitly, or explicitly written into your contract). He's suspended for making comments that don't give with A&E's values... the comments were, as I understand them, largely based on a philosophical discussion with the interviewer on his "Christian" view of homosexuality and sin.

I don't feel that bad for him, because this is the game you play in show business and as a public figure. At the same time, it makes me a bit uneasy. Especially because how can A&E talk about suspending him for not meshing with their "values"... when they run an entire show that highlights his personality, religious beliefs, etc. and obviously must've known his feelings on things like homosexuality before they ever green lighted the show. It strikes me as quite duplicitous by the network.

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

Really good post. The bolded is what makes me uncomfortable. I'm not really sure where I come down on this because I disagree with what he said and respect A&E's need as a business to do what they did, but the bolded is what has me uneasy... they knew he was very Christian. They highlight that in the show. They profit off of that. What exactly did they think his beliefs were? What did they think he was going to say? It's not like they were holding him up as a progressive mind and then he came out with what he said and they had to go "oh snap... we can't support that..." Just seems a bit disingenuous for A&E to run a show on this family and highlight their "Christian values" and then the moment they get blowback on a character espousing them in an unpopular manner it's cover your ass time.

Thanks.

Yeah I see the point that A&E might be talking out of both sides of its mouth. I would be curious what goes on in production meetings. I also wonder what sorts of things they have edited out of final cuts.

 

[tussin]

I don't know if I understand this point of view. Wouldn't the opposite be a shame, if A+E couldn't pull Phil off the air because it thought it was no longer in its best interest to associate with him? A lot of people find Phil Robertson's views abhorrent. They expressed outrage. A+E decided that it was in its best interest to cut ties with Phil Robertson. What's wrong with that? If A+E can't do that, if citizens and the media can't express their outrage, then who is being "censored"? (Others have correctly pointed out that there is no First Amendment issue. Some have seemed to hint that there may be an employment discrimination issue, but I doubt there is that either. This likely isn't a simple employee/employer relationship anyway; there must be a contract which governs A+E's right to pull Phil Robertson off the air if he runs into image problems.)

I think a lot of people underestimate how many people find what Phil Robertson said offensive. I very much doubt, as wizards seems to think, that by making this decision A+E is alienating more people than it is appeasing. You sometimes hear commentators say that the Republicans lost the 2012 presidential election because they simply underestimated how many Democrats are out there. I think something similar is going on in this thread.

1. No doubt that there are tons or people that are deeply offended by what he said. There are equally tons of people that are outraged that he was dismissed for expressing his beliefs. I'd guess that the sides are equal.

2. I think Obama won the election because of a huge turnout from minorities and young people (many of which were incredibly uninformed on the issues). I have no clue whether that translates into more democrats than republicans as a whole.

3. My frustration with this issue stems from the larger fact that one side controls the narrative in American media. This guy stood no chance because there are ten news channels that automatically pick up this story and attack conservative viewpoints. The executives at A&E probably don't give two shits about his stance on homosexuality, but they were forced into action because of the unbalanced reporting on the story. This would never have happened if the script was flipped.

 

[Woneone]

I'm not talking about Phil. I could give a shit what that hick thinks.

It's only a sin because 5,000 years ago Jews were offended by it and made their fake god be against it.

That right there is a really, really slippery slope.

 

[IrishLax]

The truth hurts is what we have here. You all needed to hear this.

Yes there is a liar--Mr Robinson is the liar--he grew up in a color blind world where there was no mistreatment of blacks. My god what a self serving load of crap. If you believe that your either naïve or a fool.

As far as muslim views on women---they get no shield from me because the Koran may justify what is pure misogynism and gender oppression ! A cultural disgrace in so many muslim countries and a shocking lack of social evolution in this the 21st century.

Religion simply is not some carte blanche that allows freedom to insulate you from human morality.

Thank you for contributing so thoughtfully to this discussion.

 

[alohagoirish]

Your quite welcome.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Or maybe Phil knew to keep his mouth shut on his views until he had the backing to make those comments....

Now he's famous and can get on a new network.If he said that on Season 1 Episode 1, the show would have been shitcanned and he would have never been heard of again.

 

[wizards8507]

Yes there is a liar--Mr Robinson is the liar--he grew up in a color blind world where there was no mistreatment of blacks. My god what a self serving load of crap. If you believe that your either naïve or a fool.

1. Robertson

2. In the farms and rural communities, a poor black person wasn't much different than a poor white person. They were all just that--poor. They weren't worried about politics and philosophical arguments about human rights. They were worried about putting food on the table.

 

[gkIrish]

Your quite welcome.

*You're

 

[IrishLax]

Your quite welcome.

Your grammar is almost as good as your tolerance of world religions and different cultures.