Duck Dynasty Family Releases Statement On Suspension Of Phil Robertson


We want to thank all of you for your prayers and support. The family has spent much time in prayer since learning of A&E’s decision. We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word. While some of Phil’s unfiltered comments to the reporter were coarse, his beliefs are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. Phil is a Godly man who follows what the Bible says are the greatest commandments: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Phil would never incite or encourage hate.We are disappointed that Phil has been placed on hiatus for expressing his faith, which is his constitutionally protected right.We have had a successful working relationship with A&E but, as a family, we cannot imagine the show going forward without our patriarch at the helm. We are in discussions with A&E to see what that means for the future of Duck Dynasty. Again, thank you for your continued support of our family.

I don’t watch the show but I side with Phil Robertson on this issue. Not that I agree with what he said about gays and Blacks, but rather with his right to express his views based on his religious and personal beliefs. And I’m not the only liberal who feels this way: for example, Chris Hayes on MSNBC has said basically the same thing. After all, this is a reality television show so why should one expect politically correct statements and, furthermore, Robertson’s comments were not made on the show itself. I think A&E has overstepped its bounds by suspending Robertson, which really does neither the audience nor the general public much good although, if the show remains on the air, this action might serve to boost its already high ratings.

This Indian liberal agrees with you.

Free speech should be protected consistently, otherwise it’s just arbitrary censorship.

That’s a fundamental misunderstanding of free speech. Free speech protects you from government censorship or punishment because of your speech. However, it does not protect against the natural consequences of being inflammatory in national media or protect you if you say something that upsets your boss.

I really don’t have an opinion on this whole thing. On one hand, the only person I know who watches that show is gay. He blew off the incident as just an ignorant redneck spouting off. That’s probably true and I’m not upset, because obviously he isn’t being widely supported in these statements. On the other, I’m grateful that we’re getting to the point as a society where saying these things is not acceptable and results in serious backlash.

Yes, I am free to go up to my boss and say all sorts of things. My boss’s discretion as to whom is employed is also a freedom that needs protection.



What did he say about blacks? I only heard the gay thing.

Exactly. That’s why I don’t get the outrage. He’s free to say whatever he wants, and he did. Now A&E is free to decide whether or not to do business with him.

There’s outrage because even though it’s within their rights, it’s still (arguably) a jerk move.

Not really. A&E has been very vocal and public about being pro-LGBT. He knew his employers stance.

If I were on national television as a well known contractor for a steakhouse, and then I went to the national media and said that meat eating was wrong, I would expect to be terminated immediately.

Robertson said that the Blacks he encountered in Louisiana during the era of Jim Crow were happy and that they were singing and dancing. Yes, one may be happy even during times of misery, and this may be due to many influences, including religious faith and individual personality. However, the impression Robertson gave is that life on the old plantation was nothing so terrible and that it was, on the contrary, one big party. It’s an ignorant statement at best, but I still think he has the right to voice his opinion, which is shared to this day by some Americans.

Interesting that these racial comments haven’t gotten more attention. The mistreatment (both by govt. and the populace) of blacks is well documented, and would be easy to criticize Robertson for some clueless comments. Having said that, blacks and whites did (do) work together in the south and the relationships were (are) more complex than some people today may acknowledge (for instance, Strom Thurmond - Carrie Butler).

And he’s an opinionated Fundamentalist redneck (his words, not mine), and they know his background.

Also, he’s the well-known commodity, not them. Duck Dynasty isn’t just their highest rated show, it’s their highest rated shoe ever. A&E itself isn’t exactly “well known” for anything. Did you honestly know they were pro-LGBT before this hoopla? This is the network of Storage Wars and American Hoggers, from where does one glean their pro-LGBT message?

If you think of it and are comfortable, perhaps you could ask your friend what makes the Duck guy ignorant? Is your friend offended by what he perceives as a comparison between homosexuality and bestiality? If so, why is he offended by that? What I’m getting at is, if he supports the homosexual lifestyle on the grounds that a person’s sexual preferences are perfectly moral and their own business, then why would it be offensive to him if someone compared him to any other sexual orientation? What is the basis for his moral compass on this?

The executives at A&E must really believe in LGBT issues to suspend the central figure of their highest rated show over this.

I think they’re wrong, but I have to respect their committment to what they perceive to be the right side of a social justice issue. No one can accuse them of being money-grubbing for making such a move that runs counter to their best financial interests.

If that’s all that’s at work here, I agree. However, it wouldn’t surprise me if there was some financial lobbying going on behind the scenes. It’s at least plausible. If this article is reliable, last year, a group funded by George Soros apparently sued a guy, Scott Lively, who runs a Christian ministry for making comments also averse to homosexual behavior. GLAAD is cited in the article as involved in the same campaign against Lively oversees. In March 2012, GLAAD held a “media awareness” dinner that had as one of its corporate partners, the A&E network.

I hope after they finish their contract with A&E they move to a different network that does not tell them to not mention Jesus name at the end of every show. A&E can go duck themselves.

That’s certainly possible.

It appears that Soros indeed bankrolls the “Human Rights Campaign,” which, along with GLAAD, went after Robertson.

Aren’t you worried that this is too far in the other direction? There are plenty of shows making far more inflammatory comments about Christians. Speaking from the perspective of a Christian, I would say my religious beliefs are just as central to my life as my sexual orientation. In fact, I would say it is far more important. Now, if fair is fair, shouldn’t we be punishing those who make inflammatory against Christians as much as we do against homosexuals? Or maybe Christians aren’t entitled to that protection, but neither is the LGBT community. From my perspective, everyone should grow some thicker skin (as Christians have been forced to) or perhaps everyone should should be treated the same.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit