“We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series ‘Duck Dynasty,’" A&E Networks said in a statement. "His personal views in no way reflect those of A&E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community.”
Is the thread title accurate? I heard what he really said, and I didn’t take it that he was directly equating homosexuality and bestiality, but more saying if you accept homosexuality as “normal”, there’s no bottom to it, rather like saying “If you steal hubcaps, you can’t draw a moral distinction between that and stealing cars.”
But regardless, when you get right down to it…
Bettcha if the Pope was that plain spoken he would never had made Time’s man of the year.
Of course the headline is written in a manner to bring the most outrage. I heard bits of the interview and as noted by Ridge, he was misunderstood at best, misquoted at worst. Last night I saw a panel consisting of three individuals, one of whom I assume was gay as his response to Robertson’s words was little short of a frothy mouthed condemnation of anyone who had anything to say demeaning his “love” for another man. Ironically I suspect he’s of the liberal persuasion but was demanding censorship of ANYONE who held the same opinion, demanding that A&E not allow anyone with such opinions on the show and that “this is showing the worst features of Christianity…” Robertson read from the Bible regarding those who engage in a variety of sins will not inherit the kingdom of Heaven. Well it’s in there… Further he said it was “not logical” that a man would desire the body of another man. Golly could he be speaking of Natural Law and basic biology. But let’s not let facts get in the way of a good story.
Do these people listen to themselves? Recall the vitriol after the Chik-Fil-A CEO said he “believed in traditional marriage.” Not a word about gays or against gays or indicating his company would not serve or hire them, just that he believed in traditional marriage. Politicians, marches, burning up of the Twitterverse…you’d think the man said he condoned child abuse.
It’s frightening how the lavender mafia has so much power in this country. Think about it, a tiny minority that basis its entire framework of life over a sexual practice demanding that the vast majority of Americans kowtow to their wishes.
It is being discussed here after being moved: forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=846003
He may or may not have said awful things or have been misquoted. Either way, the day is here already when you are a bigot if you don’t believe in homosexual marriage. Make no mistake, this is designed to leverage public opinion against Christians supporting traditional marriage.
So calling sin “sin” is hate speach? When did that change?
I don’t watch reality TV and could only stand a few minutes of “Duck Dynasty”, which I watched just to see what all the fuss was about. So, pardon my unfamilarity with this show.
What did the guy say that was so wrong? He is a Christian and he quoted the Bible.
But in the new society we have created, he broke the golden rule: never say anything bad about the homosexual lifestyle. That is a cardinal sin today. You can lose your job, and soon, I’m sure, be put on a watch list for a visit from a drone.
Do gay rights supporters realize they are having the exact opposite effect of their stated intent? Do they realize this will create more hatred? You start stifling free speech and become the thought police, watch and see how far it gets you.
Being gay is not like being black or Asian, it’s a behavioral difference, not a physical one. Whether you like it or not, people are not going to approve of you. And you cannot force people to do so. Thousands of years of history has shown that.
Does anybody know the “passage back to the place I was before”? :
January 20th 2009…
This is not a free speech issue. He is not in trouble legally. His employer A&E thought that it was inappropirate and suspended him. He became a liability for them. If they drop him someone else will pick up the show. He’s already rich and I’m sure this won’t affect his business. His little spiel wasn’t simply expressing a theological opinoin, he was making fun of others which is wrong.
The adulterers and swindlers are not causing a uproar, it is only the queers. Odd, is it not?
already being discussed in popular media forum