'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson sounds off on gays, civil rights

look - don't get all ad hominem here.

Instead of defending this guy's rights, you should defend the free speech rights of people who rally to shut him down. It's not just bigots who have the right to free speech -- the bigots should keep that in mind, especially if they have so much to lose!

And the highlighted part of your post makes zero sense. Do you dab? :mrgreen: (whatever that means)

Don't forget - you're on a discussion forum, so you're going to run into opinions contrary to yours. Comes with the territory, and you should be happy for it. If the opinion makes sense, you should even adopt it.

Free speech is great, but your right to swing your arms around wildly ends where my nose begins. Phil, with the great platform others don't have, should enjoy his success and leave the gays alone. And he shouldn't advocate jim crow unless he's down with the risk of offending folks who know what jim crow entails. They might just use their free speech against him, and I hope they do successfully.

I personally would love to see that foe shut down, and have only himself to kick for it.

 

rayer:

I think most of us know the difference between right and wrong...but only a few are able to see both sides and/or the big picture...you my friend nailed it!

 

Must spread rep to medullaslashin.:smt114


Free speech doesn't mean an equality of viewpoints.

In a free society, some people's views are antithetical to the premise 'liberty and justice for ALL.'

Also nobody is taking food out of this yokel's mouth. His family was rich before Duck Dynasty. The fame part was a nice perk, but his family can survive without it.

I wonder, if this dude went on a rant about his personal misgivings about interracial marriage, would everyone still be defending his right to believe and say whatever he wants??:smt039


We live in a country that fights its culture wars on the battlefield of ideas.

Phil's side has long since lost the war on race and sexuality in this country.

He needs to stand down and shut up.

When you start using your religious faith as a crutch to justify your own bigotry, pretending it's not your fault and you're only following spiritual dictates, you deserve to catch heat from all sides.

Phil should have said it's none of his business what two grown folks do in the privacy of their homes.

 

Go easy on him, hammer

 

thank you!

thats like telling sway not to tell kanye to calm down. cats these days always trying to turn up on some ol bs.

 

You forgot to drop the mic after this one so Imma do it for you:

 

Now there's a shocker!

 

Some of you keep acting like dude was jailed for speaking his mind. That's the only way the free speech argument would apply. Dude basically went to work and said shit his employers and customers didn't like. Keep personal views private or wait to express them when you vote but if you take a job knowing that image counts to those signing the checks shut the fuck up and do your job.

 

:smt038:smt038:smt038:smt038:smt038:smt038:smt038

 

Yup. Phil excersised his freedom of speech and there were consequences. Freedom of speech isn't just a free for all. There may be consequences. What is it with this idea that there should not be any consequences? If A&E felt it was hurting their bottom line, then of course, like any business, they will fix that.

Also, the fans have their freedom of speech and are protesting, last I heard there were over a million signatures, not sure its true, but there it is. Phil may be reinstated yet.

Besides, Phil ain't hurting, that family is worth 80 million.

 

I think one of the issues that needs to be addressed, is the bulling tactics of special interest groups. These kind of groups basically extort and harass any individual or organization into doing their bidding.

A&E didn't suspend him because of what he said. They suspended him because they were afraid of incurring the wrath of GLAAD and groups like them.

I absolutely disagree with gay bashing and discrimination of the LGBT community, but having people fired/suspended by applying duress to their employers is just an end-run around censorship.

 

Very well said. All of it. :smt038:smt038:smt038

:smt043:smt043

 

Most people seem to forget that Phil was ASKED his opinion. He did not go on a rant, nor did he randomly choose to make a speech. Whether you agree with him or not, he does have a right to his opinion and if asked to share it, should be given the same respect each person here would like when sharing his/her opinion.

 

I don't know who he is or what that show is, but he absolutely has a right to his opinion. He also has a right to the repercussions that come from voicing that opinion. There are consequences for our words just as there are for our actions and IMO if he were smarter he would've kept those comments to himself. Just because we have the freedom to say any damn thing we want doesn't mean it's always in our best interest. While that seems like common sense to many, there'll always be some who have to learn it the hard way

 

THIS ^

I don't agree with him but he certainly entitled to his opinion...if he didn't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of no one would give a crap what he says...strangely enough he was the family member that was absent for the Barbara Walters interview...his wife said he was duck hunting and to him that was more important...

 

[YOUTUBE]Jh0JJ4z3kx4[/YOUTUBE]

And this one poster made a great point:

Why are so many religions, and religious people, utterly obsessed with sex? 'Fornication;, abomination', 'lust', 'lewd', 'immoral', 'temptress', 'Jezebel', and all those stories in the OT about fathers offering their daughters to be raped, incest, polygamy, taking sex slaves... they're sex mad, d'ye hear me, sex mad!!!​

 

I don't think anyone is disputing his right to say what he wants. He can do whatever he wants with his mouth.

The real point of contention here is whether others should be able to exercise their freedom of speech to shut him down. I say they have a perfect right, and (hopefully) a great opportunity to "get at" someone who would curb others' freedoms if he had the chance.

I ask lippy and bugleroller and ches -- If this guy's freedom of speech is being violated, what's the solution? are you proposing that people who voice their opposition to the guy be silenced?

...Or perhaps we're really on the same page?

1. he has a right to play himself however he wants
2. smart people have a right to use their freedom of speech to shut him down
3. we all abhor his sentiments, of course :roll:

Which of those points do you dispute? Can't help but thinking you see the sense in point 1 ...and therefore in point 2... so then what are you really defending?

 

Is anyone actually defending what he said? I think most people are just defending his right to have an opinion (even a unpopular and hurtful opinion) without getting bullied out of his job for it.

 

The 1st Amendment wasn't violated in any way, shape or form. He expressed his opinion, but has to live with the consequences. Speaking freely is just that...speaking freely. That doesn't mean you're not immune to criticisms and consequences. It's pretty stupid that people are so adamant on thinking that voicing your views shouldn't be subject to taking action.

A&E did what they have to do as a business. But, the Duck Dynasty crew isn't dying off. They are still making oodles of money from their business.

 

actually, he wasn't holding a rifle, so I deleted that comment

but what about this one?

If you see the sense in point one, you gotta see the sense in point two.

He's being "bullied" out of a job? The real bully is the one who advocates oppression of others, especially from as prominent a platform as he has. Who wants their kids growing up thinking this guy is just "normal", on tv everyday, and even the people who make the food we eat support him with their commercials... All while they're going through genuine discrimination in their daily lives?

This guy wants more discrimination. He's the real bully

... Or maybe that kinda guy is not the bully, but the people who oppose him are? :roll: thump, you got it all wrong