Total Posts:73|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Duck Dynasty Controversy

gr33k_fr33k5
Posts: 321
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:12:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
AE recently indefinitely removed the patriarch of the family depicted in the Duck Dynasty series. . .

I have this in religion because his stated beliefs are built from his religion. Therefore the simple question is . . .

What should someone do in modern America when asked a difficult question, especially when one's beliefs on the subject go against the mainstream societal pressure.
I am free, free indeed!

ignorance is bliss
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:23:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 6:12:44 PM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
AE recently indefinitely removed the patriarch of the family depicted in the Duck Dynasty series. . .

I have this in religion because his stated beliefs are built from his religion. Therefore the simple question is . . .

What should someone do in modern America when asked a difficult question, especially when one's beliefs on the subject go against the mainstream societal pressure.

They should be able to say whatever they want, free of ANY interference from the government or threat of arrest or persecution due to their beleifs; provided that they do not incite others to hatred, violence or harm.

However, this right also extends to any private citizen OR organization to oppose such opinions (and indeed vocally counter them ). If this person espousing a belief belongs to or is employed by an organization, and that organization feels that persons actions, beleifs or opinions and the way they state them reflect negatively on that organization than they have a right to fire them provide that they can definitively show that such an opinion indeed reflects negatively.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:28:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 6:12:44 PM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
AE recently indefinitely removed the patriarch of the family depicted in the Duck Dynasty series. . .

I have this in religion because his stated beliefs are built from his religion. Therefore the simple question is . . .

What should someone do in modern America when asked a difficult question, especially when one's beliefs on the subject go against the mainstream societal pressure.

They should say it. I'm tired of PC police and word fascists putting the muzzle on free speech.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:29:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Greg Gutfeld: "It's infantile to think we need protection from words. Words do not wound, actions do. Outrage is now just an emotional exercise; it's going to the gym for your feelings. But to think that we're a country that can debate even the dumbest opinions, that becomes less true every day and that's bad. For sunlight allows good ideas to grow and bad ones to dry up and die."
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 7:51:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 6:12:44 PM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:

What should someone do in modern America when asked a difficult question, especially when one's beliefs on the subject go against the mainstream societal pressure.

It seems to me that you have two options:

1. Act like a politician. Give a vague answer. Try to change the subject. Ramble until the person forgets what they asked you.

2. Act like a human being. Be honest. Bit the bullet. Don't be a coward. Be willing to live with the consequences of what you say. Just tell the truth.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
annanicole
Posts: 19,784
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 8:05:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 6:29:34 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Greg Gutfeld: "It's infantile to think we need protection from words. Words do not wound, actions do. Outrage is now just an emotional exercise; it's going to the gym for your feelings. But to think that we're a country that can debate even the dumbest opinions, that becomes less true every day and that's bad. For sunlight allows good ideas to grow and bad ones to dry up and die."

This is true. Had Phil Robertson supported gay rights or gay marriage, then are we to suppose that the ones who oppose it are intelligent enough to not execute revenge or chastisement in punishment for his personally-held opinions. We already know where one side stands (and the mentality behind it).

"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
muslimnomore
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 8:14:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 6:12:44 PM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
What should someone do in modern America when asked a difficult question, especially when one's beliefs on the subject go against the mainstream societal pressure.

Answer it honestly. But be prepared to face the consequences. Don't act like a little punk if you get fired because your boss thinks your public opinion could harm his/her public business.

That said, I have no respect for Phil's opinion. It is just as bad as hate speech against people based on the colour of their skin.
muslimnomore
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 10:13:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
He has every right to speak his believes. The company has every right to suspend him. People have a right to freedom of speech, not to freedom from consequence. If you believe that private businesses have a right to discriminate (as many conservatives do), then you can hardly be outraged when they use that right.

Additionally, hate speech is not free speech.
annanicole
Posts: 19,784
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 11:25:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

Wise one? Surely you do not imply that negroes and gays constitute an appreciable audience of "Duck Dynasty". Phil Robertson stayed pretty close to the Bible line, just as his querist knew he would. Homosexuality is a sin. Period. That's not my fault. So are lots of other things. MadCornish's ridiculous answers are sins just as well. Bornofgod's posts are sins, if indeed he is mentally accountable.

What was he supposed to say? "I support the gay lifestyle and gay marriage"? Would that have made them happy?

I'd love to go out and commit fornication right now: I simply do not do it. If I practiced that, however, it would be just as wrong as practicing homosexuality
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 12:08:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 11:25:46 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

Wise one? Surely you do not imply that negroes and gays constitute an appreciable audience of "Duck Dynasty". Phil Robertson stayed pretty close to the Bible line, just as his querist knew he would. Homosexuality is a sin. Period. That's not my fault. So are lots of other things. MadCornish's ridiculous answers are sins just as well. Bornofgod's posts are sins, if indeed he is mentally accountable.

What was he supposed to say? "I support the gay lifestyle and gay marriage"? Would that have made them happy?

I'd love to go out and commit fornication right now: I simply do not do it. If I practiced that, however, it would be just as wrong as practicing homosexuality

Only in some religious paradigms, in the real world sin does not exist. In that world love is to be admired, in some religious paradigms, as you say, LOVE is a sin.

Just another very good reason to avoid religions.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,784
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 12:12:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 12:08:33 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/20/2013 11:25:46 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

Wise one? Surely you do not imply that negroes and gays constitute an appreciable audience of "Duck Dynasty". Phil Robertson stayed pretty close to the Bible line, just as his querist knew he would. Homosexuality is a sin. Period. That's not my fault. So are lots of other things. MadCornish's ridiculous answers are sins just as well. Bornofgod's posts are sins, if indeed he is mentally accountable.

What was he supposed to say? "I support the gay lifestyle and gay marriage"? Would that have made them happy?

I'd love to go out and commit fornication right now: I simply do not do it. If I practiced that, however, it would be just as wrong as practicing homosexuality

Only in some religious paradigms, in the real world sin does not exist. In that world love is to be admired, in some religious paradigms, as you say, LOVE is a sin.

Just another very good reason to avoid religions.

Hmmm ... I never really equated going out and screwing some guy with love. They might have. I didn't.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 12:16:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 12:12:15 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 12/21/2013 12:08:33 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/20/2013 11:25:46 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

Wise one? Surely you do not imply that negroes and gays constitute an appreciable audience of "Duck Dynasty". Phil Robertson stayed pretty close to the Bible line, just as his querist knew he would. Homosexuality is a sin. Period. That's not my fault. So are lots of other things. MadCornish's ridiculous answers are sins just as well. Bornofgod's posts are sins, if indeed he is mentally accountable.

What was he supposed to say? "I support the gay lifestyle and gay marriage"? Would that have made them happy?

I'd love to go out and commit fornication right now: I simply do not do it. If I practiced that, however, it would be just as wrong as practicing homosexuality

Only in some religious paradigms, in the real world sin does not exist. In that world love is to be admired, in some religious paradigms, as you say, LOVE is a sin.

Just another very good reason to avoid religions.

Hmmm ... I never really equated going out and screwing some guy with love. They might have. I didn't.
'sfunny. Why do people in your family get married? For money or just interbreeding purposes?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
muslimnomore
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 6:54:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 11:25:46 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

Wise one? Surely you do not imply that negroes and gays constitute an appreciable audience of "Duck Dynasty". Phil Robertson stayed pretty close to the Bible line, just as his querist knew he would. Homosexuality is a sin. Period. That's not my fault. So are lots of other things. MadCornish's ridiculous answers are sins just as well. Bornofgod's posts are sins, if indeed he is mentally accountable.

What was he supposed to say? "I support the gay lifestyle and gay marriage"? Would that have made them happy?

I'd love to go out and commit fornication right now: I simply do not do it. If I practiced that, however, it would be just as wrong as practicing homosexuality

1. I am sure Sarah Palin supporters were not amongst Martin Bashir's audience either. But MSNBC made a goo decision in making him quit. This is because his remarks were offensive and in the long run they would hurt the credibility of the channel.

I am sure duck dynasty's ratings would not be affected if Robertson was not suspended, but there was a good chance many groups would boycott A&E in general and that they would receive a lot of bad press around the world. This is because decent human beings (thankfully) speak out against such hateful and vile vitriol. Seriously, I am sure many fox news watchers are racists, but if anyone said something so overtly insensitive about another race, any network would be wise to fire that individual.

2. I am sure if Robertson said that about gays, the execs would have been very happy. However, my stance is that Phil should have said what made him happy, and he did. He should also be ready to face the consequences.

3. I always found it odd/appalling that God would cause/allow feelings of affection, love and attraction in someone's heart and then proclaim that acting upon these is a sin. if you commit fornication safely with someone you are attracted to, and that person is a consenting adult, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Why a god would get angry at that is completely beyond me. It seems more like a "boogyman"-type scare concocted by paranoid desert dwellers who were afraid other men would try to woo their women. Much like an ageing alpha baboon would be afraid to lose his harem. You are not hurting anyone. In fact you are probably bettering your life and that of your sexual partner. In any case, Robertson did not compare homosexuality with just any other old sin like gluttony, he implied that it was akin to terrorism and bestiality.
muslimnomore
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 6:55:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 12:16:24 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/21/2013 12:12:15 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 12/21/2013 12:08:33 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/20/2013 11:25:46 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

Wise one? Surely you do not imply that negroes and gays constitute an appreciable audience of "Duck Dynasty". Phil Robertson stayed pretty close to the Bible line, just as his querist knew he would. Homosexuality is a sin. Period. That's not my fault. So are lots of other things. MadCornish's ridiculous answers are sins just as well. Bornofgod's posts are sins, if indeed he is mentally accountable.

What was he supposed to say? "I support the gay lifestyle and gay marriage"? Would that have made them happy?

I'd love to go out and commit fornication right now: I simply do not do it. If I practiced that, however, it would be just as wrong as practicing homosexuality

Only in some religious paradigms, in the real world sin does not exist. In that world love is to be admired, in some religious paradigms, as you say, LOVE is a sin.

Just another very good reason to avoid religions.

Hmmm ... I never really equated going out and screwing some guy with love. They might have. I didn't.
'sfunny. Why do people in your family get married? For money or just interbreeding purposes?
hahaha! that's a good one.
Measure
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 12:47:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

WANTED: A PUBLIC broadcasting network that supports ALL public opinions. Not PUBLIC if it caters to only certain viewpoints of the PUBLIC. So this is not a PUBLIC broadcasting network that we are taking about, so leave it out of it. This is about The MONEY GOD and leave it at that. Sorry, don't see the gays being kicked off for the remarks. So, who's the victim?
obrienkr
Posts: 33
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 1:24:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
A person should truthfully answer the question in accordance with his or her personal convictions and beliefs. In a public forum we should take care to answer such question with clarity and explanation as well as with truth and conviction. We can't prevent others from twisting our message but we can do our best to relay it in a manner that explains our full position. The recent interview is a perfect example of a person doing just that.

As others have stated this does not exempt the person from retribution, in this case an employment decision by the network. We are all subject to the consequences of our actions but to a person of courage this is no reason to avoid action. The network is within their rights to take this action but the people of the US are also within their rights to make personal viewing decisions in order to express their dissatisfaction with the company's decision. We may disagree with a truthful answer but we should respect the fact that the individual has been honest. What system of moral standards religious, political, or otherwise seeks to promote the practice of lying?

If we answer this question as he did we must be prepared to be tagged as a hate-monger, religious fanatic, or homophobe even when the association is ridiculous and unfounded. All we can do is offer an explanation of what we believe and why we believe it.
muslimnomore
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 1:59:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 12:47:49 PM, Measure wrote:
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

WANTED: A PUBLIC broadcasting network that supports ALL public opinions. Not PUBLIC if it caters to only certain viewpoints of the PUBLIC. So this is not a PUBLIC broadcasting network that we are taking about, so leave it out of it. This is about The MONEY GOD and leave it at that. Sorry, don't see the gays being kicked off for the remarks. So, who's the victim?

you want a public broadcasting network that supports the KKK or the taliban? you imbecile. A broadcasting network is called public if its transmissions are available for the public to view, not if it caters to ever single viewpoint out there.
The victims are the gay men, women and children who will now feel even more ostracised, marginalised and discriminated against by their own families.
muslimnomore
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 2:00:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 1:24:42 PM, obrienkr wrote:
A person should truthfully answer the question in accordance with his or her personal convictions and beliefs. In a public forum we should take care to answer such question with clarity and explanation as well as with truth and conviction. We can't prevent others from twisting our message but we can do our best to relay it in a manner that explains our full position. The recent interview is a perfect example of a person doing just that.

As others have stated this does not exempt the person from retribution, in this case an employment decision by the network. We are all subject to the consequences of our actions but to a person of courage this is no reason to avoid action. The network is within their rights to take this action but the people of the US are also within their rights to make personal viewing decisions in order to express their dissatisfaction with the company's decision. We may disagree with a truthful answer but we should respect the fact that the individual has been honest. What system of moral standards religious, political, or otherwise seeks to promote the practice of lying?

If we answer this question as he did we must be prepared to be tagged as a hate-monger, religious fanatic, or homophobe even when the association is ridiculous and unfounded. All we can do is offer an explanation of what we believe and why we believe it.

that's exactly what i've been trying to explain to the nincompoop religious-types here.
obrienkr
Posts: 33
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 3:44:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 2:00:51 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
At 12/21/2013 1:24:42 PM, obrienkr wrote:
A person should truthfully answer the question in accordance with his or her personal convictions and beliefs. In a public forum we should take care to answer such question with clarity and explanation as well as with truth and conviction. We can't prevent others from twisting our message but we can do our best to relay it in a manner that explains our full position. The recent interview is a perfect example of a person doing just that.

As others have stated this does not exempt the person from retribution, in this case an employment decision by the network. We are all subject to the consequences of our actions but to a person of courage this is no reason to avoid action. The network is within their rights to take this action but the people of the US are also within their rights to make personal viewing decisions in order to express their dissatisfaction with the company's decision. We may disagree with a truthful answer but we should respect the fact that the individual has been honest. What system of moral standards religious, political, or otherwise seeks to promote the practice of lying?

If we answer this question as he did we must be prepared to be tagged as a hate-monger, religious fanatic, or homophobe even when the association is ridiculous and unfounded. All we can do is offer an explanation of what we believe and why we believe it.

that's exactly what i've been trying to explain to the nincompoop religious-types here.

My friend, I have to admit that I am perhaps a "nincompoop religious-type" if you mean someone who responds to this from a religious perspective. I do not disagree with the fact that he expressed his beliefs on homosexuality; they were based upon his Christian beliefs. I believe in freedom of speech and I believe that we should stand up for our beliefs in a respectful manner and have thick enough skin to accept the consequences.
Measure
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 4:22:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 1:59:16 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
At 12/21/2013 12:47:49 PM, Measure wrote:
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

WANTED: A PUBLIC broadcasting network that supports ALL public opinions. Not PUBLIC if it caters to only certain viewpoints of the PUBLIC. So this is not a PUBLIC broadcasting network that we are taking about, so leave it out of it. This is about The MONEY GOD and leave it at that. Sorry, don't see the gays being kicked off for the remarks. So, who's the victim?

you want a public broadcasting network that supports the KKK or the taliban? you imbecile. A broadcasting network is called public if its transmissions are available for the public to view, not if it caters to ever single viewpoint out there.
The victims are the gay men, women and children who will now feel even more ostracised, marginalised and discriminated against by their own families.

You missed the point. If you allow some immoral actions to be promoted then why not others. Why does one immoral action trump another. This somehow has become taboo.
Oh that something should offend! Victims are people that FEEL ostracised, marginalised and discriminated? That would make up the most people at least some time in there life. You make your choice, you live with the consequences, as it has been said for those making the remarks on A@E.
muslimnomore
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 7:46:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 4:22:47 PM, Measure wrote:
At 12/21/2013 1:59:16 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
At 12/21/2013 12:47:49 PM, Measure wrote:
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

WANTED: A PUBLIC broadcasting network that supports ALL public opinions. Not PUBLIC if it caters to only certain viewpoints of the PUBLIC. So this is not a PUBLIC broadcasting network that we are taking about, so leave it out of it. This is about The MONEY GOD and leave it at that. Sorry, don't see the gays being kicked off for the remarks. So, who's the victim?

you want a public broadcasting network that supports the KKK or the taliban? you imbecile. A broadcasting network is called public if its transmissions are available for the public to view, not if it caters to ever single viewpoint out there.
The victims are the gay men, women and children who will now feel even more ostracised, marginalised and discriminated against by their own families.

You missed the point. If you allow some immoral actions to be promoted then why not others. Why does one immoral action trump another. This somehow has become taboo.
Oh that something should offend! Victims are people that FEEL ostracised, marginalised and discriminated? That would make up the most people at least some time in there life. You make your choice, you live with the consequences, as it has been said for those making the remarks on A@E.

except homosexuality is not a choice.
muslimnomore
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 7:48:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 3:44:16 PM, obrienkr wrote:
At 12/21/2013 2:00:51 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
At 12/21/2013 1:24:42 PM, obrienkr wrote:
A person should truthfully answer the question in accordance with his or her personal convictions and beliefs. In a public forum we should take care to answer such question with clarity and explanation as well as with truth and conviction. We can't prevent others from twisting our message but we can do our best to relay it in a manner that explains our full position. The recent interview is a perfect example of a person doing just that.

As others have stated this does not exempt the person from retribution, in this case an employment decision by the network. We are all subject to the consequences of our actions but to a person of courage this is no reason to avoid action. The network is within their rights to take this action but the people of the US are also within their rights to make personal viewing decisions in order to express their dissatisfaction with the company's decision. We may disagree with a truthful answer but we should respect the fact that the individual has been honest. What system of moral standards religious, political, or otherwise seeks to promote the practice of lying?

If we answer this question as he did we must be prepared to be tagged as a hate-monger, religious fanatic, or homophobe even when the association is ridiculous and unfounded. All we can do is offer an explanation of what we believe and why we believe it.

that's exactly what i've been trying to explain to the nincompoop religious-types here.

My friend, I have to admit that I am perhaps a "nincompoop religious-type" if you mean someone who responds to this from a religious perspective. I do not disagree with the fact that he expressed his beliefs on homosexuality; they were based upon his Christian beliefs. I believe in freedom of speech and I believe that we should stand up for our beliefs in a respectful manner and have thick enough skin to accept the consequences.

i made another assumption. lesson learned. #thisisstartingtobecomeatrend
annanicole
Posts: 19,784
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2013 6:51:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 6:54:52 AM, muslimnomore wrote:
At 12/20/2013 11:25:46 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 12/20/2013 8:16:29 PM, muslimnomore wrote:
"Publicly disagree with us, and we will punish you if possible."

If you get fired for making racist or homophobic remarks, it's not a punishment. It's a business decision. A wise one for a public broadcasting network.

The only victims here are the gays whose families worship these duck dynasty characters.

Wise one? Surely you do not imply that negroes and gays constitute an appreciable audience of "Duck Dynasty". Phil Robertson stayed pretty close to the Bible line, just as his querist knew he would. Homosexuality is a sin. Period. That's not my fault. So are lots of other things. MadCornish's ridiculous answers are sins just as well. Bornofgod's posts are sins, if indeed he is mentally accountable.

What was he supposed to say? "I support the gay lifestyle and gay marriage"? Would that have made them happy?

I'd love to go out and commit fornication right now: I simply do not do it. If I practiced that, however, it would be just as wrong as practicing homosexuality

1. I am sure Sarah Palin supporters were not amongst Martin Bashir's audience either. But MSNBC made a goo decision in making him quit. This is because his remarks were offensive and in the long run they would hurt the credibility of the channel.

I am sure duck dynasty's ratings would not be affected if Robertson was not suspended, but there was a good chance many groups would boycott A&E in general and that they would receive a lot of bad press around the world. This is because decent human beings (thankfully) speak out against such hateful and vile vitriol. Seriously, I am sure many fox news watchers are racists, but if anyone said something so overtly insensitive about another race, any network would be wise to fire that individual.

2. I am sure if Robertson said that about gays, the execs would have been very happy. However, my stance is that Phil should have said what made him happy, and he did. He should also be ready to face the consequences.

3. I always found it odd/appalling that God would cause/allow feelings of affection, love and attraction in someone's heart and then proclaim that acting upon these is a sin. if you commit fornication safely with someone you are attracted to, and that person is a consenting adult, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Why a god would get angry at that is completely beyond me. It seems more like a "boogyman"-type scare concocted by paranoid desert dwellers who were afraid other men would try to woo their women. Much like an ageing alpha baboon would be afraid to lose his harem. You are not hurting anyone. In fact you are probably bettering your life and that of your sexual partner. In any case, Robertson did not compare homosexuality with just any other old sin like gluttony, he implied that it was akin to terrorism and bestiality.

MNM: " if you commit fornication safely with someone you are attracted to, and that person is a consenting adult, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that."

Anna: Oh, yes, there is. The problems, or potential problems, arising from it are numerous - especially if one is already in another relationship.

MNM: "In any case, Robertson did not compare homosexuality with just any other old sin like gluttony, he implied that it was akin to terrorism and bestiality."

Anna: I do not see the kinship of homosexuality with terrorism
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
muslimnomore
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2013 7:17:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Anna: Oh, yes, there is. The problems, or potential problems, arising from it are numerous - especially if one is already in another relationship.


OK, if you're already in another relationship, obviously there will be problems. But i wasn't talking about cheating.
there is nothing wrong with safe sex with an individual you are attracted to and that person is a consenting adult. it doesn't hurt anyone.