30
   

So Saying That Folks Should Follow Christian Morals is NOW A Firing Offense

 
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Fri 27 Dec, 2013 10:27 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
public sentiment on search and social networks is four to one in favor of the Duck Dynasty clan


From my own browsing I would say it more like ten to one instead of four to one.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Fri 27 Dec, 2013 10:28 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Whether or not companies stuck by the brand, they have faced a backlash—with civil rights groups on one side and conservative Christians and freedom-of-speech advocates on the other.


and here we see the major flaw in Fireflies "it is all about A&E" theory..... A&E screwed the pooch for its partners, and they are not going to soon forget all the trouble the network caused them for a cause they clearly cared little about. The last few weeks have hurt A&E's rep with people who matter a bunch.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Fri 27 Dec, 2013 10:42 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
So A&E play GLAAD and Jackson as fools as well as their gay and black employees?

What on earth are you talking about?

A & E didn't play anyone for fools. They sat down with the parties concerned about Robertson's remarks, and listened, and discussed, and the discussion seems to have been productive and satisfactory. And, it's my understanding that the Robertsons also listened and discussed.

The ones who were played for fools were those who listened to Palin, and Cruz, and Jindel, who tried to play this as a "freedom of speech" issue--which it never was. TV networks aren't bound by the First Amendment, and no one has a right to a reality show. And Christianity wasn't under attack, certainly not from A & E. In order to rev up their religious "family values" base, these right wing Republicans need an enemy to focus on, so they manufactured one--A & E--with Phil Robertson as some sort of victim. Except that wasn't going on. Robinson freely voiced his opinions, and his job and his show was never in jeopardy.

The Robertsons are always on hiatus from their show this time of year--it's duck hunting season--and that hiatus is part of their contract. So the "suspension" meant nada. And the new season is 90% completed and ready to air. The alleged "suspension" was all for show, and it gave A & E time to sit and talk with the activist groups to satisfy everyone's concerns.

The ones resorting to coercion, rather than discussion, were the types influenced by people like Palin, the people who bought her battle cry that A & E was attacking Phil Robertson for his Christian views, and they had to fight, and pressure, A & E to keep him on the air.

A & E never had any intention of dropping Duck Dynasty, nor was Robertson's job in jeopardy. This is their most successful show, and they've been working with the Robertson clan for several years now, and they've managed to keep the show itself clear of contentious social or religious issues, and they likely don't want to change that.

They had to figure out a way to deal with Robinson's offensive comments and to keep the show from being a lightening rod for other peoples political fights, but getting rid of Phil Robertson was not in the picture. The Robertsons signed a new multi-year contract with A & E this past August, after a several month salary standoff on the duck clan's part. So, the two parties were apparently happy with their working relationship, and neither of them was going to toss aside something that's extremely lucrative for both of them. The pressure tactics from Phil's supporters were unnecessary, A & E was never going to drop Phil, and, meanwhile, the manufactured "suspense" and the whole brouhaha helped to fuel more free publicity for Duck Dynasty than A & E could have ever wished for.

So, Phil Robertson isn't returning to A & E, because he never left A & E, and A & E still does not support, or agree with, his controversial remarks. And, as a way of holding on to their integrity, they will be promoting a public service campaign about tolerance and acceptance across their programming spectrum. And all of this buzz has certainly hyped interest in Duck Dynasty, just in time for the start of the new season.

You're the one whose been played as a fool. This really just was about a reality show. And the hoopla is over. Let the new season begin...

hawkeye10
 
  1  
Fri 27 Dec, 2013 11:13 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
And, it's my understanding that the Robertsons also listened and discussed.


it is reported that there were multiple days of hard negotiation, where the Robertsons were in the drivers seat because of public pressure on the network and because the network needs the money more than the family does. You have a very dishonest way of wording things to purposefully give a false impression.
firefly
 
  2  
Fri 27 Dec, 2013 11:19 pm
@hawkeye10,
Well, the person I heard on CNN, from the Human Rights Campaign, which is also a gay rights activist organization, http://www.hrc.org/ sounded quite satisfied with what A & E is doing, and he implied that future discussions with the Robertsons would be part of that.

G.L.A.A.D. is only one activist group that voiced concern about this situation with Robertson, NOW was another. Some of them might be happier than others with this outcome. There's no reason they have to agree.
Quote:
looks like the gay rights political pressure groups started a fight that they soundly lost.

They didn't start any fight.

And what they wanted was to discuss the situation with A & E, and they accomplished that.

The offensive remarks, about both homosexuals and blacks, were made by Phil Robertson. The people he offended certainly have legitimate reason not to remain silent. They've got a right of free speech too.

And A & E didn't support Phil's remarks either and they don't agree with the opinions he voiced. That's also not the type of opinion that's actually voiced on their Duck Dynasty show, by any of the Robertsons. A & E was more than receptive to finding some solution that would show support for the LGBT community, while keeping DD on the air. Their new public announcement campaign to promote tolerance and acceptance is going to be their way of doing that.

If anyone started "the fight" it was Phil Robertson. Had he just said he doesn't support same-sex marriage because it's contrary to his religious views, that would have been fine, there would have been no controversy--at least on that issue. But that wasn't simply what he said, and, what he did say, was downright offensive. And his comments about how much happier blacks were in Jim Crow-era Louisiana, picking cotton in the fields, was just plain mind-boggling in its ignorance. It was an affront to blacks.

It wouldn't hurt old Phil to actually sit down with representatives from LGBT and black organizations, and listen to them, and discuss these issues with them, maybe he'd actually learn something.

0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  2  
Fri 27 Dec, 2013 11:23 pm
Duck Dynasty is actually a bellwether, for in 30 years Biblically Illiterate patriarchs like Phil will have disappeared from the South.
His sons, Willie, Jes and Jape show no inclination to use Christianity to spew hate and moral superiority as jcboy described it.
Neither do their wives or Phil's grandchildren.
In 30 years WASPS will no longer be in the majority down in Louisiana.
Goodbye Phil.
BillRM
 
  -1  
Fri 27 Dec, 2013 11:40 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
You have a very dishonest way of wording things to purposefully give a false impression.


That is like saying that the sky is blue.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Fri 27 Dec, 2013 11:44 pm
@panzade,
Quote:
Illiterate patriarchs like Phi


It must be hell when the facts does not match your world view.

Quote:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Robertson

He attended Louisiana Tech University where he played football, but turned down an opportunity to play professionally with the Washington Redskins. He received a master's degree in education and spent several years teaching.
firefly
 
  2  
Fri 27 Dec, 2013 11:53 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
it is reported that there were multiple days of hard negotiation, where the Robertsons were in the drivers seat because of public pressure on the network...

The Robertsons were not in the driver's seat--they have a new mutli-year contract with A & E they are bound by. Their relationship with A & E is already spelled out in that contract. You think these people aren't interested in money. Well, they certainly are, a several month salary dispute went on before they'd sign their new contract. And they can't just pick up and take that show elsewhere--that's in the contract too.

So, what on earth were they negotiating? Even if A & E had dropped Phil, which I don't think ever crossed their mind, the rest of the family couldn't likely refuse to do the show without him without risking a breach of contract suit from A & E.

So what were they negotiating?

None of this really concerned the Duck Dynasty show which is about as uncontroversial as you can get.

And Robertson did offer an apology, of sorts, to the people who felt offended. He's not happy that people think of him as some sort of hater, because he doesn't think that accurately reflects him either. He says he doesn't hate anyone.

I think these discussions were more about diplomacy moves, and not "hard negotiations"--the Robertsons and A & E both have images they want to hold onto. And the Robertsons' image is of a warm loving family, who are good-humored nice people, the kind of people viewers tune into because they want to spend time with them. They don't run around preaching fire and brimstone, at least not on Duck Dynasty, nor do they touch on any hot-button social issues on the show. So they needed a diplomatic way to tone down the flack from those GQ comments too. They need this show very much--and it's A & E who pays them, not the fans, and not the organized conservative and religious pressure groups supporting them on the internet.



panzade
 
  2  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 07:19 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
It must be hell when the facts does not match your world view.

It must be hell to debate topics on A2K when you can't read or comprehend what others are posting.
I wrote
Quote:
Biblically Illiterate patriarchs like Phil

BillRM
 
  0  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 07:50 am
@panzade,
So you have not read the old testament yourself with the evil god who was not gay friendly or human friendly for that matter?

You know that have his chosen people wiped out whole other societies down to infants in arms for daring to be living on the lands he had given to them?

Having a bad hair day downing most of the human race for that matter.

Sorry if you do not care for the bible but good old Phil had it nail as he seems to had read his bible.
panzade
 
  2  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 08:30 am
@BillRM,
As usual, you assume. But you make an ass out of u not me.
Here's one way to interpret the Old Testament:
Quote:
In the Old Testament,, homosexual activity was strongly associated with the idolatrous practices of the pagan nations surrounding Israel.
In fact, the word "abomination," used in both mentions of homosexual acts in Leviticus, is a translation of the Hebrew word tow' ebah which means something morally disgusting, but it also has a strong implication of idolatry.
Thus, many Bible scholars believe the condemnations in Leviticus are more a condemnation of the idolatry than of the homosexual acts themselves

All the other nonsense you wrote has nothing to do with the topic.
Here's my favorite rant about DD. Cover your ears at the 'naughty' parts


maxdancona
 
  2  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 08:39 am
http://img3.allvoices.com/thumbs/image/609/480/102395580-phil-robertson.jpg
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 09:13 am
@panzade,
Sorry no matter how you rewrite the bible it is plenty must as Phil had stated it is with all it evilness/ugliness.

He is hardly Illiterate when it come to the bible and is just expressing his religious believes.
engineer
 
  2  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 09:48 am
@BillRM,
I think you are right that Phil stated his beliefs, but he is completely ignorant of main line Christian beliefs. Standard Protestant dogma is that everyone is a sinner (therefore no sin is particularly worse than another) and that the only hope of salvation is through belief in God. Phil's position that homosexuals are particularly sinful and evil is not supported anywhere in the bible. Disrespecting your parents made the top ten, being gay merited only a few comments.
BillRM
 
  0  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 10:02 am
@engineer,
You do not need to be a main spring PC christian who cheerfully is willing to overlook all the unpleasant sections of the bible to either know the bible or to be allow to expressed those beliefs contain in the bible first of all.

Quote:
homosexuals are particularly sinful and evil is not supported anywhere in the bible. Disrespecting your parents made the top ten, being gay merited only a few comments.


I did not see where the bible suggested that there is a ranking of sins or the commandment to killed you children that talk back to you is any more important then the commandment to killed gays.

The bible is an evil and sickening book to the point that most modern men need to carefully picked out the passages in order to stomach it at all.

Phil seems to have a stronger stomach then most Christians.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  3  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 11:27 am
Well, we've reached the point as in most threads that Bill participates in, where he no longer reads others posts and ideas but rather rambles on incoherently about subjects he has no knowledge of with opinions that don't make any sense and nobody cares about.

The tedium becomes unbearable and I fold the thread neatly into itself so it no longer pops up in "My Topics " anymore.
Bye Bill.
0 Replies
 
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 11:32 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
You have a very dishonest way of wording things to purposefully give a false impression.


Amazing accusation from you. You certainly have a unique view of the world.
0 Replies
 
IRFRANK
 
  2  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 11:46 am
@panzade,
That link was interesting. I hadn't thought about the FAKE aspect of these guys. Another ignorant southern stereotype. Taking it all the way to the bank. This all comes into perspective now that I realize 'Phil' was just talking in character. He must be laughing his ass off.
firefly
 
  1  
Sat 28 Dec, 2013 11:51 am
This is an interesting take from a writer who is an evangelical Christian, and one who does not approve of giving blanket approval to homosexuality. However, he also doesn't seem to approve of what some high-profile Christians seem to be demanding in this situation.

Quote:
CAL THOMAS: A Duck Dynasty checklist
December 26, 2013

The outrage industry was in high dudgeon just before Christmas over remarks "Duck Dynasty" family patriarch, Phil Robertson, made to GQ magazine about homosexuality. Outrage is the primary ingredient for political fundraising and power. One must always have an enemy.

Let's go down the "I Take Offense" checklist and make sure all the boxes were "ticked" before considering a larger point.

p Liberal New York writer goes slumming among the hayseeds in Louisiana and deliberately creates a controversy by asking a Bible-loving Christian to define sin. Check.

p Bible-reading Christian quotes from that book and is condemned by those who don't read or believe what it says, or have a different "interpretation" (same thing). Check.

p The A&E Network, on which the highest-rated cable TV show is shown, quickly issues an apology and "full support" for the LGBT community. Check.

p Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal issues a statement noting that the twerking Miley Cyrus gets laughs, while Phil Robertson is put on indefinite hiatus. Check.

p The right to free speech is defended amidst allegations that quoting the Bible promotes hate and violence against gays. Check.

p Various high-profile Christians, among them former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, denounce the "double standard" when it comes to their beliefs and the tolerance, even promotion, of beliefs and practices anathema to them. Check.

p Both sides send out fundraising appeals that ask for contributions to (pick one) fight the intolerance, hate and bigotry of the fundamentalists and their Republican allies (liberals), or keep America from sliding into the moral and cultural pit from anti-God Christian bashers (conservatives). Check. Check.

There. Now, does everyone feel better? Has everyone had their say?

Now to the larger point. Christians who read the Bible, as Phil Robertson does, should be aware of verses other than the ones that list people it says can't enter God's Kingdom apart from faith in Jesus, who changes behavior and forgives the past. That list, by the way, includes "all liars," which should put the fear of God into most politicians. (See Revelation 21:8)

Other passages say Christians should expect persecution, even hate, because Jesus said they would. "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first" (John 15:18) and "In the world you will have tribulation" (John 16:33).

Christians should not "demand" respect and "tolerance" for their beliefs when their Leader said to expect the opposite. Sure, they can point out hypocrisy (it is something in which they occasionally engage), but they should be known less for what they are against, than Who they are for.

Condemnation ought not to be the first words out of their mouths when it comes to the beliefs and lifestyles of others. Quite the opposite. Phil Robertson must be familiar with this verse: "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him." (John 3:17)

Here's a New Year's prediction: When "Duck Dynasty" returns, the ratings will be even higher and the profits larger. As Sy Robertson might put it, "and that's a fact, Jack."

http://www.sunherald.com/2013/12/26/5218915/cal-thomas-a-duck-dynasty-checklist.html#storylink=cpy

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/23/2025 at 08:38:03