I am around this sometimes at work, usually family members of patients come in from big cities, often a younger guy with a much older guy. Sometimes one of them is very conceited, rude and arrogant, and the other is polite. The best way to deal with the arrogant one is not to take his sh-t. Be careful, choose your words carefully, don't cringe before these types.
Just in case you want to know where Phil stands....
Nothing spun. My comment wasn't directed just towards OSA. Many people were supporting Hobby Lobby and Chick Fil A under the simple fact that they're companies standing up for what they believe in. It just happens to be beliefs which align with many here, therefore they gained the support of many here. My point wasn't necessarily about their beliefs, but the fact that a large portion of conservative Christians supported both companies simply because "they're standing up for what they believe in". Which is great! I'm not saying it's not. It then gets hypocritical when A&E stands up for what they believe in and they get blasted by the same folks who months ago supported businesses standing up for what they believe in.
Like I told Rick, the only thing hypocritical is throwing such enthusiastic support behind Hobby Lobby and Chick Fil A for the reason "they're a company standing up for what they believe in!" and then blasting the next company for doing the same. It validates what I'm confused about, which is that when it comes to the ultra conservatives (not to imply that liberals aren't huge hypocrites) people and companies have the right to stand up for what they believe in, as long as it aligns with conservative ideologies.
As far as the cake thing, I look at it as a white-owned bakery denying serving black customers simply because they don't approve of their skin color. While homosexuals are not a federally protected class and races are, it doesn't make it any more right. They deserve equal rights, not special rights.
He may not have directly said that homosexuality leads to bestiality, but did suggest so.
It's a bit extreme for some to claim that he was cut from the show for being a Christian. I understand their religion has a lot to do with the show and is expressed quite often, which would debunk this claim.
Again, even though I disagree with what he said, I support his right to say it 100%. I support A&E's right to cut him or keep him, as I wouldn't be bothered either way. I understand this wasn't even said on the show, but through a separate, non-A&E media outlet (magazine interview, maybe?). So, if that's the case, then perhaps I think A&E went a little too far. Many networks include disclaimers stating that the network may not necessarily endorse any statements or content within the program. I'm not sure if Duck Dynasty has this disclaimer in the beginning or end, but perhaps bringing him back and adding this disclaimer is a way to satisfy both the viewers and A&E and their sponsors.
I'm with Phil. 
Why would a man wanna go fudge packin' with some hairy legged feller when he can have a woman.
It just don't make sense.
I figure if a guy wants to lick the spoon instead of the pot, I reckon that's his business but I just can't wrap my simple mind around it.
Besides...I'm reminded of this verse of scripture...
Leviticus 18:22 (KJV)
"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
Or...to put it in words that most could understand better...
Leviticus 18:22 (NIV)
"Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable."
Now I'm not getting up on my soapbox here, because we have all sinned and fell short of the glory of God.
But like I said...I'm with Phil and I hope his family tells A&E to stick it.
Why would a man wanna go fudge packin' with some hairy legged feller when he can have a woman.
It just don't make sense.
I figure if a guy wants to lick the spoon instead of the pot, I reckon that's his business but I just can't wrap my simple mind around it.
Besides...I'm reminded of this verse of scripture...
Leviticus 18:22 (KJV)
"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
Or...to put it in words that most could understand better...
Leviticus 18:22 (NIV)
"Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable."
Now I'm not getting up on my soapbox here, because we have all sinned and fell short of the glory of God.
But like I said...I'm with Phil and I hope his family tells A&E to stick it.
The statements were made during an interview for GQ magazine.
Rick nailed it above ^^^^
Okay, so I read the interview. Again, I don't agree with his opinion, but I 100% support his right to have it and express it. His statements were a personal opinion delivered in an answer to a question, none of which had anything to do with A&E, their time, their money, or their endorsement. I do appreciate the fact that he did clarify that he would not treat anyone any differently than he would expect to be treated. He and I may have different opinions, but with the success of the show, it's obvious these people are good people with good intentions.
I think it's ridiculous to hear about teachers being fired because they're swimsuit models on the weekend, as what they do in their personal time has absolutely nothing to do with what they do on company time. This is the same situation and is just as ridiculous.
A&E should distance themselves with a disclaimer or some form of a public statement. Even though they're within their rights as a private business to cut him from the show, I think it was a bad move, unless their contract with them specifically states they aren't allowed interviews outside of A&E's partners. If that were the case, though, I would think by now that this wouldn't be their first interview. Even if it were, was he interviewed as the Duck Dynasty TV personality or as the employee of a duck call company?
I think it's ridiculous to hear about teachers being fired because they're swimsuit models on the weekend, as what they do in their personal time has absolutely nothing to do with what they do on company time. This is the same situation and is just as ridiculous.
A&E should distance themselves with a disclaimer or some form of a public statement. Even though they're within their rights as a private business to cut him from the show, I think it was a bad move, unless their contract with them specifically states they aren't allowed interviews outside of A&E's partners. If that were the case, though, I would think by now that this wouldn't be their first interview. Even if it were, was he interviewed as the Duck Dynasty TV personality or as the employee of a duck call company?
Those who feel that Phil Robertson implied that homosexual sex leads to beastiality heard what they wanted to hear. Discriminating against gays is wrong, but believing and expressing you opinion that homosexuals are sinners is not wrong.
Americans will stand up for illegal immigrants, gay rights, Muslim rights, atheists rights, and even the rights of pedophiles, hell, we'll even demand that little confused Kevin be allowed to use the girls facilities in public schools, but damned if we'll stand up for an old white Christian redneck.
We're all fooked!
Americans will stand up for illegal immigrants, gay rights, Muslim rights, atheists rights, and even the rights of pedophiles, hell, we'll even demand that little confused Kevin be allowed to use the girls facilities in public schools, but damned if we'll stand up for an old white Christian redneck.
We're all fooked!
You said it brother.
You also have the right to show up at the school board and speak your mind on the model/teacher issue and leave the district if you decide you can't support the decisions they make.
A&E is well within their rights to cancel the show, fire Phil or run wall to wall Rupaul dancing queen shows. I don't have to pay for it, support the advertisers or watch the network. Pretty simple.
Similar threads
