Phil Robertson suspended from DD for gay comments

[Coded-Dude]

It wasn't just a knee jerk reaction by A&E....they had some pressure.

The NAACP and the Human Rights Campaign wrote a joint letter to the president of A&E expressing "outrage and deep concern about the recent racist, homophobic, and ill-informed remarks made by Phil Robertson."

"Mr. Robertson claims that, from what he saw, African Americans were happier under Jim Crow. What he didn't see were lynching and beatings of black men and women for attempting to vote or simply walking down the street," the letter states.

"And his offensive claims about gay people fly in the face of science. In fact, it's important to note that every single leading medical organization in the country has said that there is absolutely nothing wrong with being LGBT -- it's not a choice, and to suggest otherwise is dangerous."

 

[0311]

It is best to say nothing about them. When you have to stand up for yourself, it's usually against more than one. When confronted with the sneering arrogance, use few words, but be blunt, and don't shy away.

 

[shootermcgavin]

Freedom of speech does not grant immunity from consequences.

The rest of this is a general statement not directed specifically towards you.

I don't agree with what he said, I think it's ignorant and even suggesting that homosexuality leads to bestiality is offensive and insulting, and I'm not gay or into sheep.

However much I disagree with his opinion, I support his right to have it. I'm indifferent on A&E's actions simply because it's their network, their contract, their rules.

The biggest thing about all of this that confuses me is when Chick Fill A and Hobby Lobby stand up for what they believe in, the majority of Christian conservatives stand up and applause. Yet, when A&E does the same, it's boycott time! You have a right to boycott for any reason you like, but it seems a bit hypocritical when doing so for reasons you supported just months ago. So, do you support a company standing up for what they believe in or don't ya? Or is this only a one-way road when that company's beliefs align with your religious ideology?

Yeah.. I don't see it that way at all. I don't see at as A&E trying to stand up for what the believe in, but appease the loudest group of complainers (notice I didn't say majority, just loudest.) When Chick-Fil-A an Hobby Lobby do things in support of the beliefs of the company/ founders, there was a backlash of support for them after the backlash of opposition. I feel like comparing the Chick-Fil-A situation with this is apples and oranges.

Had an employee of Chick-Fil-A come out in an interview with GQ and said, "I am 100% in support of gay marriage" and got indefinitely suspended from work- that would be the same situation. I would expect Chick-Fil-A to get tons of opposition in that situation, and rightfully so. But had Chick-Fil-A only said, "the opinions of our employee do not represent the opinions of the company. We as a company do not support gay marriage," then the whole thing is a non-issue. Chick-Fil-A reasserted what they believe as a company which differed from their employees without trying to punish the employee for having a different opinion or attempting to appease the nut jobs who are yelling "intolerant biggot!" (yeah, I said it). Had there been a flock of Christians opposing Chick-Fil-A for not firing an employee for having an opposing opinion, those Christians would have been nut jobs that need to accept that people don't think the same as them and part of America is they can say what they believe.

Same with A&E. The backlash is not coming because they disagree with Phil's statement. The backlash is coming because he is being punished (or they are attempting to punish him) for stating the beliefs we've all known him to have all along. Had A&E just made a statement that Phil's statements in no way are representative of A&E's beliefs as a company, this would be a non-issue- at least to the conservative bunch I think. GLAAD is never glad about anything.

Furthermore, let's play one more hypothetical. Had the employee been a guy who came out and said, "I think gay people everywhere should be allowed to marry and that it is the most natural relationship for someone to be in." (or something to that effect) and A&E suspended him indefinitely, how quickly would a lawsuit be slapped on A&E?

 

[jstaylor62]

What I find shocking is that so many members of OSA read GQ. I would not have thought that with most of the members I've met ... ;-)

 

[mugsy]

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.

In Oklahoma you have the right to go to private school or homseschool but in some States, unless you are quite wealthy (private school) or willing/able to put up with a great deal of harassment (homeschool), your children are practical prisoners of the public school system and whatever it feels like shoving down your kids' throats. Sorry, slight digression due to a weak analogy.

 

[shootermcgavin]

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?

agreed.

 

[Danny Tanner]

I feel like comparing the Chick-Fil-A situation with this is apples and oranges.

Had an employee of Chick-Fil-A come out in an interview with GQ and said, "I am 100% in support of gay marriage" and got indefinitely suspended from work- that would be the same situation. I would expect Chick-Fil-A to get tons of opposition in that situation, and rightfully so. But had Chick-Fil-A only said, "the opinions of our employee do not represent the opinions of the company. We as a company do not support gay marriage," then the whole thing is a non-issue. Chick-Fil-A reasserted what they believe as a company which differed from their employees without trying to punish the employee for having a different opinion or attempting to appease the nut jobs who are yelling "intolerant biggot!" (yeah, I said it). Had there been a flock of Christians opposing Chick-Fil-A for not firing an employee for having an opposing opinion, those Christians would have been nut jobs that need to accept that people don't think the same as them and part of America is they can say what they believe.

Same with A&E. The backlash is not coming because they disagree with Phil's statement. The backlash is coming because he is being punished (or they are attempting to punish him) for stating the beliefs we've all known him to have all along. Had A&E just made a statement that Phil's statements in no way are representative of A&E's beliefs as a company, this would be a non-issue- at least to the conservative bunch I think. GLAAD is never glad about anything.

Furthermore, let's play one more hypothetical. Had the employee been a guy who came out and said, "I think gay people everywhere should be allowed to marry and that it is the most natural relationship for someone to be in." (or something to that effect) and A&E suspended him indefinitely, how quickly would a lawsuit be slapped on A&E?

Good point, thanks for making it. I can't say I disagree with the logic.

You also make a good point with the hypothetical. Nothing would come of it and nothing should have come of this especially considering his statements had nothing to do with A&E's network.

 

[Danny Tanner]

What I find shocking is that so many members of OSA read GQ. I would not have thought that with most of the members I've met ... ;-)

[Broken External Image]

 

[ez bake]

I feel like the LGBT community has really turned on the Beastiality community in this whole thing.

That seems oddly intolerant.

 

[JonDough]

play thier game then.........Here's a list of A&E Advertisers. Do like the special interest group folks do...write and call and let these folks know what you think.

Sensodyne: 1-866-844-2797

T-Mobile: tmobile.com


Samsung: (PR department) [email protected] / Twitter @samsungtweets


Motorola: / 1-800-734-5870

Walgreens: / 1-800-925-4733

IHOP: 1-866-444-5144 / Twitter @IHOP

Macy’s: (PR Department) [email protected], 212-705-2434 / @Macys

Nokia: Twitter @Nokia


Microsoft: @microsoft


Verizon: Twitter @verizonwireless / 1 (800) 837-4966

Bass Pro Shops: Twitter @Bass_Pro-Shops

Progressive Insurance: 1-440-461-5000 / [email protected]



A&E Television Networks, LLC
235 E. 45th St.
New York, NY 10017
NY Tel. 212-210-1400
Fax 212-210-1308


Not bashing anyone.........just saying that if we want certain things in life to remain, it's time to stand up and do something abou tit rather than just **** and whine on the internet. Do with it what you will.