Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Phil Robertson suspended from DD for gay comments
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Poke78" data-source="post: 2366510" data-attributes="member: 4333"><p>Like all things cultural, this has been a hot discussion on Facebook. A friend has posted on his wall that if he sees you post a "Like" on supporting Phil Robertson, he will drop you from his Facebook. I challenged his thinking by posting a blurb and a link from Camille Paglia, well-known lesbian feminist libertarian, in a radio interview yesterday. </p><p></p><p>Paglia's comment: “To express yourself in a magazine in an interview - this is the level of punitive PC, utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist, OK, that my liberal colleagues in the Democratic Party and on college campuses have supported and promoted over the last several decades. This is the whole legacy of free speech 1960’s that have been lost by my own party.”</p><p></p><p>Read more: <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/19/paglia-duck-dynasty-uproar-utterly-fascist-utterly-stalinist/#ixzz2o1Xm8Vd3" target="_blank">http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/19/paglia-duck-dynasty-uproar-utterly-fascist-utterly-stalinist/#ixzz2o1Xm8Vd3</a></p><p></p><p>After posting that to his attention, one of his friends engaged the discussion, as follows:</p><p></p><p>Sarah: I think this article draws it's source credibility from saying the author is a democrat leftist. Which doesn't really say much for her understanding of the issue or the rights she is referring to.</p><p></p><p>Me: Since Camille Paglia was at the forefront of radical feminism and gay rights almost from the inception of the words, I don't see how anybody can question the depth of her understanding of the issue. Disagree with her position, that's fine and I bet she expects a lot of that from those normally found in her corner, I think her credibility on the issues and as an intellectual is top notch. Questioning her credibility does not necessarily move the needle to your side of the discussion.</p><p></p><p>Sarah: 1st amendment rights are not protected when contractually representing a business. Celebs know better or hire publicists. Fact of the matter is 1st amendment protects against government oppression. No one was infringed on or violate she needs to look up the supreme courts decisions on 1st amendment rights instead of defending a bigot</p><p></p><p>Me: I just re-read the article and found no direct mention of the 1st Amendment. Sure, Paglia centered her argument around concepts found in the 1st Amendment but was making her point in the broader sense of human freedom. I agree that the relationship between A&E and Phil Robertson is governed by a contract with specific obligations for both parties. Asserting that celebs universally know better ignores the reality of Alec Baldwin and Charlie Sheen, to just name a couple of large exceptions to your statement.</p><p></p><p>Sarah: Implied authority drawn by loose associations is the hallmark of bs writing so I'm sorry but I respectfully disagree it's Phillips page I don't think it's appropriate to continue arguing on it.</p><p></p><p>Me: I'm sure Camille Paglia would find your assertion of "implied authority" amusing.</p><p></p><p>= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =</p><p></p><p>I've decided that playing "logic tennis" is quite entertaining.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Poke78, post: 2366510, member: 4333"] Like all things cultural, this has been a hot discussion on Facebook. A friend has posted on his wall that if he sees you post a "Like" on supporting Phil Robertson, he will drop you from his Facebook. I challenged his thinking by posting a blurb and a link from Camille Paglia, well-known lesbian feminist libertarian, in a radio interview yesterday. Paglia's comment: “To express yourself in a magazine in an interview - this is the level of punitive PC, utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist, OK, that my liberal colleagues in the Democratic Party and on college campuses have supported and promoted over the last several decades. This is the whole legacy of free speech 1960’s that have been lost by my own party.” Read more: [url]http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/19/paglia-duck-dynasty-uproar-utterly-fascist-utterly-stalinist/#ixzz2o1Xm8Vd3[/url] After posting that to his attention, one of his friends engaged the discussion, as follows: Sarah: I think this article draws it's source credibility from saying the author is a democrat leftist. Which doesn't really say much for her understanding of the issue or the rights she is referring to. Me: Since Camille Paglia was at the forefront of radical feminism and gay rights almost from the inception of the words, I don't see how anybody can question the depth of her understanding of the issue. Disagree with her position, that's fine and I bet she expects a lot of that from those normally found in her corner, I think her credibility on the issues and as an intellectual is top notch. Questioning her credibility does not necessarily move the needle to your side of the discussion. Sarah: 1st amendment rights are not protected when contractually representing a business. Celebs know better or hire publicists. Fact of the matter is 1st amendment protects against government oppression. No one was infringed on or violate she needs to look up the supreme courts decisions on 1st amendment rights instead of defending a bigot Me: I just re-read the article and found no direct mention of the 1st Amendment. Sure, Paglia centered her argument around concepts found in the 1st Amendment but was making her point in the broader sense of human freedom. I agree that the relationship between A&E and Phil Robertson is governed by a contract with specific obligations for both parties. Asserting that celebs universally know better ignores the reality of Alec Baldwin and Charlie Sheen, to just name a couple of large exceptions to your statement. Sarah: Implied authority drawn by loose associations is the hallmark of bs writing so I'm sorry but I respectfully disagree it's Phillips page I don't think it's appropriate to continue arguing on it. Me: I'm sure Camille Paglia would find your assertion of "implied authority" amusing. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = I've decided that playing "logic tennis" is quite entertaining. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Phil Robertson suspended from DD for gay comments
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom