Duck Dynasty and the First Ammendment

[mynameisbob84]

I read the interview twice and didn't see anything particularly hateful about it. He spoke about the tenets of his faith in his own redneck way.

What, in your mind, is sinful?

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

During Phil’s darkest days, in the early 1970s, he had to flee the state of Arkansas after he badly beat up a bar owner and the guy’s wife. Kay Robertson persuaded the bar owner not to press charges in exchange for most of the Robertsons’ life savings. (“A hefty price,” he notes in his memoir.) I ask Phil if he ever repented for that, as he wants America to repent—if he ever tracked down the bar owner and his wife to apologize for the assault. He shakes his head.

“I didn’t dredge anything back up. I just put it behind me.”

As far as Phil is concerned, he was literally born again. Old Phil—the guy with the booze and the pills—died a long time ago, and New Phil sees no need to apologize for him: “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/televis ... z2oG17lc4G

If I missed the hateful part of the interview, please enlighten me. I've known a few born again Christians and they're the worst as far as trying to push their views on others but they also feel it's part of their duty. I would hardly consider any of that hateful though.

:twocents-02cents:

When asked what he deems sinful, the first "sin" he cares to mention is not murder, or rape, or theft, or adultery, but "homosexual behaviour". He later equates homosexuality with terrorism. I guess it depends what you'd consider to be hateful but he's quite clearly not the most progressive chap in the world.

The quotes pertaining to race are equally embarrassing.

 

[JoleneBrody]

I read the interview twice and didn't see anything particularly hateful about it. He spoke about the tenets of his faith in his own redneck way.

What, in your mind, is sinful?

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

During Phil’s darkest days, in the early 1970s, he had to flee the state of Arkansas after he badly beat up a bar owner and the guy’s wife. Kay Robertson persuaded the bar owner not to press charges in exchange for most of the Robertsons’ life savings. (“A hefty price,” he notes in his memoir.) I ask Phil if he ever repented for that, as he wants America to repent—if he ever tracked down the bar owner and his wife to apologize for the assault. He shakes his head.

“I didn’t dredge anything back up. I just put it behind me.”

As far as Phil is concerned, he was literally born again. Old Phil—the guy with the booze and the pills—died a long time ago, and New Phil sees no need to apologize for him: “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/televis ... z2oG17lc4G

If I missed the hateful part of the interview, please enlighten me. I've known a few born again Christians and they're the worst as far as trying to push their views on others but they also feel it's part of their duty. I would hardly consider any of that hateful though.

:twocents-02cents:

When asked what he deems sinful, the first "sin" he cares to mention is not murder, or rape, or theft, or adultery, but "homosexual behaviour". He later equates homosexuality with terrorism. I guess it depends what you'd consider to be hateful but he's quite clearly not the most progressive chap in the world.

The quotes pertaining to race are equally embarrassing.

Thank you bob, again you are more eloquent than I. I agree his comments about race are just as ignorant and stupid, but not hateful. I guess that's why I'm saying it's not comparable.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

I read the interview twice and didn't see anything particularly hateful about it. He spoke about the tenets of his faith in his own redneck way.



If I missed the hateful part of the interview, please enlighten me. I've known a few born again Christians and they're the worst as far as trying to push their views on others but they also feel it's part of their duty. I would hardly consider any of that hateful though.

:twocents-02cents:

When asked what he deems sinful, the first "sin" he cares to mention is not murder, or rape, or theft, or adultery, but "homosexual behaviour". He later equates homosexuality with terrorism. I guess it depends what you'd consider to be hateful but he's quite clearly not the most progressive chap in the world.

The quotes pertaining to race are equally embarrassing.

Before the part the Bocce quote he talks about 10 commandments and "Thou Shalt not kill etc" and how America is moving away from that. Most of the 10 commandments are pretty non controversial, killing, stealing, false witness, coveting thy neighbors wife etc. So I wouldn't put too much importance in his naming homosexuality first as sin. He is more or less quoted Corinthians 6:9 (I am no bible scholar). Now I think there is a lot of BS in the bible, including this verse, but it is weird world where quoting the bible is considered hate speech.

I also missed the part where he equated homosexuality with terrorism, I like some enlightenment also.

 

[Bocefish]

When asked what he deems sinful, the first "sin" he cares to mention is not murder, or rape, or theft, or adultery, but "homosexual behaviour". He later equates homosexuality with terrorism. I guess it depends what you'd consider to be hateful but he's quite clearly not the most progressive chap in the world.

The quotes pertaining to race are equally embarrassing.

So now you're criticizing him about the order he listed sins and which ones he didn't mention? :lol:

Nice assumption that he equates terrorism with drunks and homosexuals. Now you're really reaching.

If saying ignorant and/or stupid things on TV is grounds for termination... there wouldn't be much of a selection left to watch.

Half the crap late night televangelists spew should be criminal and is way worse than what he said in that interview.

 

[JoleneBrody]

Half the crap late night televangelists spew should be criminal and is way worse than what he said in that interview.

... Boce, can you see the hypocrisy here? I totally agree with you, but still. Are they not entitled to speak their minds and opinions also? At which level or degree does it become criminal when it's still nothing but words?
Televangelists for the most part are representing networks and organisations that agree with their views as well, and are primarily financed by the donations of there viewers (ugh, I know, I didn't even like typing that last part. I feel dirty) not contracted for a reality show and out representing the network that pays them doing interviews in entertainment media.
I can only assume that if it's not some publicity stunt, A&E and the family had specific outlined expectations beyond what we see being discussed openly, and contracts/rules/guidelines were broken resulting in a slap on the wrist.

I don't think this dude is a bad guy, I think he actually seems pretty sweet but just very ignorant and maybe a little sheltered.

Even if it was a publicity stunt, fuck it. It got the country/world talking about a very important issue that currently, needs all the ears it can reach. Maybe, just maybe it got a few lethargic people up and out of their chairs?

Also, Where did Bob say anything about drunks and terrorists?

Bob didn't say it, duck dude did but maybe equates wasn't the right word. He did however group them, yes.

I would also like to add that I think everyone is overreacting and reading way too far into the comments. I don't agree with his views but is anyone really all that shocked? I mean... it's basic evangelical talk, nuffin new here.

I just think A&E has the right to manage the behavior of their employees when it comes to certain personal manners of belief that do not represent the views of the network. blah blah blah

I have cake.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

[quote="JoleneBrody"

I don't think this dude is a bad guy, I think he actually seems pretty sweet but just very ignorant and maybe a little sheltered.

Even if it was a publicity stunt, fuck it. It got the country/world talking about a very important issue that currently, needs all the ears it can reach. Maybe, just maybe it got a few lethargic people up and out of their chairs?

Also, Where did Bob say anything about drunks and terrorists?

Bob didn't say it, duck dude did but maybe equates wasn't the right word. He did however group them, yes.

I would also like to add that I think everyone is overreacting and reading way too far into the comments. I don't agree with his views but is anyone really all that shocked? I mean... it's basic evangelical talk, nuffin new here.

I just think A&E has the right to manage the behavior of their employees when it comes to certain personal manners of belief that do not represent the views of the network. blah blah blah

I have cake.[/quote]


Well I can agree with pretty much everything you wrote here. I don't think this was planned publicity stunt, just one that should have come as no surprised. Evangelical preacher want to preach and as the interviewer noted the dude never shuts up so that he was going to say something quotable was entirely predictable.

There certainly no first amendment argument. Considering the huge amount of publicity the family and show got, if A&E was trying to actually silence Phil and bury the controversy, they failed miserably.

A&E had both a right and I'd argue a responsibility to do what they did. If I was A&E go further than they usual (their view doesn't necessarily represent those of the networks) and say flat out at the start of each broadcast"A&E disagrees with many of Phil Robertson's opinions . However, this is America and we think it is important that a variety of views are presented."*

Then all of us cynics can laugh and add the asterisks. *Plus the rating were sky high and we were making a ton of the merchandising

 

[Bocefish]

I just think A&E has the right to manage the behavior of their employees when it comes to certain personal manners of belief that do not represent the views of the network. blah blah blah

Absolutely 100% agree A&E was well within their rights, I never disputed that, but also consider them to be total hypocrites because they were well aware of his outspoken ways regarding his faith. I seriously doubt any of the Richardsons were under contract restricting them from talking about their religious beliefs away from the show.

I also agree it was blown way out of proportion.

 

[mynameisbob84]

When asked what he deems sinful, the first "sin" he cares to mention is not murder, or rape, or theft, or adultery, but "homosexual behaviour". He later equates homosexuality with terrorism. I guess it depends what you'd consider to be hateful but he's quite clearly not the most progressive chap in the world.

The quotes pertaining to race are equally embarrassing.

So now you're criticizing him about the order he listed sins and which ones he didn't mention? :lol:

Nice assumption that he equates terrorism with drunks and homosexuals. Now you're really reaching.

That he mentioned it at all is what's objectionable. That it was (seemingly) the first thing he mentioned just makes it all the more embarrassing. But then maybe I'm expecting too much to hope that we might have become a little more enlightened and tolerant since the 1950s.

And it's not really reaching to say that when someone lists three things as examples of sin, they're implicitly grouping them together. You'd have to reach much, much further to somehow conclude that he wasn't comparing homosexuality to the other two things he explicitly mentioned in the same sentence when listing things that are sinful. :twocents-02cents:

 

[Bocefish]

That he mentioned it at all is what's objectionable. That it was (seemingly) the first thing he mentioned just makes it all the more embarrassing. But then maybe I'm expecting too much to hope that we might have become a little more enlightened and tolerant since the 1950s.

And it's not really reaching to say that when someone lists three things as examples of sin, they're implicitly grouping them together. You'd have to reach much, much further to somehow conclude that he wasn't comparing homosexuality to the other two things he explicitly mentioned in the same sentence when listing things that are sinful.

HiGirlsRHot already addressed why he listed those instead of some other more serious sins, but if you actually read the interview this entire thread is about, you'd have probably known that. Millions of people still believe homosexuality is a sin, especially the older generation.

Tolerance is a two way street.

As Phil stated in the interview, “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

If you want to continue thinking he equates homosexuals with terrorists, it doesn't matter to me one bit how you interpret that. I'll just add that I think he was listing a few various ones that run the gamut like someone listing things A - Z. YMMV

 

[JoleneBrody]

I will say that any "good christian" would and SHOULD group them together if they don't want to be called a hypocrite.

But hahaha hypocrisy. It runs amuck.

Anyway, I obviously do not agree with it whatsoever but TECHNICALLY, according to the bible all sin is equal in the eyes of the lord and it is man that sets tiers.
However, this also means just about every single christian I've ever known is as equally sinful. Hhahahaha like the Utah gay marriage issue!
Some counties have completely shut down issuing ANY marriage licenses in defiance of the recent ruling. Only problem here is that in an effort to avoid something they think is sinful they are breaking the laws of their land, which is clearly described in the bible as a sin. And since all sins are equal they really aren't accomplishing shit!

But logic man... religious folk, they can be illogical. :lol:

 

[Shaun__]

I will say that any "good christian" would and SHOULD group them together if they don't want to be called a hypocrite.

But hahaha hypocrisy. It runs amuck.

Anyway, I obviously do not agree with it whatsoever but TECHNICALLY, according to the bible all sin is equal in the eyes of the lord and it is man that sets tiers.
However, this also means just about every single christian I've ever known is as equally sinful. Hhahahaha like the Utah gay marriage issue!
Some counties have completely shut down issuing ANY marriage licenses in defiance of the recent ruling. Only problem here is that in an effort to avoid something they think is sinful they are breaking the laws of their land, which is clearly described in the bible as a sin. And since all sins are equal they really aren't accomplishing shit!

But logic man... religious folk, they can be illogical. :lol:

That is why they are rewriting the bible, they are fixing all of God's mistakes. Conservatives Think The Bible Is Too Liberal So They’re Rewriting It

 

[Bocefish]

Not that I really give shit about this fiasco anymore...

Phil: "If you’re an adulterer, if you’re a liar, what’s the difference? If you break one sin, you may as well break them all.”

http://www.deadline.com/2013/12/duck-dy ... e-mistake/

 

[JoleneBrody]

Not that I really give shit about this fiasco anymore...

Phil: "If you’re an adulterer, if you’re a liar, what’s the difference? If you break one sin, you may as well break them all.”

http://www.deadline.com/2013/12/duck-dy ... e-mistake/

Exactly, I kind of respect him for at least sticking to his christian guns I guess. But yeah... as the daughter of a pastor father and Jewish mother (yes they are divorced LOL) I guess it all just makes my eyes roll. The picking and choosing of what sin to care about.
The catholic church removed one of the ten commandments in favor of their own commandment breaking practices and just split another commandment into to separate things, for crying out loud.

Someone can not understand something like homosexuality all they want, but just look around! Unless it is directly harming another person I don't think religious organizations are really in much of a place to deem what's sinful and what's not anymore.

Now excuse me, I'm going to go cook some nice PORK sausages like the little whore of pork eating babylon that I am. :lol:

 

[ga5457]

It seems that A&E caved and reinstated Phil.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/20 ... announces/

 

[VenPerv2]

TLR

ill let my good friend Buckley speak for me, hes from Canada so you know you can trust him

 

[Shaun__]

Phil says if you marry a girl when she is 15 or 16 she will be subservient to you, but if you wait until she is 20 all you will get is a gold digger.

“Now that’s a woman. They got to where they’re hard to find. Mainly because these boys are waiting til they’re twenty years old before they marry them. Look, you wait til they get to be twenty years old and the the only picking that’s going to take place is your pocket. You got to marry these girls when they’re about fifteen or sixteen and they’ll pick your ducks.”

[