'Duck Dynasty' star suspended for anti-gay remarks
- Thread starter sword
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,068
- Reaction score
- 168
- Points
- 63
Cross the line? Not if you consider the Bible to be the word of God.
Free speech ends only when conservatives speak the truth.
I hope the rest of the DD family says, no Phil, no family. Also hope the viewers of the show rises up and boycott A&E.
Free speech ends only when conservatives speak the truth.
I hope the rest of the DD family says, no Phil, no family. Also hope the viewers of the show rises up and boycott A&E.
C
christundivided
Guest
I have hardly every watched the show. Maybe 2 episodes. I could care less about it.
At the same time, sinners don't like their sin being talked about by anyone. Much less someone with a little influence. He said the right things to start with. He has a right to say whatever he pleases. Liberal can't take free speech. Look at all the "hate speech" being thrown his way. Morons. The whole lot of them.
At the same time, sinners don't like their sin being talked about by anyone. Much less someone with a little influence. He said the right things to start with. He has a right to say whatever he pleases. Liberal can't take free speech. Look at all the "hate speech" being thrown his way. Morons. The whole lot of them.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2013
- Messages
- 8,018
- Reaction score
- 60
- Points
- 48
sword said:
I don't think Phil crossed the line at all, based on the quotes of the article. That being said, what does this have to do with "free speech"? Was he arrested as a criminal? As bogus as the suspension seems to be, employers have a right to limit what is said by employees. At my company, one will be suspended for saying the word "totem pole" in reference to the Indian statue thingy. Ludicrous? Absolutely, but as long as I am employed by them, I cannot say it to my co-workers. Now if I did say it and was caught, I could be fired but I would not be arrested. "Free speech" has to do with liberties from governmental control, not business control. Churches should have the right to fire a staff member for being gay, for immorality, for cursing, whatever as it is dictated by the expectations of the churches themselves. So A&E, right or wrong, has the same right to suspend anybody for saying anything they deem derrogatory. When are employers rights to be thwarted?
Phil was not arrested in violation of the Constitution. Hence, it is not a "free speech" matter, IMHO. It is a matter of violating company policy that A&E has the freedom to dictate to employees/contractors/actors/whatever.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,340
- Reaction score
- 1,337
- Points
- 113
A&E committed ratings suicide....IMO!
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2012
- Messages
- 327
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Smellin Coffee said:
As true as your points are (and as a liberty-loving man I agree with most of them), they still don't negate the fact that the Homosexual Tolerance Inquisition is out in full force to shred anyone who dares blaspheme their idol.
C
christundivided
Guest
Smellin Coffee said:
Sure they have right to do what they want to do. However, there is clearly a double standard in today's society when to comes to such things. I'm am sure Miley's "twerking" wouldn't get her canned from any show.
I do believe they will regret their choice. They have a right to make a choice but everyone else does as well.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2013
- Messages
- 8,018
- Reaction score
- 60
- Points
- 48
christundivided said:
No argument from me. The result of freedom is the ability for double-standard based on personal/corporate criteria. I'm thankful that we have the freedom to choose or refuse to watch programs based on the actions of that particular medium.
Was A&E over the top? Probably so. But we can't claim "free speech" when they also have the right to determine what they want their people what to represent.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2013
- Messages
- 8,018
- Reaction score
- 60
- Points
- 48
Reformed Guy said:
And we live in a governmental system that ALLOWS for all types of idolatry. It begins with the Declaration of Independence giving us the right to pursue materialism ("...life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.") Why should we be surprised when corporations/individuals/media act in pursuit of what they (rightly or wrongly) perceive in their best self-interest?
C
christundivided
Guest
rsc2a said:
Both of you are morons.
Paul said he was the chief of sinners and PREACHED AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY AT THE SAME TIME. The fact we ALL sin does not change the message of God toward sinners. There is no life in Christ without dealing with your own personal sin. If you're a homo, then one of those many sins.... is your choice in where you want to stick your peepee. Deal with it.
You moron want to change the Gospel and remove the stark realization of a man's own personal sin. Yes. Jesus loves all men. At the same time, Jesus is angry with the wicked every day. He hates sin. He's not looking for everyone to come to Him and just claim His loving embrace WITHOUT recognize just how vile and worthless they really are.
You're a total buffoon if you don't understand this.
By the way, your friend might want to consider how evil it is to call someone who eats too much, a glutton. Its just like calling a nice upstanding Christian man who loves playing in another man's rearend.....a homo.
He has every right to say what he said ... and more, if he chooses.
He is protected by the Constitution from the government ... NOT his employer. A&E also has every right to act in whatever way they choose as long as it is not a violation of a legal contract with him.
IMHO, when he went into the bestiality reference, he crossed the line.
He is protected by the Constitution from the government ... NOT his employer. A&E also has every right to act in whatever way they choose as long as it is not a violation of a legal contract with him.
IMHO, when he went into the bestiality reference, he crossed the line.
C
christundivided
Guest
MTJ said:
Explain how it crossed the line? You do realize the Scriptures speak of beastality being wrong don't you?
I hope you do realize there are people "marrying" animals in this world. Whether they have sex with them or not.... I assume "marriage" makes them feel pretty much guiltless when it come to it.
Phil exercised his freedom of speech to say whatever he chose to. As a result A&E chose to suspend him.
Not sure what all the outrage is about. Is A&E some moral non-profit business? Since they are not, if you don't like their stand then don't watch them. However what channel are you going to watch?
Phil is a gruff, crude kind of a man and speaks in that manner. Did he speak the truth in love? I don't know him well enough to make that call.
However is Phil a Christian? One of the ministries his church has is We Care. Here is a video they put out called "Step Into The Water"
http://www.wecaretoday.net/Step%20Into%20The%20Water.html
Not sure what all the outrage is about. Is A&E some moral non-profit business? Since they are not, if you don't like their stand then don't watch them. However what channel are you going to watch?
Phil is a gruff, crude kind of a man and speaks in that manner. Did he speak the truth in love? I don't know him well enough to make that call.
However is Phil a Christian? One of the ministries his church has is We Care. Here is a video they put out called "Step Into The Water"
http://www.wecaretoday.net/Step%20Into%20The%20Water.html
C
christundivided
Guest
Mathew Ward said:
Man. That was painful to watch.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2013
- Messages
- 5,279
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 0
Phil had the right to say what he said.
A&E had the right to "fire" him from the show.
But if you want to make this a case of discrimination, then this is a clear case of anti-Christian discrimination, not anti-gay discrimination. Phil was the only person harmed in this incident (although A&E may have harmed itself in the long run - that remains to be seen).
A&E decided it didn't want his Christian beliefs represented on their show. If Phil was gay and A&E got rid of him because he espoused gay beliefs, then it would have been anti-homosexual discrimination.
But just expressing your Christian views of homosexual behavior isn't discrimination against anyone, anymore than expressing anti-Christian views is discrimination against Christians.
A&E had the right to "fire" him from the show.
But if you want to make this a case of discrimination, then this is a clear case of anti-Christian discrimination, not anti-gay discrimination. Phil was the only person harmed in this incident (although A&E may have harmed itself in the long run - that remains to be seen).
A&E decided it didn't want his Christian beliefs represented on their show. If Phil was gay and A&E got rid of him because he espoused gay beliefs, then it would have been anti-homosexual discrimination.
But just expressing your Christian views of homosexual behavior isn't discrimination against anyone, anymore than expressing anti-Christian views is discrimination against Christians.
C
christundivided
Guest
prophet said:
Get a grip man. Its not hate speech. Either way......It didn't happen on the AIR. Its never happened on the SHOW. The channel has no liability.