WN: 'Duck Dynasty' star sparks culture war with opinions on g

[Burning_Ember]

 

Let's see.

 

A+E announced that  it's 'Duck Dynasty' show has a regular viewer following of about 14,000,000 Americans.

 

Last I counted, the US population is about 320,000,000

 

That means slightly over 4% of the US populations even KNOWS what "Duck Dynasty" is let alone watches them on a regular basis.

 

I didn't know what it was and have never seen the 'Duck Dynasty' show until days ago when the 'patriarch's' comments sparked a supposed furor over homosexuality.

 

Sounds like a contrived 'crisis' just to get people to watch the show if you ask me.

 

Sorry, but men or women jumping into ponds to 'noodle' catfish....catch snapping turtles...shoot muskrats....talk with "Cajun" patois accents not even Bobby Jundal can understand...or make mallard sounds with a piece of wood just doesn't sound like anything most Americans care about.... let alone most rednecks.

 

So why should what happens on Duck Dynasty matter or why should any cast member's comments about homosexuality should affect our lives?

 

It DOESN"T matter and their comments are MEANINGLESS to me as they are to 95% of Americans.

-----------------------------------

 

 

Recent comments on Duck Dynasty are just a big ploy to make more money for a struggling (and soon to be defunct) TV show franchise I suggest.

 

But Hey! That's me.

 

Can I get the Duck Dynasty "Chia Beards" to grow any faster if I use Miracle Grow? 

 

<shakes head sadly>

 

Just wondrin'

It matters because freedom matters.  The freedom to speak your religious views without fear of reprisal.  

 

Were his constitutional violated in some way?

[Guest shiloh357]

 

Were his constitutional violated in some way?

 

 

Absolutely.    Let me tell you something...   Had the Robertson family been nothing  but a bunch of crazy, foul-mouthed drunken rednecks who said some unsavory things about Christians/Christianity, and Christians protested their comments, those comments would have been defended as protected free speech.

 

People can throw around some of the most vile comments about Christianity and the liberals will run to the defense of such people claiming that they have the right to voice their opinions and to do so without fear of reprisal.

 

A&E didn't fire him because they were offended at his comments.  They bowed to pressure from radical homsexual activists.   The producers at A&E knew about the interview and its contents long before it was published.   Had groups like GLAAD not made a stink about it, most of us would not have known about it.    Had Phil Robertson been a homosexual and came out defending homosexuality, and had Christians protested his comments, radical groups like GLAAD would have defended him on First Ammendment Grounds. 

 

Why can Bill Maher and LouieCK  get on TV and refer to conservative women in vugar, degrading terms that would get any other man fired from his job and probably prosecuted for sexual harrassment, and yet be defended on the first ammendemnt grounds?   Why hasn't Bill Maher lost his job?? The Left will defend the most vile, disgusting comments as free speech when they agree with those comments.   The Left is so hypocritical about this, it isn't even funny.  But that's liberalism for you.

[MorningGlory]

Let's see.

 

A+E announced that  it's 'Duck Dynasty' show has a regular viewer following of about 14,000,000 Americans.

 

Last I counted, the US population is about 320,000,000

 

That means slightly over 4% of the US populations even KNOWS what "Duck Dynasty" is let alone watches them on a regular basis.

 

I didn't know what it was and have never seen the 'Duck Dynasty' show until days ago when the 'patriarch's' comments sparked a supposed furor over homosexuality.

 

Sounds like a contrived 'crisis' just to get people to watch the show if you ask me.

 

Sorry, but men or women jumping into ponds to 'noodle' catfish....catch snapping turtles...shoot muskrats....talk with "Cajun" patois accents not even Bobby Jundal can understand...or make mallard sounds with a piece of wood just doesn't sound like anything most Americans (even rednecks) care about or even would watch on TV.

 

So why should what happens on Duck Dynasty matter to 95% of Americans or why should any cast member's comments about homosexuality should affect any of our lives?

 

It DOESN"T matter and comments by cast members on 'Duck Dynasty' are as MEANINGLESS to me most Americans as they are to most who inhabit the world.

-----------------------------------

 

 

Recent comments on Duck Dynasty are just a big ploy to make more money for a struggling (and soon to be defunct) TV show franchise I suggest.

 

But Hey! That's me.

 

Can I get the Duck Dynasty "Chia Beards" to grow any faster if I use Miracle Grow? 

 

<shakes head sadly>

 

Didn't think so....

 

---------------------------

 

Anyone remember "The Real McCoys"?

 

Didn't think so either....

 

You are categorially and incomprehenibly wrong, my friend.  Please do further research on the amount of support for Robertson's right to speak before you try to dismiss the issue.  Btw, these people are nice, personable and funny individuals with VALUES who even resonate with a big city girl like myself.  Dig deeper and you may come to understand the real issue.    

[homebild]

Looks like AFlameOfFire is the one missing the point about 'chia beards'...

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/duck-dynasty-s-uncle-si-and-willie-chia-pets-a-hot-item-for-2013-holiday-gifts

 

Chia Pet is actually marketing 'chia beards' to make more money for these Duck Dynasty weirdos!

 

And my beard looks just fine all neat and trimmed as it is!...Thank you very much!

 

 

PS: 4% of the population does NOT represent "Middle America" or its values!

 

4% of the population following Duck Dynasty realty stars is why the Republican Party is in big trouble when it thinks it represents 'America'...and why Evangelicals are in even bigger trouble when they look to Duck Dynasty stars as examples of  role model 'Christians' and protectors of speech freedom....

 

What did Jesus say about the hypocrites who wanted to be seen of men acting all holy in public on the street corners?

 

Sheesh!

 

PPS: I support the right of anyone to say anything within reason and their Constitutional rights....But NO ONE has the right to say what they want on their EMPLOYERS time and in their EMPLOY without suffering the consequences for it.

 

SI wants to lose his contract with A+E and go on the road at his own expense as a 'preacher' against gays, then he should GO FOR IT!...

 

He just shouldn't expect A+E or anyone else he works for...and DISAGREES...to have to accept his 'free speech' views or be forced to be swallow his misguided 'opinions'.

---------------

Sorry.

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

Looks like AFlameOfFire is missing the point about 'chia beards'...

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/duck-dynasty-s-uncle-si-and-willie-chia-pets-a-hot-item-for-2013-holiday-gifts

 

They are actually selling 'chia beards' to make more money off these weirdos!

Might have but it doesn't seem to be an uncommon question

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120102202051AA8er0u

I actually thought the chia pet died out in the 80's.

[Burning_Ember]

 

 

Were his constitutional violated in some way?

 

 

Absolutely.

<SNIP>

 

How were his constitutional rights violated?

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

 

Were his constitutional violated in some way?

 

 

Absolutely.

<SNIP>

 

How were his constitutional rights violated?

 

I answered the question. It's the part you snipped out:  Read below, especially the bold parts:

Let me tell you something...   Had the Robertson family been nothing  but a bunch of crazy, foul-mouthed drunken rednecks who said some unsavory things about Christians/Christianity, and Christians protested their comments, those comments would have been defended as protected free speech.

 

People can throw around some of the most vile comments about Christianity and the liberals will run to the defense of such people claiming that they have the right to voice their opinions and to do so without fear of reprisal.

 

A&E didn't fire him because they were offended at his comments.  They bowed to pressure from radical homsexual activists.   The producers at A&E knew about the interview and its contents long before it was published.   Had groups like GLAAD not made a stink about it, most of us would not have known about it.    Had Phil Robertson been a homosexual and came out defending homosexuality, and had Christians protested his comments, radical groups like GLAAD would have defended him on First Ammendment Grounds. 

 

Why can Bill Maher and LouieCK  get on TV and refer to conservative women in vugar, degrading terms that would get any other man fired from his job and probably prosecuted for sexual harrassment, and yet be defended on the first ammendemnt grounds?   Why hasn't Bill Maher lost his job?? The Left will defend the most vile, disgusting comments as free speech when they agree with those comments.   The Left is so hypocritical about this, it isn't even funny.  But that's liberalism for you.

 

 

Burning Ember,

 

The point in the response above is to point out how hypocritcal liberals are.  They defend the rights of TV personalities they agree with to make vulgar statements on the grounds that those statements no matter how vulgar they may be, as protected free speech and that to censor or punish someone like Bill Maher for making those comments would be violation of his first ammendment rights.

 

When Phil Robertson says he thinks about homosexuality being a sin and is punished for it,  you ask how that is a violation of his first ammendment rights.   That shows how ingrained liberal hyporisy is.  

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

PS: 4% of the population does NOT represent "Middle America" or its values!

 

4% of the population following Duck Dynasty realty stars is why the Republican Party is in big trouble when it thinks it represents 'America'...and why Evangelicals are in even bigger trouble when they look to Duck Dynasty stars as examples of  role model 'Christians' and protectors of speech freedom....

14 million people is a lot of viewers for any show on A&E.  It is their highest rated shows.  And they resonate with middle America, whether you believe it or not.  Far more than the  14 million viewers are coming out in support of the Robertsons.  People who never watched the show and probably never will are coming out in support of the Robertsons.

What did Jesus say about the hypocrites who wanted to be seen of men acting all holy in public on the street corners?

 

And the Robertsons are the polar opposite of description of Jesus.  Jesus also said if you are ashamed of Him in public he will be ashamed you before the Father.  They are no different than Tim Tebow who was bold and consistent witness for Jesus.  I bet you don't like him, either.

 

 

PPS: I support the right of anyone to say anything within reason and their Constitutional rights....But NO ONE has the right to say what they want on their EMPLOYERS time and in their EMPLOY without suffering the consequences for it.

 

They were not on company time when Phil made his comments and A&E was present at the interview and possessed a copy of the transcript before it was published in GQ.  They didn't suspend Phil Robertson for the comments he made.  They bowed to the pressure of gay special interest groups who made a lot of noise about it.   Phil was the sacrificial lamb who was offered up on the altar political correctness before A&E had heard from the rest of the viewing community as to their opinion of what Robertson said.  They made a rash and impulsive decision to fire him because they cowards and the media is under the delusion that their support the LGBT community is mainstream when it isn't mainstream.

 

SI wants to lose his contract with A+E and go on the road at his own expense as a 'preacher' against gays, then he should GO FOR IT!...

 

He just shouldn't expect A+E or anyone else he works for...and DISAGREES...to have to accept his 'free speech' views or be forced to be swallow his misguided 'opinions'.

 

I bet you would be singing a different tune had the Robertsons been a bunch of foul mouthed rednecks who made unsavory comments about Christians.  I bet the entire free speech argument currently being made against the Robertsons would be stood on its head in order to defend them for making hateful comments about Christans.

[MrsRational]

I didn't know people had a constitutional right to be on television.

Edited December 27, 2013 by MsRational

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

Isnt that his job? To be filmed in his home and paid for it?