As much as I appreciate the refreshing "Duck Dynasty" program, I am done watching A&E. Why?
• A&E dishonestly edits bleeps into "Duck Dynasty" conversations to imply foul language when none exists.
• A&E demanded the "Duck Dynasty" family refrain from praying in the name of Jesus.
• A&E demanded that the family eliminate its references to God and guns. Phil Robertson said, "God and guns are part of our everyday lives [and] to remove either of them from the show is unacceptable. If we can't pray to God on the show, then we will not do the show."
Now, after a complaint by GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) A&E has indefinitely dropped "Duck Dynasty" patriarch Phil Robertson because he has an opinion that isn't politically-correct (politically cleansed):
We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson's comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series "Duck Dynasty". His personal views in no way reflect those of A&E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely.What were the egregious words that got the Duck Commander in such hot water? When asked what he viewed as sinful during his interview published in GQ magazine, he responded honestly (this was not an unsolicited anti-gay rant -- it was a response to a question):
Everything is blurred on what's right and what's wrong. Sin becomes fine. 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.Paraphrasing the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 he added:
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.GLADD shouldn't be complaining about Phil Robertson, they should be complaining about the apostle Paul!
I find it odd that Phil Robertson was cut for espousing views distasteful to thought police who very likely don't even watch, and could care less about, Duck Dynasty.
To a large extent, this argument is about truth. GLADD and others like them advocate arbitrary "relative truth" -- what's true for you isn't necessarily true for me. Robertson's argument is based on "absolute truth" -- time-tested truth that comes from God and which doesn't change.
A&E has a right to produce/drop whatever programming it chooses or is pressured into producing/dropping due to pressure from special interest groups. I choose to not be one of A&E's viewers because they caved to at least one professional outrage group.
Some, especially on the Left, think the A&E vs Robertson rhubarb is an argument about homosexuality. It's not. It's about the First Amendment: Freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Atheists demand and get their freedom of religion. Liberals demand and get their freedom of speech. Homosexuals get their TV/movie/news programming (freedom of the press and of speech). What about the rest of us?
Yeah, I know that the Bill of Rights imposes limits only on government -- not on the People or on organizations such as GLAAD. But such organizations love to use the power of government to silence anyone they disagree with.
Bobby Jindal, governor of Louisiana, home state of the Robertson clan chimed in:
Phil Robertson and his family are great citizens of the state of Louisiana. The politically correct crowd is tolerant of all viewpoints -- except those they disagree with. I don't agree with quite a bit of stuff I read in magazine interviews or see on TV. In fact, come to think of it, I find a good bit of it offensive. But I also acknowledge that this is a free country and everyone is entitled to express their views. In fact, I remember when TV networks believed in the First Amendment. It is a messed up situation when Miley Cyrus gets a laugh, and Phil Robertson gets suspended.These same folks who gave us sensitivity training and the embracing of diversity need to learn a bit about sensitivity and diversity. The rest of us simply want everyone's rights protected -- not just one politically-correct (politically-cleansed) minority or another.
Here is what a former coworker of mine said about the A&E-Robertson kerfuffle (sorry about the immature language -- it's his and typical of those who argue primarily with emotion, not reason and facts):
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." -- Mark Twain. You can pretty much say anything you want in this country. Just prepare yourself to be hammered for saying stupid redneck shit. People should keep all their racist, bigoted, homophobic, religious, bullshit to themselves. It helps no one and then they look like an asshole. You can't say homophobic, bigoted or racist shit then run to the bible to justify it.Yup. "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." -- Mark Twain
Some seem to think that only "racist, bigoted, homophobic, religious" rednecks use the Bible to guide their lives; that they have no right to express their beliefs, when asked, in the land of the free and the home of the brave; and that the emotional application of profane, hateful, and derogatory labels to such people is therefore appropriate.
After his dismissal, Robertson said:
I myself am a product of the 60s; I centered my life around sex, drugs and rock and roll until I hit rock bottom and accepted Jesus as my Savior.That statement parallels the official stand made by my church:
My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.
However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints affirms the centrality of doctrines relating to human sexuality and gender as well as the sanctity and significance of marriage as the union of a man and a woman. However, the Church firmly believes that all people are equally beloved children of God and deserve to be treated with love and respect.Inasmuch as Robertson was removed from his own show because he expressed a sincere religious belief (away from the workplace, no less), he may have federal civil-rights case:
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. SEC. 2000e-2. [Section 703]Isn't it interesting that GLAAD chose what should be the most religious time of the year to complain about a nearly-year-old statement of a man's religious belief in absolute truth? I suspect they are quite proud of that "coincidence." They and every other anti-religion group won't rest until they impose their will on every individual, business, school, charitable organization, government entity, and even on God and His Church.
(a) Employer practices
It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer -
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Conscience is the most sacred of all property. — James MadisonIn the "good ol' days, we admired those who stood by their principles -- even if they differed from your own, But today, those who honor traditional marriage are not just "stupid rednecks" in the eyes of homosexual-marriage proponents, they are bigots and haters, the targets of the deepest bigotry and hate.
Homosexual-rights activists have this message: "If you don't agree with me, you hate me. Agree with me across the board or you are a hater. Submit to my viewpoint or you are a bigot." By using this attack, they don't need to win their arguments by intelligent discussion or rational debate. Instead, they can silence us by labeling opponents. It is the lowest form of policy debate, but in this case it has been frighteningly effective.
A lot's at stake here, and it isn't homosexual rights or the traditional family. If you don't understand or don't care what's in danger, you're a part of the problem.
"The popular culture that praises Miley Cyrus and fires Phil Robertson is a popular culture that won't let you sit on the sidelines. I'm forced to talk about a show I don't even really watch because the left is making me care. The left is trying to silence dissent." -- Erick Erickson, 20 Dec 2013 on the Rush Limbaugh Show
ReplyDeleteHere are a couple of somewhat related stories:
ReplyDeleteThe central government required Utah enshrine traditional marriage in its constitution as a condition of statehood.
Now, twice in a week, two judges (one a Bush II appointee, the other, an Obama appointee) from the central government say such a restriction must be abandoned.
Odd.
I have often said that Utah is the great prize in the statist/humanist/hedonist war on religion. Congratulations to the winners. You must surely be proud.
14 Dec 2013 - www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56894145-78/utah-polygamy-waddoups-ruling.html.csp
20 Dec 2013 - www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home3/57291925-200/ban-judge-sex-court.html.csp
Robertson has been reinstated as the star of the A&E series, "Duck Dynasty."
ReplyDelete"There was a blissful time, lost somewhere in nostalgia, where people admired someone who stood by their principles—even if they differed from your own, but today those who uphold traditional marriage are not just backward in the eyes of gay marriage proponents. No, they are bigots and haters, the targets of the deepest disdain.
ReplyDelete"This is an interesting ploy on the part of same-sex marriage advocates, neutralizing the efforts of those of us who support traditional marriage. Their message: “If you don’t agree with me, you hate me. Agree with me across the board or you are a hater. Submit to my viewpoint or you are a bigot.”
"In this way, they don’t have to win their arguments by intelligent discussion or rational debate. Instead, they can silence us by labeling us. It is the lowest form of policy debate, but in this case it has been effective." -- Maurine Proctor, 14 Jan 2014, http://www.ldsmag.com/article/1/13790