What Phil Robertson SaidCulture

robertson_phil_duckdynasty

…oh come off it.  You don’t really care about that, do you?

This world doesn’t guarantee that you’re never going to be offended.  Definition of tolerance?  Yeah — means that other people don’t have to share your opinion 100% of the time, sweetheart.  Man up.

Seriously — if the opinions of others offends you?  Grow up and get a damn life, and be a bit more secure in your own belief system.  Duck Dynasty is gonna be just fine… and A&E gets to demonstrate how closed minded the left truly can be.

There it is – fin.  

  • midwestconservative

    I bet half of the people talking about what Mr. Robertson said, don’t even watch Duck Dynasty.

    • MD Russ

      Phil who and WTF is Duck Dynasty? It sounds like an ancient Chinese monarchy.

    • Warmac9999

      I watch it because it is about the only decent comedy show on TV. In addition, unlike the idiot comedy shows with canned laughter, there are actually a few occasions of real humor which draw genuine laughs.

  • Not Harry F. Byrd

    I don’t get why either side is particularly up in arms about this. A&E is a private business that has a perfect right to decide what it wants to endorse with its support. Mr. Robertson’s opinion isn’t to A&E’s liking, so they got rid of him. Fair enough. He can go somewhere that likes him. What’s the big deal?

    • Warmac9999

      The continuous attacks on people of faith and principle are beginning to really anger people. You probably don’t realize that A&E has had homosexual “stars” make equally egregious statement advocating for the homosexual lifestyle. Obviously a double standard.

      • Jason R.

        It’s A&E’s right to show the world their double standard.

        • Warmac9999

          Yes they do, but then there is that tricky little thing called equal protection – and contract law. I would like to see this suit prosecuted. The outcome will set precedents for decades.

          • Jason R.

            It certainly would be interesting. I don’t know the specifics of their contracts.

    • Iona Warmack

      They hired him FULLY aware of his beliefs. Smells a little funny does’t it?

  • Warmac9999

    A&E will likely be sued if the Robertson’s wish to do so. This is a Louisiana lawyers dream case, and make no mistake Phil and the family could easily win enough money to buy A&E when an angry Louisiana jury gives its verdict.

    The problem is that the gay lobby, obviously a force in the arts and entertainment arena, pressured A&E to take precipitous and conflicting action. I would not underestimate the significance here. This is chic-fil-a on steroids as both religious freedom and freedom of speech have been attacked.

    Unlike Bashir who made his remarks on air, Robertson made his remarks off the air and as part of a magazine interview. A&E doesn’t own Robertson, they contract for a certain set of services.

    • Chris

      On what basis could they possible be sued?

      • Warmac9999

        They have had homosexual men make similar comments only pro not con. They knew well ahead of Robertson’s religious stances and hired him anyway. They consulted with glaad before taking action. They have damaged the duck corporate image as well as their merchandising. They have put show sponsors in a difficult position. They almost certainly pre-approved Phil Robertson’s appearance in the GQ magazine. Thus, There is more than a chance that this was a set-up. Any good Louisiana lawyer could get discovery going on all of this and an angered Louisiana jury could easily render a verdict in the hundreds of millions if not billion dollar range.

        Oh, by the way, anybody can file a lawsuit just for the heck of it. Whether it clears through the courts is another matter.

        • Chris

          Unless Louisiana has truly strange standing laws, I think all of those claims would fail at the motions stage.
          The only thing that sounds vaguely bad is the “set-up” suggestion, but since they could terminate his contract at any time for any reason, there was hardly a need to set him up.
          And as for the duck corporate image, it’s not like they defamed him. All they did was terminate him as was their right. Not actionable.

          • Jason R.

            Why not? ACLU can sue Disney for making business decisions. It was the wrong decision as companies make dress-code exceptions all the time. But it’s their right to make that decision.

            But if ACLU can sue Disney for making a business decision about an employee working for them AT work, then why can’t Phil sue A&E about his comments made outside of work that reflects his opinion.

            http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/13/disney-is-sued-over-treatment-of-muslim-employee-who-wears-a-head-scarf/?_r=0

          • Chris

            That case involved an alleged violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. No such violation here.

          • Jason R.

            lol. Realistically, he won’t do it. He was talking bout quietly exiting the lime-light and go around the nation doing church events. The Robertsons are above all this non-sense and are just as happy going to another the network or having no show at all.

          • Chris

            In that case it sounds like it WAS a set up. By Robertson!!! To get some free PR as he launched his ministry. And it completely worked. Whoa, I am in awe of the genius.

          • Warmac9999

            I’ve had the distinct privilege of working with a variety of Louisiana lawyers in civil matters. And yes, the laws down there are quite interesting. But even more interesting is that the judge, the lawyer and the Robertson’s are likely to be “cousins”. If you think this can just be motioned away, I have a couple of bridges in NYC for sale cheap.

  • John Ub

    BFD. What does his contract with A&E say? He had a private contract with them and obviously he violated something in that contract. No outcry when Alec was fired and big hurrah’s when Bashir was fired.

    • Warmac9999

      Am willing to bet his interview with GQ was pre-approved,

    • midwestconservative

      Bashir wasn’t fired. And Phil never called anybody ” a toxic little queen” or suggest someone should crap in another person’s mouth.

  • Antoninus

    The Robertson family is exactly how you see them portrayed on the show. What you see is what you get, and they are much more representative of people in Louisiana and across the South than Honey Boo Boo and other shows attempting to make us all look like illiterate inbred hicks. They never expected the show to get this big and they’re tired of the headaches fame has brought. They would like nothing better than to wrap the show and get back to their lives. They have an opportunity to bring honor and glory to the Lord by quitting the show and demonstrating that moral fidelity is more important than the worldly lusts of fame and money. I fully expect them to quit and get on with their lives.

    Any American who believes we still have freedom of speech in this country is either hopelessly naive or a progressive liar! The progressives are the most hateful, intolerant, and close-minded hypocrites on the planet! They don’t allow any opinion to be expressed that contradicts the liberal orthodoxy by bullying and shouting down all opposition to their agenda! If their positions were so defensible, then they could stand up to dissent, but the fact that the progressives don’t allow dissent demonstrates exactly how weak their positions are and how out of touch they are with center-right mainstream America!

  • DJRippert

    This whole issue has the smell of a publicity stunt. I’ve seen the show a few times. I am also familiar with the Duck Commander products. These guys are sharpies dressed in redneck clothing. You see this a lot in the deep south. So, why is Phil Robertson detailing his personal opinion about various body parts on GQ? That’s not how a smart Southern man talks in public. That’s not how men of faith talk in public. It’s not how they talk on the show. Forget the homosexual angle and focus on the fairly graphic discussion of male vs female body parts. It doesn’t add up. Unless … it was staged.

    • Warmac9999

      Exactly what was or is expected to be gained? When you can answer that then maybe you have a point.

      • DJRippert

        Seriously?

        Why did Miley Cyrus twerk? To get publicity. There is already a Facebook page with over half a million “likes” supporting Phil Robertson. He’s in the news, he’s on the blogs. If it was a publicity stunt, it was a good one.

        Why did a year old rumor suddenly surface about Mike Shanahan cleaning out his office before last year’s playoff game in Seattle? Because Shanahan gets paid for his last year if he gets fired but not of he quits. Guess what? Just today the press is saying that the rest of the Duck Dynasty folks are “in discussions with A&E about the future of the show”. Maybe they figure another network would be a better home for the show.

        Why did Charlie Sheen publicly assail Chuck Lorre on the internet over Two and a Half Men? He wanted more creative control over the show. The Duck Dynasty stars have already had a run in with A&E over references to Jesus and guns in the show.

        Why do actors pull publicity stunts? Really? That’s your question?

        • Warmac9999

          The gain is that Phil Richardson gets to further evangelize. He doesn’t need any more money – he is worth tens of millions. He isn’t like Miley Cyrus or Charlie sheen – they are entertainers who actually need publicity to continue their careers. Phil is a businessman, outdoorsman, and evangelical Christian. He also happens to be in his late sixties and represents the ideas of the elderly many of whom see homosexuality and government excess for the dangers they represent.

          • DJRippert

            I don’t hear a lot of evangelists talking about vaginas and anuses. The crudeness of his rhetoric seems at odds with an evangelical message.

          • Warmac9999

            I can remember when thunder from the pulpit was quite explicit. Over the past few decades, the message of sin and salvation was “moderated” into love without consequence. Phil is the old school not the PC new school which is slowly destroying Christianity.

          • DJRippert

            Really? You remember preachers, ministers, etc giving sermons where they claimed to prefer women’s vaginas over men’s anuses? Look – I don’t begrudge the man his opinions but claiming he’s some kind of old school theologian is quite a stretch. He’s a smart businessman / performer who knows he can get attention and make more money by being controversial. Kind of a Donald Trump in camouflage.

          • Warmac9999

            Ever hear the word fornication? Not exactly an uncommon word from the pulpit. But, of course, very few old time ministers had to deal with homosexual perversion as it was understood exactly what it was as a horrific behavior – part of Dante’s inferno.

          • DJRippert

            OK, my last post on this matter. This is what Phil Robertson actually said:

            “It seems like, to me, a vagina — as a man — would be more desirable than a man’s anus,” he said. “That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying?”.

            That doesn’t sound like something a minister or preacher would say from the pulpit.

            He’s not a reverend. He’s an entertainer.

          • Warmac9999

            First, he is a pastor. Second, you are missing some sermons from some of the more liberal churches where homosexuality is extolled. The overt attacks on traditional marriage are truly excessive. By the way, why you would think such things don’t happen is amazing to me. Ever hear of Farrakhan or Wright?

          • tpaschal

            You missed the part where he said “speaking as a man” he was not speaking as a preacher, minister,or reverend from the pulpit. It is called freedom of speech and it was HIS opinion.

          • DJRippert

            Please go back and read the comment thread. I never said he was speaking as a preacher. Warmac9999 seems to believe he was evangelizing. I personally believe he was “speaking as an entertainer” and trying to raise the awareness of himself and his show. Unfortunately, he may have overplayed his hand. This happens a lot in show business – from Charlie Sheen to Alec Baldwin.

            I don’t begrudge Phil Robertson his comments. I don’t agree with his anti-gay attitude but he’s entitled to his opinion. I do think he could have expressed himself better – especially in regard to his crude depiction of his own sexual preferences. And no, I don’t assume he’s too stupid to put a few coherent sentences together. Just the opposite. He’s part of a successful business and he’s a media sensation. So, I assume he wanted to be controversial and create a hubbub.

        • Tommy Valentine

          Guess what Robertson reportedly did after getting suspended? He went to church. To pray for a woman with cancer.

          He even said a few months ago he wouldn’t stay on the show for more than a few years.

          Not the type of guy who says things for publicity.

          • DJRippert

            I think you guys have been taken a bit. Let’s talk about Phil Robertson. In high school, he was all state in three different sports. – football, baseball and track. He got a scholarship to Louisiana Tech where he was the starting quarterback. He started ahead of a fellow named Terry Bradshaw. Bradshaw, it should be noted, was the first overall pick in the 1970 draft and is now in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

            Robertson earned both a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree.

            He invented the Duck Commander duck call and received a US patent for its invention. Then, he turned the invention into a million dollar company.

            Phil Robertson is a well educated man who has been successful with every endeavor he has undertaken in life.

            He knew exactly what he was doing in that interview and he thought he knew the exact consequences of his actions.

  • Pingback: Five Things that are more important than Duck Dynasty this Christmas » The Write Side of My Brain

  • Chris

    Lots of commentary about the “gay lobby”…what about his remarks on civil rights? Anyone?

    • Warmac9999

      He stated what he observed when he was younger and it now seems to him, in retrospect, that the civil rights laws have led to greater community problems. I think the war on poverty has done the damage, but that is JUST MY OPINION.

      • Chris

        I think the war on drugs has done most of the damage.
        And I think that it’s a shame that only a few libertarians are ever willing to say so, unlike the bought-and-paid-for fake progressives on the left.

        • midwestconservative

          Because only black people buy drugs right? You libertarians think the War on Drugs is the root to all of our problems.

          • Chris

            Except that statistically speaking, only black people buy crack.

          • JReynolds79

            That’s not just a “libertarian” position, and its root in free-market capitalism should be a clear signal to the Republican Party that it’s an avenue worth investigating. If you take into account all of the indirect costs associated with this contrived “war,” it becomes readily apparent that we’re fighting a losing battle.

            Since its inception, the quality of drugs has gone up, while price (when adjusted for inflation) has gone down. We’re destroying the futures of at-risk individuals by them for a personal decision that destroys their life and ultimately leaves them in a position they cannot get out of. All the while we’re normalizing the expansion of government under the ruse of “security.” Sound familiar?

            This is an area where we can actually find theoretical common ground. But once again, the idea is marginalized because it doesn’t comply with the static worldview “traditional Republicans” like to impose.

            For being the party of personal freedom, it’s quite ironic that so many of our members prefer to stifle innovative ideas merely because they don’t comply with “the way its always been”-this is why libertarians always bring up the “War on Drugs.” It’s a microcosm of how intellectually exclusive we’ve become.

          • midwestconservative

            I’m not talking about the merits of legalizing drugs, or ending the “War on Drugs”
            I’m talking about the small segment of people who think ending the War on Drugs is the magic bullet that will heal all of the nation’s ills.
            Rand Paul among them. The same people who think if we do this we’ll all of a sudden become super popular among millennials and black people and Latinos.

  • BrianKirwin

    The funniest thing is hearing liberals defend discrimination.

    • Warmac9999

      They scream so loudly they can’t hear the discrimination that comes out of their mouths.

  • MD Russ

    In late-breaking news, A & E just announced that they are canceling “Duck Dynasty.” They are replacing it with a reality show about life in the White House West Wing.

    It is going to be called, “Ducking Responsibility.”