The amount of money someone has doesn't determine their intelligence level. A whole lot of rich idiots out there.

 

That is true. I guess I should have just questioned how you know he is stupid if you've never met him. Just because you don't like his show doesn't mean he is stupid.

Merry Christmas to you too. :lol2:

It was meant to be sarcasm. Sorry.

I form opinions based off information at hand. You know, kind of like you do with your constant negative rantings about Marvin Lewis, Andy Dalton, and every other person associated with the Bengals organization.

 

I'm not going to lie. You are coming off as bad as the people you are criticizing. To not agree with homosexuality does not make one ignorant. Like I've said a million times the whole topic is a non-issue with me because it doesn't affect me. But taking the moral or intellectual high ground over people because of their own beliefs doesn't show much thoughtful thinking on your end either.

Sure, I think it's clear that's part of it. But, again, it seems to me that this show has a much wider appeal.

 

I mean, do they get into the blacks-were-happy-before-welfare stuff on the show? Or about how Nazi's weren't Christians? Or that homosexuality and bestiality are comparable? This is the kind of stuff that would turn off a wider audience and I imagine it is not scripted or it is edited out. So, what I’m saying is that the unvarnished opinions of the Robertson’s might not be so inclusive or beneficial to A&E, even if they are portrayed as wholesome, religious conservatives on the show. And this is the my other point, why is it that these opinions should be taken for granted as being part and parcel of being a wholesome, religious conservative? Aren't these the kind of opinions what conservatives claim liberals unfairly stereotype them as having?

 

Well, I was done posting in this thread until you responded to me & asked questions. And since you are Habib, I guess I'll post once more. :lol2:

 

Some of the other stuff stated in the interview is bizarre. I don't quite know where's coming from on some of it. But the homosexuality issue was the reason given for his suspension; not the other stuff. And I didn't see him comparing homosexuality to bestiality, except to say that be believed both to be sinful--along with "sleeping around with this woman and that woman."

 

I'm not sure of the demographic/audience of Duck Dynasty, but my assumption has always been that it's mostly people who share the passion of faith, outdoors, & humor. In other words, A&E has reached an audience that wants entertainment more family-friendly. I don't believe Robertson's comments will run anyone off & I actually believe that if Phil comes back their ratings will increase (but that is only a guess).

 

I think the stereotyping question, at least from my perspective, is not a problem. If I tell someone I am a social conservative, I am pretty much informing them right there of my beliefs.

I will watch the show either 32.1 or 32.3 percent of the time.

 

:lol2::lol2::lol2:

I form opinions based off information at hand. You know, kind of like you do with your constant negative rantings about Marvin Lewis, Andy Dalton, and every other person associated with the Bengals organization.

Even more proof you know nothing about the things you post about.

 

Being ignorant and a Patriots fan is no way to go through life son.

What good does it do to suppend him. If A&E lets him back on the show they are hypocrites. Are we supposed to believe that after a short absence that he no longer believes that homosexulality is a sin? And since we are going to get all upset with Phil for what he believes, why not the rest of the cast. It would be really naive to think that the majoirty (if not all) of them didn't agree with what Phil has said.

What good does it do to suppend him. If A&E lets him back on the show they are hypocrites. Are we supposed to believe that after a short absence that he no longer believes that homosexulality is a sin? And since we are going to get all upset with Phil for what he believes, why not the rest of the cast. It would be really naive to think that the majoirty (if not all) of them didn't agree with what Phil has said.

 

Of course A&E is hypocritical from a moral standpoint. They are in this for profit, and in that regard they aren't hypocritical. They are suspending him to get in front of the controversy, which will inevitably die down once it cycles out of the news, then they will add him back to the show.

What good does it do to suppend him. If A&E lets him back on the show they are hypocrites. Are we supposed to believe that after a short absence that he no longer believes that homosexulality is a sin? And since we are going to get all upset with Phil for what he believes, why not the rest of the cast. It would be really naive to think that the majoirty (if not all) of them didn't agree with what Phil has said.

Same point I previously brought up. So I guess according to A&E it's ok to think that homosexuality is a sin but you better not say it anywhere....no matter where you are.

Of course A&E is hypocritical from a moral standpoint. They are in this for profit, and in that regard they aren't hypocritical. They are suspending him to get in front of the controversy, which will inevitably die down once it cycles out of the news, then they will add him back to the show.

Pre-emptive damage control.

Sure, I think it's clear that's part of it. But, again, it seems to me that this show has a much wider appeal.

 

I mean, do they get into the blacks-were-happy-before-welfare stuff on the show? Or about how Nazi's weren't Christians? Or that homosexuality and bestiality are comparable? This is the kind of stuff that would turn off a wider audience and I imagine it is not scripted or it is edited out. So, what I’m saying is that the unvarnished opinions of the Robertson’s might not be so inclusive or beneficial to A&E, even if they are portrayed as wholesome, religious conservatives on the show. And this is the my other point, why is it that these opinions should be taken for granted as being part and parcel of being a wholesome, religious conservative? Aren't these the kind of opinions what conservatives claim liberals unfairly stereotype them as having?

 

 

I think fmkyw’s highlights from the interview in post 56 and my reiteration of them in post 73 indicate we are talking about more than simply whether Robertson agrees with homosexuality.

 

I'm confused how saying Nazi's weren't Christian may be offensive? Is there a large Nazi demographic I may not be aware of?

The bestiality people will be taking a stand now and that will cause big problems.:sssh: PETA will get mad and then all hell will break loose.:deadhorse:

 

:popcorn::popcorn::greedy:

This all is the beauty that is Phil Robertson. If he thinks it and chooses to speak it publicly, he feels no need to sugar coat it.

This falls right in line with how he handles every other issue he chooses to comment on whether meaningless or of high importance.

I'm sure if A&E decision makers had been given a blank sheet of paper and was told to write down their opinions of Phil's perspective on this issue, they all could have written spot on, his view. Perhaps not in his exact choice of words, actually, maybe so, but definitely his view nonetheless.

I'm confused how saying Nazi's weren't Christian may be offensive? Is there a large Nazi demographic I may not be aware of?

 

I wouldn't say it's offensive, but it's inaccurate, for one (though I imagine if pressed he would be making the No True Scotsman argument). And more broadly it's a bit of an attempt to whitewash history, particularly by blaming violence and atrocities on non-Christians, which wouldn't stand up to any kind of reason, and is, I think, a fairly contemptible thing to do.

While I understand that one is illegal while the other is legal, I find it funny that we have selective toleration of sexual behavior. If you are a public figure you cannot object to homosexuality without consequences, however, lets suppose that insteand of Phil stating his belief that homosexuality is a sin, that he instead declared that he preferes to sleep with 12 year old girls. Odds are that he would still be off the show, but nobody would be defending or preaching toleraism for his sexual preference.