Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
Floridamom

Phil Robertson suspended from Duck Dynasty 'indefinitely'

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

De Oppresso Liber

That's what I was looking for.

 

I think his comments are over the top, and his beliefs a bit...puritanical and bigoted, but the title was misleading.

 

Do I think the guy is an ignorant ass? Yeah. But let's call him that for what he did say, and not plant words.

 

 

What did he say that was "ignorant" and "ass-ish"? I genuinely don't understand how you came to that conclusion.

 

 

I guess that makes me a "puritanical and bigoted" ignorant ass too.

 

 

 

I agree with what he said. Doesn't mean I hate gays or disregard their opinions or don't think they may still be good people--and I know you know that. I believe homosexuality is a sin. But then, we all sin. We all fall short in different ways.

 

 

Gotta agree with Floridamom and our Sinister Simian here.

 

What exactly did he say that makes him "Puritanical and bigoted"?

 

In the Bible, the things he mentioned are all sins. He did not once ever say that something should be done against any of those sinning. He even stated it is up to God to sort that out.

 

I am a Christian. I sin constantly. I have nothing against homosexuals, but I would be lying if I said the Bible does not call homosexuality a sin. But I certainly do not judge anyone for it. To each their own.

 

It is the sinner that has to square with God. They don't have to square with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kommiefornia escapee

How can they be "hillbillies" when there aren't any hills down on the Louisiana bayous and woods where they live? Heck they even refer to themselves as "rednecks". Some sheeple sure do not know the difference. What pissed off the gays was that ol' Phil suggested that most men find a woman's vagina preferable to another man's anus. He's just not inbred enough to be one of those banjo strumming hillbillies from "Deliverance" for some groups. But hey, there's always Runny Poo Poo and her clan! :puke:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13

Oh, but he does know about gay people, especially the ones who go ballistic over anyone daring to criticize them for anything or say that it's wrong in his religious views and they demand that be fired.

 

He should have known that he was going to baited by the questions that they had asked him. These types live to take down Christians or anyone or any institution that has morals and to force their ways upon everyone else.

 

He's a multi-millionaire and he'll be just fine without that show or A & E and their gutlessness to political correctness.

 

If I were the rest of the family, I'd refuse to do anymore shows and let A & E lose hundreds of millions more dollars to prove a point and to back my father.

 

The GLAAD spokesman is a liar in claiming that he knows true Christian's beliefs.

 

Latest headline is that Phil has been fired from the show.

 

I am betting the whole show gets picked up by CMT once contracts are fulfilled.

 

Supposedly, an entire season is already filmed and already in process. I assume they might try to edit them so he doesn't appear in the show.

 

I watched an entire episode for the first time last night......after purchasing his book on kindle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Effectively, what we have is a minority of an already small minority dictating to the vast majority.

 

Nothing he said was hateful, insulting, vile, threatening, or otherwise bad. Yet this minority of a minority who are so insecure that they have to make everything about where they put their penises or their tongues make a clamor and the majority caves in to them. I really, REALLY despise PC.

 

That being said, this is not a "Free Speech" issue. A&E is a business and they have the right to run their business as they see fit. They are not preventing him from saying what he wants, only preventing him from being associated with A&E if he is going to say it. I personally hopes this bites them in their PC caving into whiney "victims" butts, but it is their choice.

I agree that they SHOULD have the right to run their business as they see fit, but apparently America is changing.

 

If a baker can be forced against his belief system to bake a cake for a gay wedding, why can't a TV studio be forced against their belief system to film a guy who expressed his opinion in one interview?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13

If only he had added one word to his statement. Allah. He should have said God and allah say it's a sin.

No controversy then.

 

 

 

Hellish perverted evil demons at A&E.

 

If Robertson had said that he found a man's anus more sexually appealing than a woman's vagina, he would be GLAAD's Person of The Year and would have his place on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.

 

 

You guys have both nailed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

I agree that they SHOULD have the right to run their business as they see fit, but apparently America is changing.

 

If a baker can be forced against his belief system to bake a cake for a gay wedding, why can't a TV studio be forced against their belief system to film a guy who expressed his opinion in one interview?

You are correct. However, you have to be a super-minority protected class to have your personal viewpoint foisted on the rest of society. That is why I said I hate PC. The only reason PC even exists is because the majority has become too pussified to simply say "STFU. You want to smoke a pole? Smoke a pole, I don't care. But STFU about it and don't expect me to celebrate your pole smoking or bake a cake commemorating your pole smoking if pole smoking is against my religious my religious convictions."

 

Would anyone sue a baker for not baking a cake glorifying serial adultery, murder, theft, alcoholism, or pedophelia...which are also all sins according to the Bible? I don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator T

I agree that they SHOULD have the right to run their business as they see fit, but apparently America is changing.

 

If a baker can be forced against his belief system to bake a cake for a gay wedding, why can't a TV studio be forced against their belief system to film a guy who expressed his opinion in one interview?

Because some beliefs are more equal than others. Only those beliefs that are popular and approved of by the left are deserving of special protections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mrdirt73

In the Bible, the things he mentioned are all sins. He did not once ever say that something should be done against any of those sinning. He even stated it is up to God to sort that out.

 

I am a Christian. I sin constantly. I have nothing against homosexuals, but I would be lying if I said the Bible does not call homosexuality a sin. But I certainly do not judge anyone for it. To each their own.

 

It is the sinner that has to square with God. They don't have to square with me.

 

This pretty much sums up how I feel. I'm to the point where I'm sick of seeing posts from people vulgarly describing homosexual acts in their attempt to show how horrible the gays are and then the next week they're posting articles about the latest hollywood starlet in a see through dress and including a smilie emoticon with it's tongue hanging out. Apparently some people believe that if it's a heterosexual sin then God will turn his back and pretend not to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ilja

How much longer will I be able to keep my job without signing a document declaring I do not own any non-state-approved Bibles?

Edited by ilja

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. E. Monkey

This article nailed it.

 

:2up:

Knocked it out of the park. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

That being said, this is not a "Free Speech" issue. A&E is a business and they have the right to run their business as they see fit. They are not preventing him from saying what he wants, only preventing him from being associated with A&E if he is going to say it. I personally hopes this bites them in their PC caving into whiney "victims" butts, but it is their choice.

I agree with you 100% (except for that last part about butt-biting).

 

As soon as someone starts bleating about the First Amendment and Free Speech having ANYTHING to do with Robertson's removal, I have to write them off as ignorant at best. Unless the GOVERNMENT takes action against an individual, the First Amendment and Free Speech is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

I would be absolutely shocked if A&E did not have written into every contract signed a right to suspend or dismiss a person who brings negative attention to A&E, as solely determined by A&E. I would imagine that the Robertsons can afford good legal council which would not want to go into court against such a contract.

 

A&E is a network by snooty cultured liberals, for snooty cultured liberals. Their advertisers try to reach such an audience and would not want to advertise on a network which stood by what Robertson said. The removal of Phil from the show is entirely a business move.

 

:popcorn:

 

 

RationalThought

 

ETA: If there is so much money to be made in entertainment pandering to conservatives, why among the THOUSANDS of TV networks is the not a conservative entertainment channel? You'd think if enough money is there to be made, someone (Murdock perhaps?) would have started one already.

Edited by RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AnnieGotHerGun

ETA: If there is so much money to be made in entertainment pandering to conservatives, why among the THOUSANDS of TV networks is the not a conservative entertainment channel? You'd think if enough money is there to be made, someone (Murdock perhaps?) would have started one already.

Try the 'Up' channel, channel 338 on Direct TV here in our area. And maybe there are not more family friendly channels because so many Christian families stay away from the TV more often than not. Just a thought...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Severian

This isn't the first time the media and leftists, redundant I know, have tried to take the Duck guys and Phil Robertson down. A while ago someone found footage of him preaching, with a strong Christian sermon and against abortion, saying basically what happened to this country? How did we go off the rails. It didn't resonate much, not enough outrage generated to matter. So, now they are making another go at it using gays instead of abortion to try and discredit him and the show. Make no mistake, the fact that these guys pray, have intact and apparently normal and loving families, and hunt and are big into firearms and self sufficiency can't be allowed to stand. They are good examples, with no traits in common with the progressive utopia, so they must be discredited and driven off the air lest the hoi polloi get the wrong ideas.

Edited by Severian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee

Phil was looking for a way out and it looks like he's found it. It'll be interesting to see what the family does. Do they stick to their values or kowtow to A&E for money? I heard that Jace and Jeb want out as well, especially since Jace's son was contemplating suicide for a while over the show.

 

Yeah, I'll buy that.

 

Been there myself on some industrial projects. I have NEVER walked off a project. I have NEVER done anything less than my best, from an engineering/technical standpoint. But there have DEFINITELY been some projects where, as time goes on, my PR skills slip, to the point where I really don't care who I piss off or even if I get kicked off the project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brah

A&E knew what they were getting with Duck Dynasty and the only reason they've acted is because the usual hypocrites cried fowl.. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilmerfan

How much longer will I be able to keep my job without signing a document declaring I do not own any non-state-approved Bibles?

Catch 22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. E. Monkey

A&E knew what they were getting with Duck Dynasty and the only reason they've acted is because the usual hypocrites cried fowl.. <_<

You quack me up, Brah. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

I agree with you 100% (except for that last part about butt-biting).

 

As soon as someone starts bleating about the First Amendment and Free Speech having ANYTHING to do with Robertson's removal, I have to write them off as ignorant at best. Unless the GOVERNMENT takes action against an individual, the First Amendment and Free Speech is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

I would be absolutely shocked if A&E did not have written into every contract signed a right to suspend or dismiss a person who brings negative attention to A&E, as solely determined by A&E. I would imagine that the Robertsons can afford good legal council which would not want to go into court against such a contract.

 

A&E is a network by snooty cultured liberals, for snooty cultured liberals. Their advertisers try to reach such an audience and would not want to advertise on a network which stood by what Robertson said. The removal of Phil from the show is entirely a business move.

 

:popcorn:

 

 

RationalThought

 

ETA: If there is so much money to be made in entertainment pandering to conservatives, why among the THOUSANDS of TV networks is the not a conservative entertainment channel? You'd think if enough money is there to be made, someone (Murdock perhaps?) would have started one already.

Wow. Nothing I disagree with here.

 

While I disagree with the decision to remove him for what he said...I don't think that they should have taken the measure to satisfy the personal victimhood of a minority of an already small minority that wants to force their views on the rest of society...it was their decision to make.

 

But, as I disagree with the decision and the reason for the decision, I do hope it ends up being a BAD business decision and that it ends up costing them. They may be snooty cultured liberals catering to snooty cultured liberals, but they had a show that was not snooty and not cultured and was immensely popular. It would seem to me that the "snooty cultured liberal" agenda became more important than the business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gertie Keddle

A&E knew what they were getting with Duck Dynasty and the only reason they've acted is because the usual hypocrites cried fowl.. <_<

 

Maybe not.

 

Duck Dynasty: The Show That Got Away

 

by Pat Archbold Thursday, December 19, 2013 11:58 AM

NC Register

Excerpt:

 

After A&E fired Phil Robertson for saying what every good Christian should believe, social media has been abuzz. One of the recurring themes has been puzzlement about why A&E would cut off its nose to spite its face. Duck Dynasty is the franchise right now. Why would they risk destroying their own cash cow?

 

To understand the why, we have to go back to the beginning. Duck Dynasty is not the show that they wanted, it is the show that got away from them.

 

It seems what the producers intended and what A&E envisioned with the show is much different than the show that they ended up with, but they didn't do anything about it because it was so wildly popular and so wildly profitable. But even with all the money, they have never really been comfortable with what happened.

 

This is what happened. The whole idea of the show was to parade these nouveau riche Christian hillbillies around so that we could laugh at them. "Look at them," we were supposed to say. "Look how backward they are! Look what they believe! Can you believe they really live this way and believe this stuff? See how they don't fit in? HAHAHA"

 

When the producers saw the way the show was shaping up, different than they envisioned it, they tried to change course. They tried to get the Robertson's to tone down their Christianity, but to their eternal credit they refused. They tried to add fake cussin' to the show by inserting bleeps where no cussword was uttered. At best, they wanted to make the Robertson's look like crass buffoons. At worst they wanted them to look like hypocrites.

 

They desperately wanted us to laugh at the Robertsons. Instead, we loved them.

 

A&E wanted us to point fingers at them and laugh at them. But something else happened entirely. Millions upon millions of people tuned in, not to laugh at them, but to laugh with them.

 

And then we pointed at them. We pointed at them and said things like, "I wish my family was more like them. I wish we prayed together as a family. I wish we were together like the Robertsons."

 

By the time this all happened, A&E had a conundrum. They knew who the Robertsons were and what they believe and they still held it in disdain. But they really liked the money. Really liked the money. So they lived with it.

 

But the progressives whose bank accounts were not growing fatter because of these backward rubes were never inclined to look the other way. They hate the show and they really hate the response to the show. They want it destroyed.

 

Many magazines and interviewers have tried to get the Robertsons to trip up so they could pounce. When Phil backed the Christian viewpoint on homosexuality and added some personal asides about how he just couldn't understand it, they had their moment.

 

Article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

Well, A&E can go sh!t in the weeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

Wow. Nothing I disagree with here.

 

While I disagree with the decision to remove him for what he said...I don't think that they should have taken the measure to satisfy the personal victimhood of a minority of an already small minority that wants to force their views on the rest of society...it was their decision to make.

 

But, as I disagree with the decision and the reason for the decision, I do hope it ends up being a BAD business decision and that it ends up costing them. They may be snooty cultured liberals catering to snooty cultured liberals, but they had a show that was not snooty and not cultured and was immensely popular. It would seem to me that the "snooty cultured liberal" agenda became more important than the business.

Ultimately it comes down to dollars, as does everything in the corporate world.

 

In the case of A&E, it's about advertising dollars, not just during the Duck Dynasty (DD) show, but for the network 24/7. The challenge for A&E executives, as for all other corporate businesses, is to maximize revenue and minimize cost. Cost is one reason why DD and other reality TV shows get produced, they are dirt cheap to create. On the revenue side, a popular innocuous DD is a huge plus for A&E, but a DD mired in controversy and losing advertising dollars for A&E on OTHER shows on the network quickly becomes a liability and a drain on A&E's bottom line.

 

If conservatives want to impact the entertainment industry, the best way to do so is through advertising dollars. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tea Party Hooligan

I agree with you 100% (except for that last part about butt-biting).

 

As soon as someone starts bleating about the First Amendment and Free Speech having ANYTHING to do with Robertson's removal, I have to write them off as ignorant at best. Unless the GOVERNMENT takes action against an individual, the First Amendment and Free Speech is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

I would be absolutely shocked if A&E did not have written into every contract signed a right to suspend or dismiss a person who brings negative attention to A&E, as solely determined by A&E. I would imagine that the Robertsons can afford good legal council which would not want to go into court against such a contract.

 

A&E is a network by snooty cultured liberals, for snooty cultured liberals. Their advertisers try to reach such an audience and would not want to advertise on a network which stood by what Robertson said. The removal of Phil from the show is entirely a business move.

 

:popcorn:

 

 

RationalThought

 

ETA: If there is so much money to be made in entertainment pandering to conservatives, why among the THOUSANDS of TV networks is the not a conservative entertainment channel? You'd think if enough money is there to be made, someone (Murdock perhaps?) would have started one already.

 

Well, to be clear, progressives don't like that people are fed up with their bs, that's why they start whining about a "right wing media bias", even though there is only 1 news channel that is conservative (Fox), yet it constantly kicks the crap out of all the progressive news channels combined. That's a fact, not an opinion. Then, we have radio, where conservative talk radio has demolished the progressives for a couple of decades, now, and at one point, they created their own network (scAir Amerika) that was going to bring down conservative talk radio. How did that work our for them? Since they can't win in the realm of ideas, they want to make government do their dirty work, that's why they keep trying to revive the "Fairness Doctrine", so that they can control the amount of free speech coming from the right. In the arena of tv/movies, it's no secret that most all of it is controlled by progressives, yet when programs, or movies come out with a conservative Christian message to them, they are huge draws at the box office and ratings on tv. Maybe there does need to be a conservative network, but then, when the other networks start losing share, they will whine to the government to control the conservative network, anyway.

 

Gays already have their own channel (LOGO), Blacks have theirs (BET), a dedicated progressive channel (Current), etc., plus all the usual networks and channels. Same with film companies. As others have said UP is a good start, but there can be more done with it, or add another channel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

Try the 'Up' channel, channel 338 on Direct TV here in our area. And maybe there are not more family friendly channels because so many Christian families stay away from the TV more often than not. Just a thought...

I see plenty of "family friendly" channels which I would not term "conservative": the family of Disney channels, ABC Family, Hallmark, etc. Each of those channels run programming at times with messages that run counter the message I've seen conservatives espouse here.

 

I had not heard of "Up", but it seems to be the reconstituted GospelTV channel. The channel seems to be repackaged syndicated shows no longer in production. Running less popular syndicated shows is very cheap compared to producing new shows. Where are all the new shows in production aimed squarely at conservatives?

 

Let's compare two movies, one aimed at liberals and one aimed at conservatives: Fahrenheit 9/11 and An American Carol. F 9/11 cost $6 million to make and had box office receipts of almost over $220 million worldwide for a return of $216 million on that initial $6 million. An American Carol cost twice as much as F 9/11 to make, $12 million, and had box office receipts of $7 million for a return of -$5 million on the $12 million investment. From a business standpoint, when Moore and Zucker (the writer/director of An American Carol) go to get financing for their next movie, why would any financier turn down Moore, or give Zucker any money?

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Severian

Ultimately it comes down to dollars, as does everything in the corporate world.

 

In the case of A&E, it's about advertising dollars, not just during the Duck Dynasty (DD) show, but for the network 24/7. The challenge for A&E executives, as for all other corporate businesses, is to maximize revenue and minimize cost. Cost is one reason why DD and other reality TV shows get produced, they are dirt cheap to create. On the revenue side, a popular innocuous DD is a huge plus for A&E, but a DD mired in controversy and losing advertising dollars for A&E on OTHER shows on the network quickly becomes a liability and a drain on A&E's bottom line.

 

If conservatives want to impact the entertainment industry, the best way to do so is through advertising dollars. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

 

 

RationalThought

Don't ever underestimate the amount of pettiness, vindictiveness, and backstabbing present in the "entertainment" industry. There are many, many examples of shows and movies that were deliberately stifled by studio heads or producers all because of bias against the person shopping the idea, even if it cost the studio big time in lost profit from what would have been a good selling film or show. Read "The Battle For Brazil" for just one example.

 

It is completely believable to me that the powers that be in A&E/Disney found to their chagrin that Duck Dynasty wasn't working out the way they wanted, it was getting sympathetic viewers for an entire way of life they detest and deride, instead of turning these folk and their ways into objects of ridicule like Honey Boo Boo. And that being the case, they would kill it in any way they could. If they can't contractually do it, why, let's just gin up a controversy that makes the hicks look bad. Only problem is it once again backfired, which is what you'd expect given how well these types of people really understand most Americans and their culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tea Party Hooligan

I see plenty of "family friendly" channels which I would not term "conservative": the family of Disney channels, ABC Family, Hallmark, etc. Each of those channels run programming at times with messages that run counter the message I've seen conservatives espouse here.

 

I had not heard of "Up", but it seems to be the reconstituted GospelTV channel. The channel seems to be repackaged syndicated shows no longer in production. Running less popular syndicated shows is very cheap compared to producing new shows. Where are all the new shows in production aimed squarely at conservatives?

 

Let's compare two movies, one aimed at liberals and one aimed at conservatives: Fahrenheit 9/11 and An American Carol. F 9/11 cost $6 million to make and had box office receipts of almost over $220 million worldwide for a return of $216 million on that initial $6 million. An American Carol cost twice as much as F 9/11 to make, $12 million, and had box office receipts of $7 million for a return of -$5 million on the $12 million investment. From a business standpoint, when Moore and Zucker (the writer/director of An American Carol) go to get financing for their next movie, why would any financier turn down Moore, or give Zucker any money?

 

 

RationalThought

 

 

You're comparing apples to oranges. You take a fake documentary and compare it to a spoof movie about the creator of the fake documentary and then challenge the results. Talk about disengenuous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...