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

RationalThought

That's how they roll, my friend. But they can never seem to find anything in the Koran worth posting, to point out where the Muslims are getting it all wrong. Hmmm...I wonder why?

I've posted countless times that I find the Koran is just as flawed as Bible, for very similar reasons. I've posted a few times about the specifics. But that doesn't matter when the self-righteous RT brigade gets rolling.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rocketraccoon

 

 

 

I give the Bible a cover to cover read every few years. I know what it says, I just don't believe it to be true. There are plenty of other books I read which I don't take to be true, like Lord of the Rings.

 

 

RationalThought

 

lol. But I'd bet that you see the unity in the elements of The Lord of the Rings that come together to make a complete work of fiction. Not so willing to concede the same for the fictional Bible, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rocketraccoon

I've posted countless times that I find the Koran is just as flawed as Bible, for very similar reasons. I've posted a few times about the specifics. But that doesn't matter when the self-righteous RT brigade gets rolling.

 

 

RationalThought

 

That's right. I am self-righteous in the minds of non-believers. That's OK with me. I will answer for it.

 

Peace. I'm out.

Edited by rocketraccoon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wyn

But that doesn't matter when the self-righteous RT brigade gets rolling.

 

:rofl:

 

You still believe in fat ankles and are trying to make fun of us?

 

Too funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

lol. But I'd bet that you see the unity in the elements of The Lord of the Rings that come together to make a complete work of fiction. Not so willing to concede the same for the fictional Bible, eh?

The Bible started as a great quilted pastiche where the editors took various source materials and spliced them together, much like the Thieves World or Wild Cards books. Then it continues as a chain story where one author takes up after the last author finishes, like the Second Foundation Trilogy by Benford, Bear, and Brin. Finally, it concludes with a carefully selected assortment of pseudepigrapha. It's got so much going on it's wild wonderful wonky mess. The only scriptural reading I've found wilder and wonkier are the Hindu scriptures.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stick

How about you explain what the middle ground happens to be. If it's not ALL, then it's only PART.

 

Being a Christian, for me, is not dependent on everything that's contained in the bible verbatim.

 

Who said anything about liking or disliking Christian beliefs? I'm just pointing out inconsistencies I see and explaining why I find them literally unbelievable.

 

And sit in judgment of Christians stating their beliefs. I don't understand why you feel obligated to tell us all about the inconsistencies you see with Christianity. People are free to believe as they do and your incessant, petty sniping about it does nothing to change anyone's beliefs, so put a sock in it. We get it already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

 

 

And sit in judgment of Christians stating their beliefs. I don't understand why you feel obligated to tell us all about the inconsistencies you see with Christianity. People are free to believe as they do and your incessant, petty sniping about it does nothing to change anyone's beliefs, so put a sock in it. We get it already.

He is obligated because he is one of the enlighten elite. If only we all could possess such clarity, we would understand his intelligence.

 

 

Actually, he is just a self centered know it all dick head. One who has to tell us how enlighten he is, otherwise, how would we know? ;).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

Being a Christian, for me, is not dependent on everything that's contained in the bible verbatim.

Sounds like pick and choose to me.

 

And sit in judgment of Christians stating their beliefs. I don't understand why you feel obligated to tell us all about the inconsistencies you see with Christianity. People are free to believe as they do and your incessant, petty sniping about it does nothing to change anyone's beliefs, so put a sock in it. We get it already.

If Christians tell me and everyone else who believes differently than Christians do are wrong in their current beliefs, they really should expect that they and Christian beliefs will be judged. It's pretty darn arrogant of Christians to get all bent out of shape when people DON'T find their beliefs the greatest, most wonderful, most perfect set of beliefs. Part of the resistance and negative feedback Christians get comes from their evangelical insistence that their beliefs are the uniquely correct ones and everyone else needs to get on board or face the eternal negative consequences. Rabid evangelism and live-and-let-live are contradictory.

 

As I've said many, many, many times, I've got no beef with how anyone believes until they start something with me.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

He is obligated because he is one of the enlighten elite. If only we all could possess such clarity, we would understand his intelligence.

 

 

Actually, he is just a self centered know it all dick head. One who has to tell us how enlighten he is, otherwise, how would we know? ;).

I'm not "obligated" to do anything of the sort. It's Christians who are "obligated" to confront those who believe differently. I post because it entertains me, is educational for me, and helps me craft my writing ability.

 

It's hilarious how bent out of shape certain people are here get from my posts.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

I'm not "obligated" to do anything of the sort. It's Christians who are "obligated" to confront those who believe differently. I post because it entertains me, is educational for me, and helps me craft my writing ability.

 

It's hilarious how bent out of shape certain people are here get from my posts.

 

 

RationalThought

As Wyn often says about you leftist dolts "clueless absolutely clueless." Too funny!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

As Wyn often says about you leftist dolts "clueless absolutely clueless." Too funny!

LOL!

 

Being on the side opposite Wyn is a VERY good sign one is on the correct side.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tea Party Hooligan

Some of them do have screen names simply to read the additional forums. Maybe you've read their posts and never known it.

 

Most of them question why I would ever want to interact with the right-wing members here. Some have even expressed concern for my life given how deranged some of the members of the tribe seem. Their concerns are one of the reasons why only a handful of people here know my real first name, let alone any other details about my life.

 

 

RationalThought

 

 

Yeah, that about sums up the limp-wristed people you hang out with, plus I really like your lame-a$$ed stereotype about "the tribe". Nice try, but many of us have served our country in time of conflict and have more self control and discipline in our toes than you and your limp-wristed ilk have in your whole entire bodies. We, also, have common sense and realize that you aren't worth going to jail over.

 

You're a joke, and a bad one at that.

Edited by Tea Party Hooligan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

LOL!

 

Being on the side opposite Wyn is a VERY good sign one is on the correct side.

 

 

RationalThought

Are you twelve? Just curious because your behavior indicates that you have the mentality of a child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

Yeah, that about sums up the limp-wristed people you hang out with, plus I really like your lame-a$$ed stereotype about "the tribe". Nice try, but many of us have served our country in time of conflict and have more self control and discipline in our toes than you and your limp-wristed ilk have in your whole entire bodies. We, also, have common sense and realize that you aren't worth going to jail over.

 

You're a joke, and a bad one at that.

LOL! I see not engaging me lasted about 10 hours.

 

I'm a veteran as well. I don't doubt many people here have the discipline and self-control you claim. Unfortunately, all it takes is ONE who doesn't.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

Are you twelve? Just curious because your behavior indicates that you have the mentality of a child.

I try to communicate with people in the manner they've exhibited. If someone wants to discuss at an elevated level, I'm game. Go ahead, pick the subject, and we'll have one of those highfalutin intellectual discussions.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
satellite66

I have RT on ignore because he adds nothing in my opinion. All the you have chosen to ignore posts speak volumes about how right I am about that. :biglaugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

I noticed this thread here about Justine Sacco (link).

 

I'm startled the people here on RN aren't condemning HER employer for unfairly firing her for making statements which bring negative attention to the company. Is it really so simple that if people here agree with a person, they should get support, but if they disagree with a person, that person deserves to be fired. I see a lack of principle and a fair amount of hypocrisy comparing the statements on the two threads.

 

 

RationalThought

Edited by RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

I try to communicate with people in the manner they've exhibited. If someone wants to discuss at an elevated level, I'm game. Go ahead, pick the subject, and we'll have one of those highfalutin intellectual discussions.

 

 

RationalThought

So you are twelve. Got it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

I noticed this thread here about Justine Sacco (link).

 

I'm startled the people here on RN aren't condemning HER employer for unfairly firing her for making statements which bring negative attention to the company. Is it really so simple that if people here agree with a person, they should get support, but if they disagree with a person, that person deserves to be fired. I see a lack of principle and a fair amount of hypocrisy comparing the statements on the two threads.

 

 

RationalThought

Give it a rest, child. That is an apples and oranges comparison. Or should I say apple dippers for the intellectually shallow crowd such as yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

Give it a rest, child. That is an apples and oranges comparison. Or should I say apple dippers for the intellectually shallow crowd such as yourself?

LOL!!!! You're the one calling me names and I'm the one whose supposed to be a child. I couldn't make up such hilarity.

 

Of COURSE it's apples and oranges for you. Phil says something which violates the position of the company he works for and people support him because they agree with what he says, protesting his suspension. Justine says something which violates the position of the company she works for and people throw her to the wolves because they disagree with what she said, applauding her firing. If you can't see a lack of consistency and sticking to principle in holding both those positions, I feel very sorry for you.

 

For the record, I support the company in BOTH Phil's and Justine's situation. THAT is having a consistent principle.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fishandchips

I noticed this thread here about Justine Sacco (link).

 

I'm startled the people here on RN aren't condemning HER employer for unfairly firing her for making statements which bring negative attention to the company. Is it really so simple that if people here agree with a person, they should get support, but if they disagree with a person, that person deserves to be fired. I see a lack of principle and a fair amount of hypocrisy comparing the statements on the two threads.

 

 

RationalThought

So you're posing a challenge for members of RN to condemn a foolish woman's employer for what you say is a commensurable action to A&E's expulsion of Phil Robertson. If our members don't condemn both, they're hypocrites.

 

Your analysis is superficial. As you probably know, AIDS is a disease that ravages Africa, and once in the seventies and eighties ravaged gay communities in the United States. If Robertson had made wanton, flippant jokes about gay men suffering from AIDS, he would have been criticized, and rightly so. If he had said, "I hope I don't get AIDS -- oh, never mind, I'm straight!" he could have been ejected from television on legitimate grounds and never would be missed. But, you know as well as I do, that Robertson did nothing like that. He offered a moral opinion in a magazine interview. He did not speak eloquently, but neither did he speak jokingly.

 

Robertson did not do anything comparable to that fool who lost her job over a stupid tweet. But you knew that already, didn't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RationalThought

So you're posing a challenge for members of RN to condemn a foolish woman's employer for what you say is a commensurable action to A&E's expulsion of Phil Robertson. If our members don't condemn both, they're hypocrites.

 

Your analysis is superficial. As you probably know, AIDS is a disease that ravages Africa, and once in the seventies and eighties ravaged gay communities in the United States. If Robertson had made wanton, flippant jokes about gay men suffering from AIDS, he would have been criticized, and rightly so. If he had said, "I hope I don't get AIDS -- oh, never mind, I'm straight!" he could have been ejected from television on legitimate grounds and never would be missed. But, you know as well as I do, that Robertson did nothing like that. He offered a moral opinion in a magazine interview. He did not speak eloquently, but neither did he speak jokingly.

 

Robertson did not do anything comparable to that fool who lost her job over a stupid tweet. But you knew that already, didn't you?

Both people made very public statements which are contradictory to their employer's position. Both deserved dismissal by their employers for doing so. That makes them comparable. Go ahead and parse Clintonian if it makes you feel better to fool yourself.

 

 

RationalThought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fishandchips

Both people made very public statements which are contradictory to their employer's position. Both deserved dismissal by their employers for doing so. That makes them comparable. Go ahead and parse Clintonian if it makes you feel better to fool yourself.

 

 

RationalThought

You see no difference between offering a disapproving opinion of homosexuality and joking about a disease that has killed millions of people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wyn
Being on the side opposite Wyn is a VERY good sign one is on the correct side.

 

:lol3:

 

Yeah, because I believe in fat ankles...wait...

 

Another brave liberal, can talk about me, but not to me.

 

Too funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wyn

You see no difference between offering a disapproving opinion of homosexuality and joking about a disease that has killed millions of people?

 

He doesn't because he believes that Trig Palin is not Sarah Palin's son, but is her daughter's son and his proof positive is that there are no pictures of Sarah Palin with fat ankles.

 

That's the mentality of the guy your dealing with.

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...