Reply
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 11/04/2012
Online
1496 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

Dec 30, 2013

And remember kids, the only thing that trumps the moral decision is money and ratings!  Congrats A&E

doc shady signature
Message 211 of 236 (121 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 10/02/2008
Online
14161 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

Dec 30, 2013

docshady wrote:

And remember kids, the only thing that trumps the moral decision is money and ratings!  Congrats A&E


Considering a corporate entity is there to only make money and not make moral decisions for the nation, it is perfectly fine. And then you have the bigger question of what makes it more moral than the opposite argument. Then you have a fight with your main audience. then you lose money. If there is one thing that is worse for a corporation than not making more money, it is losing money.


Welcoming Committee- "The business of gaming is business"
Message 212 of 236 (119 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 12/21/2007
Online
50475 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

[ Edited ]
Dec 30, 2013

docshady wrote:

And remember kids, the only thing that trumps the moral decision is money and ratings!  Congrats A&E


Ah but which morals?   This is what I get a kick out of on this topic.

 

"Tolerance".   People want to say they are tolerant yet wont tolerate anyone whom disagrees with their position.   (you can apply this to the duck dynasty guy's comments about the gay people or you can apply this to people's reaction to his expression of religion, hence my "kick")

 

So is it tolerance if you silence someone's opinion because you feel it is intolerant of something you support?   Whoa watch out for hypocricy :smileytongue:

 

 

 

 

Message 213 of 236 (118 Views)
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 11/04/2012
Online
1496 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

Dec 30, 2013

PLYMCO_PILGRIM wrote:

docshady wrote:

And remember kids, the only thing that trumps the moral decision is money and ratings!  Congrats A&E


Ah but which morals?   This is what I get a kick out of on this topic.

 

"Tolerance".   People want to say they are tolerant yet wont tolerate anyone whom disagrees with their position.   (you can apply this to the duck dynasty guy's comments about the gay people or you can apply this to people's reaction to his expression of religion, hence my "kick")

 

So is it tolerance if you silence someone's opinion because you feel it is intolerant of something you support?   Whoa watch out for hypocricy :smileytongue:

 

 

 

 


Robertsons comments constitute hate speech.  Had he said that he simply doesn't agree with the LGBT lifestyle, that would have been fine, lots of people don't agree with it.  But he took it to another level and likened it to having sex with an animal which is where he went wrong.  

 

He took the gays and compared their lifestyle to a dirty and illegal act.  That was not needed.  There's a line in the sand between opinion and hate speech and Phil crossed it.  Any religion that considers this moral doesn't deserve me as a member of their church.  Religion needs to pull their heads out of their dark age **bleep** and realize that the world is changing, with or without them.  A&E's decision was based off ratings and money.

 

Would I be a hypocrite if it was 1939 and I support the Jews?  Would I be a hypocrite if it was the 50's and I supported the African Americans in the civil rights movement?  I would have been then but not now.  Hopefully we'll look back at this period of time 50 years from now and be glad that hate and intolerance such as demonstrated by Phil Robertson is a thing of the past just like him.

doc shady signature
Message 214 of 236 (99 Views)
Wastelander
Registered: 10/09/2013
Offline
573 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

Dec 30, 2013

PLYMCO_PILGRIM wrote:

bob-maul wrote:

taker-77 wrote:
lol, poor AMC. Stuck between the LGBT and the Christians. It's just so hard to appease everyone.

A&E*

 

And I think they should have picked the Christians on this one. Mainly because that is their entire viewing audience for the show. Nobody watching Storage Wars would know or care what a backwoods guy says about homosexuality (or what this gay watchdog group says). But since they picked a side contrary to their viewership, they caused a major problem. 


A&E, like crackerbarrel, misread their revenue base.  Now that both know the majority of their revenue comes from the people of the majority faith in this nation they wont make the same mistake again. 


This was a great move for publicity though!

 


their main revenue from duck dynasty*. they have shows that cater to a few different demographics.

ferguson is a weird name for an iraqi village
Message 215 of 236 (95 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Wastelander
Registered: 10/09/2013
Offline
573 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

Dec 30, 2013

docshady wrote:

And remember kids, the only thing that trumps the moral decision is money and ratings!  Congrats A&E


my thoughts exactly, but bob's right that a&e isn't out to define morals, they're out to make money.

ferguson is a weird name for an iraqi village
Message 216 of 236 (91 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 10/08/2009
Offline
4918 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

[ Edited ]
Dec 31, 2013

docshady wrote:

PLYMCO_PILGRIM wrote:

docshady wrote:

And remember kids, the only thing that trumps the moral decision is money and ratings!  Congrats A&E


Ah but which morals?   This is what I get a kick out of on this topic.

 

"Tolerance".   People want to say they are tolerant yet wont tolerate anyone whom disagrees with their position.   (you can apply this to the duck dynasty guy's comments about the gay people or you can apply this to people's reaction to his expression of religion, hence my "kick")

 

So is it tolerance if you silence someone's opinion because you feel it is intolerant of something you support?   Whoa watch out for hypocricy :smileytongue:

 

 

 

 


Robertsons comments constitute hate speech.  Had he said that he simply doesn't agree with the LGBT lifestyle, that would have been fine, lots of people don't agree with it.  But he took it to another level and likened it to having sex with an animal which is where he went wrong.  

 

He took the gays and compared their lifestyle to a dirty and illegal act.  That was not needed.  There's a line in the sand between opinion and hate speech and Phil crossed it.  Any religion that considers this moral doesn't deserve me as a member of their church.  Religion needs to pull their heads out of their dark age **bleep** and realize that the world is changing, with or without them.  A&E's decision was based off ratings and money.

 

Would I be a hypocrite if it was 1939 and I support the Jews?  Would I be a hypocrite if it was the 50's and I supported the African Americans in the civil rights movement?  I would have been then but not now.  Hopefully we'll look back at this period of time 50 years from now and be glad that hate and intolerance such as demonstrated by Phil Robertson is a thing of the past just like him.


I assume you are referring to bestiality?

 

You should probably be aware that by your definition, you just committed "hate speech". Bestiality (or zoophilia, which is apparently the more accurate term) is actually perfectly legal in a (disturbingly) decent amount of states and merely a misdemeanors in most others. There is also no federal law that prohibits it. Yet you seem to be declaring zoophiles "dirty and illegal" despite the fact that the former is slander and the latter is inaccurate. Now, you condemn Robertson for "hate speech" against  gays, yet you okay with doing the same to those who engage in this activity. Is this "hate speech" okay so long as it is socially acceptable to hate on that group? 

 

Please don't think I'm advocating bestiality. In my opinion it is wrong and there should be a federal law against it. I write this only to illustrate a point. Where is the line drawn and who decides it? Deciding merely on the knee jerk reaction of the general public is dangerous as the public is often misinformed. In this case, I'd be willing to wager a large sum that most of the offended people have not read the entire article and have only read out out of context quotes if anything at all. We should also use caution when dealing with the group in question, as they can hardly be considered unbiased and may take things harder than the accused intended.

 

I think the solution lies in tolerance. Not the modern, tolerate everyone but the intolerant, tolerance, but actually, mind your own darn business, tolerance. By definition, in order to tolerate something, you must first not like/agree with it. In a situation like this one, where a man was asked his opinion and gave it honestly, I believe we must all practice a bit of this tolerance. When you get right down to it, Robertson wasn't actually advocating any sort of action that would be harmful to the LGBT community. He wasn't suggesting passing laws against them or putting them into death camps. He merely stated his opinion when solicited.

Message 217 of 236 (74 Views)
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 10/02/2008
Online
14161 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

Dec 31, 2013

taker-77 wrote:

docshady wrote:

PLYMCO_PILGRIM wrote:

docshady wrote:

And remember kids, the only thing that trumps the moral decision is money and ratings!  Congrats A&E


Ah but which morals?   This is what I get a kick out of on this topic.

 

"Tolerance".   People want to say they are tolerant yet wont tolerate anyone whom disagrees with their position.   (you can apply this to the duck dynasty guy's comments about the gay people or you can apply this to people's reaction to his expression of religion, hence my "kick")

 

So is it tolerance if you silence someone's opinion because you feel it is intolerant of something you support?   Whoa watch out for hypocricy :smileytongue:

 

 

 

 


Robertsons comments constitute hate speech.  Had he said that he simply doesn't agree with the LGBT lifestyle, that would have been fine, lots of people don't agree with it.  But he took it to another level and likened it to having sex with an animal which is where he went wrong.  

 

He took the gays and compared their lifestyle to a dirty and illegal act.  That was not needed.  There's a line in the sand between opinion and hate speech and Phil crossed it.  Any religion that considers this moral doesn't deserve me as a member of their church.  Religion needs to pull their heads out of their dark age **bleep** and realize that the world is changing, with or without them.  A&E's decision was based off ratings and money.

 

Would I be a hypocrite if it was 1939 and I support the Jews?  Would I be a hypocrite if it was the 50's and I supported the African Americans in the civil rights movement?  I would have been then but not now.  Hopefully we'll look back at this period of time 50 years from now and be glad that hate and intolerance such as demonstrated by Phil Robertson is a thing of the past just like him.


I assume you are referring to bestiality?

 

You should probably be aware that by your definition, you just committed "hate speech". Bestiality (or zoophilia, which is apparently the more accurate term) is actually perfectly legal in a (disturbingly) decent amount of states and merely a misdemeanors in most others. There is also no federal law that prohibits it. Yet you seem to be declaring zoophiles "dirty and illegal" despite the fact that the former is slander and the latter is inaccurate. Now, you condemn Robertson for "hate speech" against  gays, yet you okay with doing the same to those who engage in this activity. Is this "hate speech" okay so long as it is socially acceptable to hate on that group? 

 

Please don't think I'm advocating bestiality. In my opinion it is wrong and there should be a federal law against it. I write this only to illustrate a point. Where is the line drawn and who decides it? Deciding merely on the knee jerk reaction of the general public is dangerous as the public is often misinformed. In this case, I'd be willing to wager a large sum that most of the offended people have not read the entire article and have only read out out of context quotes if anything at all. We should also use caution when dealing with the group in question, as they can hardly be considered unbiased and may take things harder than the accused intended.

 

I think the solution lies in tolerance. Not the modern, tolerate everyone but the intolerant, tolerance, but actually, mind your own darn business, tolerance. By definition, in order to tolerate something, you must first not like/agree with it. In a situation like this one, where a man was asked his opinion and gave it honestly, I believe we must all practice a bit of this tolerance. When you get right down to it, Robertson wasn't actually advocating any sort of action that would be harmful to the LGBT community. He wasn't suggesting passing laws against them or putting them into death camps. He merely stated his opinion when solicited.


This was a perfect answer. And, like you were getting at with context, he did not say homosexuality was just like bestiality. That is using it out of context. He said it is a SIN like bestiality and other sexual deviations. He did not say they are the same thing. He said they fall under one category. 


Welcoming Committee- "The business of gaming is business"
Message 218 of 236 (69 Views)
Wastelander
Registered: 10/09/2013
Offline
573 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

Dec 31, 2013
so now that that's out of the way, how exactly was this an infringement of his first amendment rights? i still want somebody to explain. that somebody to, preferably, be setz since he made the ludicrous claim.
ferguson is a weird name for an iraqi village
Message 219 of 236 (65 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 05/09/2006
Online
5944 posts
 

Re: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson on Indefinite Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks

Dec 31, 2013
It isnt. First amendment protect from goverment censorship.

People just think free speech means you can say whatever you want and not be reprimanded for it.
 photo newforumsig_zps5ec69817.png
Message 220 of 236 (60 Views)