Duck Dynasty

[Elizabeth619]

The 1st Amendment does not protect ALL speech.

Examples:
Hate Speech- The Supreme Court ruled The Westboro Baptist Church's protests are legal. So if the WBC is covered under the 1st Amendment then why wasn't Phil for quoting what the bible said. When he compared homosexuality to beastiality he was not wrong in doing so. The bible is clear both are sinful, and both are unnatural. People can argue homosexuality is natural, but never has two people of the same sex been able to procreate on their own without a 3rd person of the opposite sex. Therefore it is unnatural.

Speech that encourages violence- Nowhere did Phil encourage harm or violence on any individual.

Material Support Phil has never given any type of advice, funds, or items towards any terrorist groups.

Violation of privacy like HIPPA Everyone knows in America you can get fired for this, and this doesn't really apply to the topic here.

Slander, Defamation, and Libel Phil slandered no one. He spoke his mind.

Publishing copyrighted/legal material Again, he isn't guilty of this

True Threats Phil threatened no one.

 

[st_sebastian]

I wonder if I could more plainly state that questions about the 1st Amendment are not pertinent here?

He was fired, not jailed. He was not prevented from free assembly. He's not a member of the press.

He got removed from a job by the boss, not by Congress.

The 1st Amendment is as pertinent as the 75th (and yes, I know).

 

[Elizabeth619]

I wonder if I could more plainly state that questions about the 1st Amendment are not pertinent here?

He was fired, not jailed. He was not prevented from free assembly. He's not a member of the press.

He got removed from a job by the boss, not by Congress.

The 1st Amendment is as pertinent as the 75th (and yes, I know).

All I stated was what free speech doesn't cover, and where he is innocent. Where did I say he was wrongfully suspended?

 

[st_sebastian]

All I stated was what free speech doesn't cover, and where he is innocent. Where did I say he was wrongfully suspended?

So let's just be clear - you type up or copy-paste a list showing why the exceptions to the 1st Amendment don't apply, then want us not to conclude the 1st Amendment has anything to do with this question? You're not trying to imply anything?

This is just an exercise in showing why certain laws don't apply to this case? Should we also discuss the exceptions to the 5th amendment and why they don't apply to this case? Why not?

 

[p_rehbein]

They didn't. They fired him for giving interviews about his religious beliefs and comments on race in Louisiana (my home) before and after giving welfare and entitlements to black people, before which (he reports) they were happy and godly.

Of course no pre-civil rights black person complained about white people in front of a white person.

Nobody infringed on his right to hold or practice his religion. But they did say he ought not have done an interview, said those things, and expected to keep a job.

Your logic is asinine.............

 

[Elizabeth619]

So let's just be clear - you type up or copy-paste a list showing why the exceptions to the 1st Amendment don't apply, then want us not to conclude the 1st Amendment has anything to do with this question? You're not trying to imply anything?

This is just an exercise in showing why certain laws don't apply to this case? Should we also discuss the exceptions to the 5th amendment and why they don't apply to this case? Why not?

I was actually responding the the OP. Not anything to do with your posts which is pretty much full of intent to argue. Yes, a boss can fire you if they don't like what you say. It may not be fair. It may be inappropriate, but they still can.

What I did was speak strictly on what it does not cover. You are free to assume anything you want or what you THINK I was trying to imply if that makes you feel good then have at it.

 

[p_rehbein]

Can we be clear that there's more going on in that interview than just talking about gay people?



To claim that no one was singing the blues before the civil rights movement is going to raise a couple eyebrows. To claim that people were happy because they didn't complain to a white person about white people is just weird.

Why are we focusing on the anti-gay remarks? Does the guy get a pass on the rest of it because he said some anti-gay things too?

SPEAKING OF HYPOCRICY..........well, here it is.........HE ONLY spoke to HIS LIFE EXPERIENCE growing up, NOT THE ENTIRE NATION.............and WHAT he said about the blacks he grew up with was in no way offensive.............get off your socialist liberal soap box and find another ax to grind.............your asinine commentary shows you have no understanding of the generation/location Phil grew up in.............give it a rest...........

 

[The_highwayman]

As an example of why you're misinterpreting free speech, I'm going to curse at you for just a bit: ***** * ******** ** ****** ****! ***** * *** ** *** ****!?! ****. ** ***** **** *******. ******* **** 17 ***!

Now, if I get banned, is that right or wrong? Does the first amendment apply here? I don't think it does apply here, because the Constitution or its amendments never promised me that I'd be able to stay on CC. Christian Chat is free to determine who can stay or go and at no point can government step in and tell CC to either keep me or ban me. The first amendment is not remotely applicable here.

Now, if CC were accepting government money, then it could make rules. Last time I checked (and like you, I'm just making this up, because I didn't ever ask the mods), they don't take government money.

In the very same way, the Constitution and its amendments never promise that you can say whatever you want and keep your job. That is up to your employer.

If you think free speech means everything, then it means nothing.

Slow down and take a breath....Phil expressed his PERSONAL opinions to a GQ writer not on a show or under A&E authority.

In reality A&E has no authority to tell the man what his or not what his PERSONAL opinions are, while not taping a show or under A&E Authority.

Furthermore lets face facts, why should A&E be so surprised....

 

[Fenner]

I am sure GQ Magazine set him up to maybe gain more subscribers??? Media does this stuff all the time. It's lame and wish it would stop but it won't. I've never watched Duck Dynasty and I probably never will, so I have no clue what he said in this interview, but this was clearly blown out of proportion.

 

[Elizabeth619]

I think it is more like a Deja Vu of Paula Deen. She was slammed for a while. Had her producted removed from retailers and now she is back in business and her skillets are back at WalMart

 

[ChosenbyHim]

The people these days who cry out the most for "tolerance," are the most hypocrital, bigoted, and intolerant people on the face of this earth. The religious left-wing liberals, which not surprisingly, are the ones who are always screaming for "tolerance" are doing that just so that we Christians will "tolerate" their wicked, filthy, and sin-filled lifestyle.


Also, ever notice how all the left-wing liberals get all the air time on national tv and radio and how the Bible Believing Christians don't ever get any time to share a Biblical view? Just something to consider.

 

[p_rehbein]

I am sure GQ Magazine set him up to maybe gain more subscribers??? Media does this stuff all the time. It's lame and wish it would stop but it won't. I've never watched Duck Dynasty and I probably never will, so I have no clue what he said in this interview, but this was clearly blown out of proportion.

While some of his language was graphic (in that it was explicit), it was not x-rated...........and there wasn't anything he said about homosexuals that should have been offensive........for his words were far softer than what the Apostle Paul writes in the First Chapter of Romans.............and his comments about the blacks he grew up with were simply his life experience, he was not speaking for all mankind........He grew up in a poor white share croppers family living next to and working next to poor black share cropper families............and he remarked how they were God loving, God fearing, full of music and joy people, and he never heard them cursing or complaining about the "white man." Wow...........calling someone God loving and God fearing is SURELY an insulting thing isn't it?

The assault against Phil is nothing more than socialist liberal anti-Christ rhetoric designed to silence the Christian views.

 

[LovePink]

What truth did Phil speak? What did the full article say? Did he talk about how the ground is level at the cross? Did he say how gays are saved the exact same way as everyone else? By believing the gospel of their salvation. Did he recite the next verse "as were some of you, but ye were washed, sanctified", etc? Thank you Jesus, you are the man, God is really cool... came to save sinners, while we were yet ungodly commending His love toward us. Ambassadors are not policemen of another's faith, "not that we have dominion of your faith, but are helpers of your joy."

Besides, I know a bit about contracts, and I bet Phil's contract had some tight stipulations on behavior and representation. I don't watch tv, but I have caught bits & pieces of the show, I don't think it was a good representation for anything, American, Christian or otherwise.

 

[p_rehbein]

What truth did Phil speak? What did the full article say? Did he talk about how the ground is level at the cross? Did he say how gays are saved the exact same way as everyone else? By believing the gospel of their salvation. Did he recite the next verse "as were some of you, but ye were washed, sanctified", etc? Thank you Jesus, you are the man, God is really cool... came to save sinners, while we were yet ungodly commending His love toward us. Ambassadors are not policemen of another's faith, "not that we have dominion of your faith, but are helpers of your joy."

Besides, I know a bit about contracts, and I bet Phil's contract had some tight stipulations on behavior and representation. I don't watch tv, but I have caught bits & pieces of the show, I don't think it was a good representation for anything, American, Christian or otherwise.

Betcha don't have the slightest IDEA what Phil's contract says........but go on with your wisdom.......it's a real hoot.......

PHIL WAS ASKED: WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IS A SIN?

He was not asked how a person is saved from sin..............and since you obviously have ACCESS to a computer, google the interview and read it yourself...........geesshhh.........

 

[Misty77]

I agree and say good luck with any kind of rights as a believer that likes/yea is commanded to sound off about why we believe what we believe. If you are true Christian you have no rights anymore in this country. If you condemn the worldly, wicked, contrary lifestyles as described in the Bible then you are a bigot, racial, or a religious fanatic. Yet ALL on the other side of the fence expect us to roll over and take what they have to say and "like it" or get sued or imprisoned for hate speech. WOW!

Actually, you still have a lot of rights in this country. I work for Christian attorneys and we deal with religious liberty a lot. In over 99% of the cases that a Christian stands up for their rights (disclaimer: actual not perceived), they win. Now, sometimes that takes a few years and a couple of appeals, but they do win.

 

[Misty77]

These were a result of questions asked to Phil Robertson in an interview for GQ where he was not the one in control of the topic. He is a Church of Christ preacher so the reporter knew what his answer would be. (Sidebar: there's probably a PR person that needs to be fired.) I think an important part of this story is that Phil has not gone public with this before. This wasn't some judgmental nut-job condemning everyone around him. He was ASKED about his opinion on homosexuality, and he answered honestly. His only options at that time were to be honest or to lie. He chose his integrity over his popularity.

Concerning the racial comments, I think they were ignorant at worst. Though actually, some of the worst racial riots happened in big cities in the north. While there were still terrible things happening in the name of racism, there were pockets of at least a tentative peace where people of different races learned how to get along for the most part. And Phil was only speaking to what he saw or observed, which as a white male would have been somewhat limited. He never said it as uncontested fact.

 

[CRC]

That is why Jesus said that his Kingdom is no part of the world. The morality of the Bible is an equal opportunity emplolyer. Jesus died for all sinners!! The Bible is clear on God desire to save every sinner but however it makes no apologies for the standards of morality that the Bible proclaims as the "Word of God". 2 Tim. 3:16

 

[LovePink]

Betcha don't have the slightest IDEA what Phil's contract says........but go on with your wisdom.......it's a real hoot.......

PHIL WAS ASKED: WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IS A SIN?

He was not asked how a person is saved from sin..............and since you obviously have ACCESS to a computer, google the interview and read it yourself...........geesshhh.........

lol, I was replying to OP, but thanks. People seem to hit the ground running and forget about the actual op topic a lot around here. If I were really interested, which I'm not, I would google for it.

When we talk about sin, we should always couple that with the gospel of grace, if he did that he may not have been fired. And, yeah that's right we don't know what his contract stated, my point exactly.

 

[p_rehbein]

These were a result of questions asked to Phil Robertson in an interview for GQ where he was not the one in control of the topic. He is a Church of Christ preacher so the reporter knew what his answer would be. (Sidebar: there's probably a PR person that needs to be fired.) I think an important part of this story is that Phil has not gone public with this before. This wasn't some judgmental nut-job condemning everyone around him. He was ASKED about his opinion on homosexuality, and he answered honestly. His only options at that time were to be honest or to lie. He chose his integrity over his popularity.

Concerning the racial comments, I think they were ignorant at worst. Though actually, some of the worst racial riots happened in big cities in the north. While there were still terrible things happening in the name of racism, there were pockets of at least a tentative peace where people of different races learned how to get along for the most part. And Phil was only speaking to what he saw or observed, which as a white male would have been somewhat limited. He never said it as uncontested fact.

Having grown up in the Deep South during this ear, I can assure you a LOT of bad stuff happened here..........Selma to Montgomery, the Scotsboro 13, the Birmingham Church bombing, and so on and so forth.............That being said however, not ALL WHITES hated ALL BLACKS, and not ALL BLACKS hated ALL WHITES..........Yes, there were some horrific things that happened................but, as you said, there were places where such as these did not occur and folks (especially poor whites and poor blacks) worked side by side, ate side by side, used same toilets and such.........but that doesn't sell papers.

Phil was ONLY speaking of HIS life experience and not lessening the plight of the blacks in America........

Haters gonna hate, and the haters came out in full force to go after Phil.........

People should really read what the Apostle Paul said, the words he used are far more graphic than what Phil said......

 

[p_rehbein]

lol, I was replying to OP, but thanks. People seem to hit the ground running and forget about the actual op topic a lot around here. If I were really interested, which I'm not, I would google for it.

When we talk about sin, we should always couple that with the gospel of grace, if he did that he may not have been fired. And, yeah that's right we don't know what his contract stated, my point exactly.

Why I told you to google it, he did speak of Grace.........of loving and not judging others but leaving that to God.......have to read his comments to know the FULL STORY.............

GQ got what they wanted.................to sell their magazine............A&E got what they deserved, and Phil got the chance to say what the Bible says about homosexuality............he spoke (paraphrased) Scripture, and folks condemned it as "hate speech."