Anti-PC people making a mistake on the Duck Dynasty story

[Mac1958]

Sorry, but the only ones bringing up free speech and the exercise of religion are the people who DO like what Duckfuck said. How many threads have popped up about how Phil's rights were violated? You could probably find half a dozen on the first fucking page.

You haven't seen it because nobody is doing it. Nobody has called for the man to be suspended or fired...AND HE WASN'T. I haven't seen a single "PC liberal" saying that he DIDN'T have the right to say what he said...they follow up with the right to call him out. Isn't that EXACTLY what you want?

Indeed, I've seen several conservatives bringing up free speech, religious freedom, etc., and I think that's a shallow, simplistic, badly flawed argument. I think Sarah Palin tried to make it. But I've also seen lefties saying "this isn't about the First Amendment" when I didn't say it was.

As I said, I haven't seen the Left demanding his firing (although honestly I haven't paid much attention outside this board). But, also as I've said, I've seen plenty of bigotry from those who claim to hate bigotry. I think that behavior is known as hypocrisy.

.

 

[paulitician]

Unfortunately for most in America today, it's "Well, you agreed to these things when you got hired." But what did you agree to exactly? How much of our personal lives should an Employer be allowed to control? I had a pretty heated discussion about this with one of my relatives the other day. He usually stands by the Corporations on everything. Whatever they do and say is Gospel as far as he's concerned. The Workers aren't worthy of having any say in anything. It's a crazy mentality. I'll never get it. So he's obviously a firm believer in the Employer having a great deal of control of Employees' personal lives. But he's just one of many many Millions who feel that way.

If we take this stuff to it's logical conclusion, the Employers will control Citizens' lives completely. Your thoughts and opinions will have to be approved or disapproved by them before expressing them. Once that happens, what good is having Constitutional Rights? You must be employed to survive. It puts Citizens in a very sad Catch 22 predicament. We need clear separation of Business and Personal lives. The more control we hand over, the more they'll demand. A clear line will have to be drawn by Americans. And that will have to be done soon. Because they're seizing more & more control by the day.

 

[Seawytch]

Sorry, but the only ones bringing up free speech and the exercise of religion are the people who DO like what Duckfuck said. How many threads have popped up about how Phil's rights were violated? You could probably find half a dozen on the first fucking page.

You haven't seen it because nobody is doing it. Nobody has called for the man to be suspended or fired...AND HE WASN'T. I haven't seen a single "PC liberal" saying that he DIDN'T have the right to say what he said...they follow up with the right to call him out. Isn't that EXACTLY what you want?

Indeed, I've seen several conservatives bringing up free speech, religious freedom, etc., and I think that's a shallow, simplistic, badly flawed argument. I think Sarah Palin tried to make it. But I've also seen lefties saying "this isn't about the First Amendment" when I didn't say it was.

As I said, I haven't seen the Left demanding his firing (although honestly I haven't paid much attention outside this board). But, also as I've said, I've seen plenty of bigotry from those who claim to hate bigotry. I think that behavior is known as hypocrisy.

.

Like what? What bigotry have you seen? How does that relate to your "PC" theme? I'm still not clear on how this Duck crap has anything to do with PC.

 

[OODA_Loop]

I can be fired, not for my actions...not for anything I did, but for my being. I should have the same right to fire a Christian for their beliefs, not actions right?

Not according to the law.

Of course your premise is highly improbable.

 

[Stephanie]

Homosexuals are always Playing a victim

and wonder why people get tired of hearing it and disapprove of them

 

[Mac1958]

Sorry, but the only ones bringing up free speech and the exercise of religion are the people who DO like what Duckfuck said. How many threads have popped up about how Phil's rights were violated? You could probably find half a dozen on the first fucking page.

You haven't seen it because nobody is doing it. Nobody has called for the man to be suspended or fired...AND HE WASN'T. I haven't seen a single "PC liberal" saying that he DIDN'T have the right to say what he said...they follow up with the right to call him out. Isn't that EXACTLY what you want?

Indeed, I've seen several conservatives bringing up free speech, religious freedom, etc., and I think that's a shallow, simplistic, badly flawed argument. I think Sarah Palin tried to make it. But I've also seen lefties saying "this isn't about the First Amendment" when I didn't say it was.

As I said, I haven't seen the Left demanding his firing (although honestly I haven't paid much attention outside this board). But, also as I've said, I've seen plenty of bigotry from those who claim to hate bigotry. I think that behavior is known as hypocrisy.

.

Like what? What bigotry have you seen? How does that relate to your "PC" theme? I'm still not clear on how this Duck crap has anything to do with PC.

Jeez, you're not going to tell me you haven't seen any bigotry from the Left on this thread and others, are you? If so, just never mind the whole thing. I wouldn't even know how to respond.

The bigotry I point out has nothing to do with PC. It has to do with hypocrisy.

I really don't know why this is all so complicated.

.

 

[Bfgrn]

So I take it you're not going to Google "Political Correctness Examples", huh? That's okay, I wasn't expecting you to back up your words, I never expect that here. Chalk another one up.

I know I don't have to actually say this, because you're clearly being obtuse, but what the heck: Any person has the right, the obligation if they choose, to speak out against things with which they disagree. Where some people draw the line is when they try to punish others for saying what they're thinking and/or intimidate others from saying what they're thinking.

This hairy duck guy? Pretty much a non-issue for me. I'm talking about the larger tactic of PC.

Now, you may want to claim that no one is ever punished or intimidated, and I just don't care enough to list the myriad examples. When partisan ideologues start playing the denial game, everything that follows is a waste of time.

.

I did Google "Political Correctness Examples", and found exactly what I expected. I offered you some enlightenment into WHY the results are so skewed when you Google any political word or phrase. But you can mindlessly continue to parrot what you are told.

Even one of the leading right wing rhetors admits the left has none.

The 11 Words for 2011
by Frank Luntz

Words matter. The most powerful words have helped launch social movements and cultural revolutions. The most effective words have instigated great change in public policy. The right words at the right time can literally change history.

Most of you know me as a wordsmith. From time to time my memos and language guides have appeared on these pages -- sometimes with my blessings and sometimes against my will. I realize that my work is often controversial, and often you like to attack the messenger, but it's the message that matters.

For those who care about words, I'm going to make it easy for you. No need to dig through my trash or shuffle through my papers. I will voluntarily open up my computer files to give you the "11 for 11"... the 11 most powerful words and phrases for 2011.

These are 11 phrases that will be shaping the public discourse over the coming year. You won't find a similar list from a liberal wordsmith -- there aren't any -- so you might as well use these. And if you want the other 89 words and phrases that really matter, you'll just have to buy the book.

Um, does all that mean you're saying PC doesn't exist?

I wonder what you think of what this lefty said:

Every society has Political Correctness

.

Every society has what is called 'norms' and 'values'

What you are parroting (PC police) is pure right wing propaganda created by right wing propagandists to protect their bigotry and hatred of minorities. I tried to enlighten you, but instead you decided to double down.

 

[driveby]

All societies have behaviors that they find offensive. Offensive speech has always had consequences....always will

Obabble's lies are offensive.....waiting on the consequences.

He saw the consequences in 2012

No he didn't, that was the point dummy.......

 

[earlycuyler]

.

Those of us who have had enough BS from the PC Police are making it easy for them to wiggle out of this story on the hairy southern duck guy.

By bringing up -- or worse, letting them move the conversation to -- freedom of speech or religion or television contracts or the Constitution, you're giving them the opportunity to avoid the real issue (at least in my humble opinion): Their hypocritical, narcissistic intolerance.

Plus, this issue doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's just the latest in a long, long line of examples of their bigotry and intolerance. Holy crap, some of the things I've seen them say here about people who live in that area, wow.

The pushback is absolutely great and terribly overdue. They've jumped the shark with their race-baiting, language-manipulating, phony self esteem-building, forced inclusion silliness and it's clear that the pushback has begun. Yay!

This isn't (or shouldn't be) about the 1st Amendment or television contracts or religion. It should be about the hypocritical, paranoid, intolerant narcissism of the PC Police, and how they want to punish and intimidate people and businesses.

.

They must scream louder because they matter less.

 

[Mac1958]

Every society has what is called 'norms' and 'values'

What you are parroting (PC police) is pure right wing propaganda created by right wing propagandists to protect their bigotry and hatred of minorities. I tried to enlighten you, but instead you decided to double down.

Oh, I see. You're choosing to call it "norms and values".

Good point. One of the basic tenets of PC is changing words and phrases for the sake of expediency, that's pretty ironic.

Maybe we'll call PC "NV" from now on, huh?

.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

.

Those of us who have had enough BS from the PC Police are making it easy for them to wiggle out of this story on the hairy southern duck guy.

By bringing up -- or worse, letting them move the conversation to -- freedom of speech or religion or television contracts or the Constitution, you're giving them the opportunity to avoid the real issue (at least in my humble opinion): Their hypocritical, narcissistic intolerance.

Plus, this issue doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's just the latest in a long, long line of examples of their bigotry and intolerance. Holy crap, some of the things I've seen them say here about people who live in that area, wow.

The pushback is absolutely great and terribly overdue. They've jumped the shark with their race-baiting, language-manipulating, phony self esteem-building, forced inclusion silliness and it's clear that the pushback has begun. Yay!

This isn't (or shouldn't be) about the 1st Amendment or television contracts or religion. It should be about the hypocritical, paranoid, intolerant narcissism of the PC Police, and how they want to punish and intimidate people and businesses.

.

Pretty funny. You are merely defending someone you agree with. So when someone YOU agree with decides to make PUBLIC his or her private beliefs, and those beliefs show their blatant bigotry, intolerance and narcissism, everyone else should just shut the fuck up.

You are an idiot, thanks for making THAT public.

In essence, yes.

The OP's premise is that if one is the subject of lies he must remain silent and not respond out of fear that might 'jeopardize' the livelihood of the liar.

 

[Seawytch]

Indeed, I've seen several conservatives bringing up free speech, religious freedom, etc., and I think that's a shallow, simplistic, badly flawed argument. I think Sarah Palin tried to make it. But I've also seen lefties saying "this isn't about the First Amendment" when I didn't say it was.

As I said, I haven't seen the Left demanding his firing (although honestly I haven't paid much attention outside this board). But, also as I've said, I've seen plenty of bigotry from those who claim to hate bigotry. I think that behavior is known as hypocrisy.

.

Like what? What bigotry have you seen? How does that relate to your "PC" theme? I'm still not clear on how this Duck crap has anything to do with PC.

Jeez, you're not going to tell me you haven't seen any bigotry from the Left on this thread and others, are you? If so, just never mind the whole thing. I wouldn't even know how to respond.

The bigotry I point out has nothing to do with PC. It has to do with hypocrisy.

I really don't know why this is all so complicated.

.

I'm asking for examples. You started a thread all about PC and referenced there current DD kerfuffle and I simple want to know how it relates to political correctness. Are you telling me now that it has nothing to do with being politically correct after all?

What bigotry have you seen from "the left" regarding this DD thing?

 

[martybegan]

.

Those of us who have had enough BS from the PC Police are making it easy for them to wiggle out of this story on the hairy southern duck guy.

By bringing up -- or worse, letting them move the conversation to -- freedom of speech or religion or television contracts or the Constitution, you're giving them the opportunity to avoid the real issue (at least in my humble opinion): Their hypocritical, narcissistic intolerance.

Plus, this issue doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's just the latest in a long, long line of examples of their bigotry and intolerance. Holy crap, some of the things I've seen them say here about people who live in that area, wow.

The pushback is absolutely great and terribly overdue. They've jumped the shark with their race-baiting, language-manipulating, phony self esteem-building, forced inclusion silliness and it's clear that the pushback has begun. Yay!

This isn't (or shouldn't be) about the 1st Amendment or television contracts or religion. It should be about the hypocritical, paranoid, intolerant narcissism of the PC Police, and how they want to punish and intimidate people and businesses.

.

Pretty funny. You are merely defending someone you agree with. So when someone YOU agree with decides to make PUBLIC his or her private beliefs, and those beliefs show their blatant bigotry, intolerance and narcissism, everyone else should just shut the fuck up.

You are an idiot, thanks for making THAT public.

In essence, yes.

The OP's premise is that if one is the subject of lies he must remain silent and not respond out of fear that might 'jeopardize' the livelihood of the liar.

Or maybe since Phil's opnions of ones lifestlye has ZERO impact on your own life, maybe you should man up, shrug your shoulders and get on with your life. At a maximum you can go on the air and call him an asshole back, but the whole concept of feeling the need to punish someone for what they say is childish, and makes YOU the asshole.

 

[Seawytch]

I can be fired, not for my actions...not for anything I did, but for my being. I should have the same right to fire a Christian for their beliefs, not actions right?

Not according to the law.

Of course your premise is highly improbable.

Exactly. You're beliefs are protected but my being is not. My "premise" happens all the time.

 

[OODA_Loop]

I can be fired, not for my actions...not for anything I did, but for my being. I should have the same right to fire a Christian for their beliefs, not actions right?

Not according to the law.

Of course your premise is highly improbable.

Exactly. You're beliefs are protected but my being is not. My "premise" happens all the time.

Religion is protected.

Gay is not.

I think your exaggerating the frequency of employers seeing gays holding hands on the weekend in public and firing them.

It is like pregnant rape victims needing abortions. Clinging to any remote semblance of credibility to bolster the cause, no matter how obtuse.

 

[Seawytch]

Pretty funny. You are merely defending someone you agree with. So when someone YOU agree with decides to make PUBLIC his or her private beliefs, and those beliefs show their blatant bigotry, intolerance and narcissism, everyone else should just shut the fuck up.

You are an idiot, thanks for making THAT public.

In essence, yes.

The OP's premise is that if one is the subject of lies he must remain silent and not respond out of fear that might 'jeopardize' the livelihood of the liar.

Or maybe since Phil's opnions of ones lifestlye has ZERO impact on your own life, maybe you should man up, shrug your shoulders and get on with your life. At a maximum you can go on the air and call him an asshole back, but the whole concept of feeling the need to punish someone for what they say is childish, and makes YOU the asshole.

Who is being "punished"? Are you referring to boycotts?

 

[Seawytch]

Not according to the law.

Of course your premise is highly improbable.

Exactly. You're beliefs are protected but my being is not. My "premise" happens all the time.

Religion is protected.

Gay is not.

I think your exaggerating the frequency of employers seeing gays holding hands on the weekend in public and firing them.

You just made my point. You are protected from me firing you, but I'm not protected from you firing me. People get fired all the time for being gay...not for anything they did at work, not for their performance or behaviors in the workplace but simply because they are gay and the employers can. I don't want you NOT to be able to fire me...I just want to be able to fire you.

 

[Katzndogz]

In a world that ran better, anyone could fire or simply not hire anyone they wanted. No one would be forced to hire gays or blacks or non English speakers. Some businesses might end up all Christian, some end up all gay. A business would have the freedom to have employees sign a no religion oath that would entitle an employer to fire them if they go to Church. Another business might not hire anyone but Catholics, muslims or Baptists.

 

[paulitician]

From what i've read on this thread so far, i'll have to conclude that Communists and gays are all for Free Speech...Just as long as you say what they want you to say.

 

[martybegan]

In a world that ran better, anyone could fire or simply not hire anyone they wanted. No one would be forced to hire gays or blacks or non English speakers. Some businesses might end up all Christian, some end up all gay. A business would have the freedom to have employees sign a no religion oath that would entitle an employer to fire them if they go to Church. Another business might not hire anyone but Catholics, muslims or Baptists.

My only caveat on this would be for business that have government contracts, and for certain businesses that are related to insterstate travel,as per the commerce clause.