Freedom of Religious Opinion? Not If You're Phil Robertson

[Luissa]

The funniest part about it all is Sarah Palin. Here is her comments about Bashir just a month ago.
"d some choice advice: "Those with that platform, with a microphone, a camera in their face, they have to have some more responsibility taken," she said on Fox & Friends."

Here is her comments about Robertson.
"Free speech is endangered species; those "intolerants" hatin' & taking on Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing personal opinion take on us all"

http://www.policymic.com/mobile/art...uck-dynasty-star-but-what-about-martin-bashir

I guess free speech only applies to conservatives... Of course she has no clue how free speech works, and neither does the OP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The T]

Pre civil rights when black people were happy and not murdering one another in the streets.

What will they do when GAYS start doing the same? [/Rhetorical]

 

[Luissa]

Pre civil rights when black people were happy and not murdering one another in the streets.

Of course white people were killing them for such things like voicing their opinion...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The T]

The funniest part about it all is Sarah Palin. Here is her comments about Bashir just a month ago.
"d some choice advice: "Those with that platform, with a microphone, a camera in their face, they have to have some more responsibility taken," she said on Fox & Friends."

Here is her comments about Robertson.
"Free speech is endangered species; those "intolerants" hatin' & taking on Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing personal opinion take on us all"

Sarah Palin Defends 'Duck Dynasty' Star, But What About Martin Bashir? - PolicyMic

I guess free speech only applies to conservatives... Of course she has no clue how free speech work, and neither does the OP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NOR does A&E. Touche...Intolerant much? YOU exude it.

 

[The T]

That's OK. I'm sure there are dozens of networks that would LOVE to have this program under contract. A&E just lopped off their nose to spite their faces.

Exactly.

They screwed up by taking this stance. However, they are entitled to that stance.

The best way to show them that they made a mistake when they give into politically correct action is to not do business with them or their sponsors. When their market share plummets by 35% or more, they'll wake up.

When their viewership plummets by say oh, 14 million, they'll reconsider their arrogance.

^This too.

These idiots are cowtowing to a minority...question is? WHY?

 

[The T]

Pre civil rights when black people were happy and not murdering one another in the streets.

Of course white people were killing them for such things like voicing their opinion...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MOOT. Doesn't happen much any more, does it? QUITE the opposite. But YOU continue to live in the past to paint a false portrait of YOUR America that doesn't exist but in your feeble mind.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The burdens have been met.

This is a business dispute (contract), and A&E's right as an employer supercedes an employee's right to make it look "bad" publicly.

I hate to tell you this, Jake, but the contract doesn't prohibit him from doing off camera interviews with magazines. Nor does it prohibit him from having any religious opinions outside of the show. He isn't representing A&E when he does such. This is an unlawful termination, based on religious discrimination.

If Christians aren't allowed to discriminate against homosexuals, this TV network is not allowed to discriminate against the man for being a Christian. Learn contract law before you decide to foist your flawed interpretations of it on me. Please? A&E has unfairly terminated Robertson for something he did off camera and out of view of the 14 million people who watch that show weekly.

1. How long has the show been airing?

2. Did he just become a Christian when he did this interview?

3. Is it possible that his being a Christian has absolutely nothing to do with his suspension?

1. March 21, 2012

2. No.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvrriOAtBZM]Duck Dynasty - Phil Robertson - Deciding To Follow Jesus - YouTube[/ame]

3. No. As each episode ends with the family praying together at the table. There are Christian elements to the show.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I know some of you watch Duck Dynasty and probably heard that Phil Robertson was suspended by A&E for his opinion on homosexuality. He had the gall to quote 1 Corinthians 6:9 and express himself openly about his opposition to gay marriage. Groups like GLAAD came out in support of the suspension. Don't you find it odd that people like Martin Bashir get a pass for their intolerance toward conservative women, but people like Phil Robertson are being targeted for their beliefs?

Should TV Networks silence religious speech for the political sensibilities of others? As most of you were aware, Chick-Fil-A came under similar scrutiny by gay rights organizations for its views on homosexuality last year. The response from the public was overwhelming, as the restaurant experienced booming profits from the ordeal. Suffice it to say, ratings for the show may experience similar results.

Should Phil Robertson be suspended for his comments in GQ? Or should he be allowed to express himself as he is allowed to by the the First Amendment? My personal opinion here is that no TV network should be allowed to censor a man for expressing his religious beliefs.

There have been many instances of people or businesses being targeted for their religious beliefs, all for being "intolerant." Isn't it strange that you can be allowed to be homosexual, but not a person of faith? The real intolerance here, is of those who cannot accept that others aren't forced to tolerate their way of life or their practices. If you are any freedom loving American; Democrat, Republican or Libertarian, you should be disturbed by this recent turn of events.

What’s disturbing is the ignorance expressed by many that this is a First Amendment/free speech/freedom of religion issue.

It is not.

In fact, this is exactly where we want the debate to take place, and private society is at liberty to admonish those who speak or act in a manner considered inappropriate; we do not want these determinations made by the government or the courts.

Robertson indeed retains his freedom of religious opinion; no Federal, state, or local lawmaking entity has passed a measure seeking to deny him that right; he’s not being threatened with some punitive act, fine, or imprisonment. He’s at liberty to exercise his freedom of religious opinion in any private venue that will allow him to do so, absent any government interference.

And there are private venues which are also at liberty to not allow him to express his views, such as A&E, and by doing so pose no ‘threat’ to one’s freedom of religious opinion.

 

[Luissa]

Pre civil rights when black people were happy and not murdering one another in the streets.

Of course white people were killing them for such things like voicing their opinion...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MOOT. Doesn't happen much any more, does it? QUITE the opposite. But YOU continue to live in the past to paint a false portrait of YOUR America that doesn't exist but in your feeble mind.

Feeble mind? Where did I say it still happens?
Who has the feeble mind here? Try to follow a thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TemplarKormac]

Exactly.

They screwed up by taking this stance. However, they are entitled to that stance.

The best way to show them that they made a mistake when they give into politically correct action is to not do business with them or their sponsors. When their market share plummets by 35% or more, they'll wake up.

When their viewership plummets by say oh, 14 million, they'll reconsider their arrogance.

^This too.

These idiots are cowtowing to a minority...question is? WHY?

A dagger does just as much damage as a sword.

 

[The T]

I hate to tell you this, Jake, but the contract doesn't prohibit him from doing off camera interviews with magazines. Nor does it prohibit him from having any religious opinions outside of the show. He isn't representing A&E when he does such. This is an unlawful termination, based on religious discrimination.

If Christians aren't allowed to discriminate against homosexuals, this TV network is not allowed to discriminate against the man for being a Christian. Learn contract law before you decide to foist your flawed interpretations of it on me. Please? A&E has unfairly terminated Robertson for something he did off camera and out of view of the 14 million people who watch that show weekly.

1. How long has the show been airing?

2. Did he just become a Christian when he did this interview?

3. Is it possible that his being a Christian has absolutely nothing to do with his suspension?

1. March 21, 2012

2. No.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvrriOAtBZM"]Duck Dynasty - Phil Robertson - Deciding To Follow Jesus - YouTube[/ame]

3. No. As each episode ends with the family praying together at the table. There are Christian elements to the show.

IF A&E knew their leanings, and NOW ban someone from the show for a view A&E had to know might be coming? SHOW OVER.

They crossed a line they might not recover from.

 

[Luissa]

The funniest part about it all is Sarah Palin. Here is her comments about Bashir just a month ago.
"d some choice advice: "Those with that platform, with a microphone, a camera in their face, they have to have some more responsibility taken," she said on Fox & Friends."

Here is her comments about Robertson.
"Free speech is endangered species; those "intolerants" hatin' & taking on Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing personal opinion take on us all"

Sarah Palin Defends 'Duck Dynasty' Star, But What About Martin Bashir? - PolicyMic

I guess free speech only applies to conservatives... Of course she has no clue how free speech work, and neither does the OP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NOR does A&E. Touche...Intolerant much? YOU exude it.

A&E can fire whom they choose. Or do you not believe they have rights also?
Try posting something that makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The T]

When their viewership plummets by say oh, 14 million, they'll reconsider their arrogance.

^This too.

These idiots are cowtowing to a minority...question is? WHY?

A dagger does just as much damage as a sword.

Or a baseball bat.

 

[The T]

The funniest part about it all is Sarah Palin. Here is her comments about Bashir just a month ago.
"d some choice advice: "Those with that platform, with a microphone, a camera in their face, they have to have some more responsibility taken," she said on Fox & Friends."

Here is her comments about Robertson.
"Free speech is endangered species; those "intolerants" hatin' & taking on Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing personal opinion take on us all"

Sarah Palin Defends 'Duck Dynasty' Star, But What About Martin Bashir? - PolicyMic

I guess free speech only applies to conservatives... Of course she has no clue how free speech work, and neither does the OP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NOR does A&E. Touche...Intolerant much? YOU exude it.

A&E can fire whom they choose. Or do you not believe they have rights also?
Try posting something that makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes they can...and they are FREE to FAIL just as easily.

Game, Set, Match.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I know some of you watch Duck Dynasty and probably heard that Phil Robertson was suspended by A&E for his opinion on homosexuality. He had the gall to quote 1 Corinthians 6:9 and express himself openly about his opposition to gay marriage. Groups like GLAAD came out in support of the suspension. Don't you find it odd that people like Martin Bashir get a pass for their intolerance toward conservative women, but people like Phil Robertson are being targeted for their beliefs?

Should TV Networks silence religious speech for the political sensibilities of others? As most of you were aware, Chick-Fil-A came under similar scrutiny by gay rights organizations for its views on homosexuality last year. The response from the public was overwhelming, as the restaurant experienced booming profits from the ordeal. Suffice it to say, ratings for the show may experience similar results.

Should Phil Robertson be suspended for his comments in GQ? Or should he be allowed to express himself as he is allowed to by the the First Amendment? My personal opinion here is that no TV network should be allowed to censor a man for expressing his religious beliefs.

There have been many instances of people or businesses being targeted for their religious beliefs, all for being "intolerant." Isn't it strange that you can be allowed to be homosexual, but not a person of faith? The real intolerance here, is of those who cannot accept that others aren't forced to tolerate their way of life or their practices. If you are any freedom loving American; Democrat, Republican or Libertarian, you should be disturbed by this recent turn of events.

What’s disturbing is the ignorance expressed by many that this is a First Amendment/free speech/freedom of religion issue.

It is not.

In fact, this is exactly where we want the debate to take place, and private society is at liberty admonish those who speak or act in a manner considered inappropriate; we do not want these determinations made by the government or the courts.

Robertson indeed retains his freedom of religious opinion; no Federal, state, or local lawmaking entity has passed a measure seeking to deny him that right; he’s not being threatened with some punitive act, fine, or imprisonment. He’s at liberty to exercise his freedom of religious opinion in any private venue that will allow him to do so, absent any government interference.

And there are private venues which are also at liberty to not allow him to express his views, such as A&E, and by doing so pose no ‘threat’ to one’s freedom of religious opinion.

Simple rebuttal to your argument. By making these comments to GQ and not on his show at A&E, he was indeed making these comments at a private venue. So tell me again how this warrants firing the man? You infringe on a man's right to free speech when you fire him for comments he made at a private venue, apart from the enterprise he works for.

Don't be stupid Clayton.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The funniest part about it all is Sarah Palin. Here is her comments about Bashir just a month ago.
"d some choice advice: "Those with that platform, with a microphone, a camera in their face, they have to have some more responsibility taken," she said on Fox & Friends."

Here is her comments about Robertson.
"Free speech is endangered species; those "intolerants" hatin' & taking on Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing personal opinion take on us all"

Sarah Palin Defends 'Duck Dynasty' Star, But What About Martin Bashir? - PolicyMic

I guess free speech only applies to conservatives... Of course she has no clue how free speech work, and neither does the OP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NOR does A&E. Touche...Intolerant much? YOU exude it.

A&E can fire whom they choose. Or do you not believe they have rights also?
Try posting something that makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Umm…

 

[The T]

Of course white people were killing them for such things like voicing their opinion...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MOOT. Doesn't happen much any more, does it? QUITE the opposite. But YOU continue to live in the past to paint a false portrait of YOUR America that doesn't exist but in your feeble mind.

Feeble mind? Where did I say it still happens?
Who has the feeble mind here? Try to follow a thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Short memory?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Phil had every right to say what he said.
Anyone who chooses to do so has every right to whine and cry about it.
/issue

 

[Katzndogz]

The Robertsons are shit canning A&E. Just announced on the Kelly File. A&E may back down but negotiations are to end the show, at least on A&E.

It puts the network in a terrible position. They either have to back away from their pro gay position or lose the most popular show in cable history. Either way A&E loses.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The funniest part about it all is Sarah Palin. Here is her comments about Bashir just a month ago.
"d some choice advice: "Those with that platform, with a microphone, a camera in their face, they have to have some more responsibility taken," she said on Fox & Friends."

Here is her comments about Robertson.
"Free speech is endangered species; those "intolerants" hatin' & taking on Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing personal opinion take on us all"

Sarah Palin Defends 'Duck Dynasty' Star, But What About Martin Bashir? - PolicyMic

I guess free speech only applies to conservatives... Of course she has no clue how free speech work, and neither does the OP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NOR does A&E. Touche...Intolerant much? YOU exude it.

A&E can fire whom they choose. Or do you not believe they have rights also?
Try posting something that makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He has. Unlike you. What the hell do pre Civil Rights era African Americans have to do with this thread? Exactly, so politely can it.

What right do they have firing a man for making comments about gay marriage in a private venue outside of his TV show? Nobody wants to answer this question...