Phil Robertson Latest Victim of Gay Mafia War on Freedom of Religion and Speech

[PredFan]

And CHRISTIANS have the right to BOYCOT A+E.

Do we not?

And yes, by definition A+E is censoring Phil Robertson and while this is not a federal issue, it is an abridgement of his religious expression, like it or not.

Of course we have the right to boycott!

But no it isn't an abridgment if his freedom of religious expression. The network has a right to fire him because of his speech irregardless of wether it was religious in nature.

As a conservative who was probably upset about the state forcing the bakery to bake cakes for gay weddings, you should be supporting A&E's right (if not their decision). Believe me you do not want to live in a country where employers are forced to behave by the government or groups of people who believe they have a right to not be offended.

That is NOT the conservative way.

Exactly what I was trying to say in a roundabout way. Maybe you will be called rude names now by JimBowie?

Already happening, I'm sorry to say.

 

[PredFan]

From Senator Ted Cruz

Free Speech Matters

The reason that so many Americans love Duck Dynasty is because it represents the America usually ignored or mocked by liberal elites: a family that loves and cares for each other, believes in God, and speaks openly about their faith.

If you believe in free speech or religious liberty, you should be deeply dismayed over the treatment of Phil Robertson. Phil expressed his personal views and his own religious faith; for that, he was suspended from his job. In a free society, anyone is free to disagree with him--but the mainstream media should not behave as the thought police censoring the views with which they disagree.

And, as PC enforcers often forget, tolerance is a two-way street. Here's what Phil himself had to say about accepting and loving everybody:

“I myself am a product of the 60s; I centered my life around sex, drugs and rock and roll until I hit rock bottom and accepted Jesus as my Savior. My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together. However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”

Ted Cruz is a smart man. You will notice that he never said that Phil's free speech or free exercise of religion was violated.

He and others are correct. What A&E did was awful and stupid. I hope they pay dearly for it.

GoodGod, talk about splitting hairs!

Cruz said, 'If you believe in free speech or religious liberty, you should be deeply dismayed over the treatment of Phil Robertson. Phil expressed his personal views and his own religious faith; for that, he was suspended from his job. In a free society, anyone is free to disagree with him--but the mainstream media should not behave as the thought police censoring the views with which they disagree.'

That you imagine Cruz saying we should be dismayed over this free speech issue and yet cant see how that is an assertion that Phil's free speech was censored is, well, kinda stupid. No offense.

But glad you see A+E as being awful and stupid, but there is more of that thing to come as the Enlightened One completes his last term and his minions grow bolder by the day.

But he will leave a thoroughly awakened foe of the left that they cannot even imagine today.

You can highlight anything you want to but you are reading things into it that aren't there.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Of course we have the right to boycott!

But no it isn't an abridgment if his freedom of religious expression.

Yes, it is, not against government censorship but of private censorship, and so we do not try to respond by law but by our own retaliatory action.



And we have the right to boycott them for it, and where in the Constitution does it say that a company has the right to fire anyone? You keep playing this game of deliberately obfuscating legal rights with general social rights, where do you see the right to fire people in the Constitution?



I don't want the government to have anything to do with any of this.

Do you even bother to read what you respond to?

That is NOT the conservative way.

And no one is suggesting it. Actually reading things one responds to *is* the conservative way, but cant speak for neocons.

You are not protected from censorship by the constitution when the entity censoring you is private.

Lol, do you think all our rights are enclosed in the Constitution? If so, then where would you get that idea? If not then why do you persist in falling back on said retort that I am falsely trying to use some Constitutional right? I am not and have never tried to.

You simply imagine this for some reason. The general and universal rights we have from God are not restricted to the law of the land, but transcend those laws.

We are not calling for government intervention anyway, but are calling for a BOYCOTT by Christians against A+E as RETRIBUTION for firing Phil for saying the TRUTH.

Can you grok that yet?

The example I cited about the bakery is the exact same argument.

No, it is not as no one is calling for the government to do anything, Nimrod, lol.

The bakery shop should have been allowed to deny service to anyone. It was a great injustice that they are being forced to comply. This is exactly the same rights I'm referring to when A&E has the right to fire Phil. It is the same thing wether or not the government is involved.

No, by definition it is not the same if the government is involved or not; the simple involvement of the government changes EVERYTHING from the gitgo.

If you support the right of the employer to conduct his business in the way he sees fit, you cannot say that A&E is violating Phil's rights. I read and understood your point, the fact that YOU cannot understand how they are related is not my fault.

I do not support the right of the business owner to conduct his business anyway he sees fit. I do not support slavery, I do not support debt slavery. I do not support irresponsible use of property that harms the environment, kills endangered species nor puts employees at undue risk of harm.

You are talking about something that is gone with the 19th century and the Johnstown Flood.

 

[bodecea]

Free speech and/or religious expression transcends mere legal concerns, dumbass.

If you weren't an idiot and or a fascist I would bother trying to essplain it to you, but you are not worth the time.

No Jim, it does not.

NOTHING transcends our rights given to us by the constitution. A&E as an employer has the right to fire him.

SHOW ME THAT RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Otherwise every union shop law in this country is unconstitutional and would have been struck down decades ago.

Please, just stop claiming it and actually prove it, that is all I am asking.

Good lords, you've simply lost it. Unions sign CONTRACTS with employers. I'm willing to bet the Robertsons signed a CONTRACT with A&E which included some language about not bringing negative publicity to the network. CONTRACTS are legal documents on this planet, Jimmy.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Ted Cruz is a smart man. You will notice that he never said that Phil's free speech or free exercise of religion was violated.

He and others are correct. What A&E did was awful and stupid. I hope they pay dearly for it.

GoodGod, talk about splitting hairs!

Cruz said, 'If you believe in free speech or religious liberty, you should be deeply dismayed over the treatment of Phil Robertson. Phil expressed his personal views and his own religious faith; for that, he was suspended from his job. In a free society, anyone is free to disagree with him--but the mainstream media should not behave as the thought police censoring the views with which they disagree.'

That you imagine Cruz saying we should be dismayed over this free speech issue and yet cant see how that is an assertion that Phil's free speech was censored is, well, kinda stupid. No offense.

But glad you see A+E as being awful and stupid, but there is more of that thing to come as the Enlightened One completes his last term and his minions grow bolder by the day.

But he will leave a thoroughly awakened foe of the left that they cannot even imagine today.

You can highlight anything you want to but you are reading things into it that aren't there.

Not at all, and I trust readers to make up their own minds and so I repost it.

 

[Moonglow]

Free speech and/or religious expression transcends mere legal concerns, dumbass.

If you weren't an idiot and or a fascist I would bother trying to essplain it to you, but you are not worth the time.

No Jim, it does not.

NOTHING transcends our rights given to us by the constitution. A&E as an employer has the right to fire him.

SHOW ME THAT RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Otherwise every union shop law in this country is unconstitutional and would have been struck down decades ago.

Please, just stop claiming it and actually prove it, that is all I am asking.

A& E are owned by Disney and the Hearst corp.,it is a private organization and they fire whom they like, when they like.

 

[JimBowie1958]

No Jim, it does not.

NOTHING transcends our rights given to us by the constitution. A&E as an employer has the right to fire him.

SHOW ME THAT RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Otherwise every union shop law in this country is unconstitutional and would have been struck down decades ago.

Please, just stop claiming it and actually prove it, that is all I am asking.

Good lords, you've simply lost it. Unions sign CONTRACTS with employers. .

Again, your stupidity amazes me. You seriously are trying to pretend that the unions do not have laws in place that give them protections?

roflmao

I'm willing to bet the Robertsons signed a CONTRACT with A&E which included some language about not bringing negative publicity to the network. CONTRACTS are legal documents on this planet, Jimmy

No shit Sherlock.

 

[JimBowie1958]

No Jim, it does not.

NOTHING transcends our rights given to us by the constitution. A&E as an employer has the right to fire him.

SHOW ME THAT RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Otherwise every union shop law in this country is unconstitutional and would have been struck down decades ago.

Please, just stop claiming it and actually prove it, that is all I am asking.

A& E are owned by Disney and the Hearst corp.,it is a private organization and they fire whom they like, when they like.

Why don't you fuck off you little gnat?

 

[PredFan]

Free speech and/or religious expression transcends mere legal concerns, dumbass.

If you weren't an idiot and or a fascist I would bother trying to essplain it to you, but you are not worth the time.

No Jim, it does not.

NOTHING transcends our rights given to us by the constitution. A&E as an employer has the right to fire him.

SHOW ME THAT RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Otherwise every union shop law in this country is unconstitutional and would have been struck down decades ago.

Please, just stop claiming it and actually prove it, that is all I am asking.

Private sector employers are people, are they not?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Of course we have the right to boycott!

But no it isn't an abridgment if his freedom of religious expression. The network has a right to fire him because of his speech irregardless of wether it was religious in nature.

As a conservative who was probably upset about the state forcing the bakery to bake cakes for gay weddings, you should be supporting A&E's right (if not their decision). Believe me you do not want to live in a country where employers are forced to behave by the government or groups of people who believe they have a right to not be offended.

That is NOT the conservative way.

Exactly what I was trying to say in a roundabout way. Maybe you will be called rude names now by JimBowie?

Already happening, I'm sorry to say.

Ah, am I hoiting your widdle fewwings?

Seriously, stop acting like a stupid ass and I wont call you a stupid ass.

It's really simple.

 

[Moonglow]

In any city you will find phone books for Christians only.

 

[JimBowie1958]

No Jim, it does not.

NOTHING transcends our rights given to us by the constitution. A&E as an employer has the right to fire him.

SHOW ME THAT RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Otherwise every union shop law in this country is unconstitutional and would have been struck down decades ago.

Please, just stop claiming it and actually prove it, that is all I am asking.

Private sector employers are people, are they not?

Yep, and so you think that means they have the Constitutional right to fire people for any reason at all? If so then laws protecting unions are all unconstitutional, and I doubt that is true.

 

[Moonglow]

SHOW ME THAT RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Otherwise every union shop law in this country is unconstitutional and would have been struck down decades ago.

Please, just stop claiming it and actually prove it, that is all I am asking.

A& E are owned by Disney and the Hearst corp.,it is a private organization and they fire whom they like, when they like.

Why don't you fuck off you little gnat?

Why don't you make me? This is not the A&E channel.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Exactly correct.

No, he is not as he fails to grasp that no one is talking about the government taking action here, only a call to BOYCOT by Christians.

Don't like that? too bad.

The Support Phil Facebook page is already up to half a million likes, lol.

He isn't talking about the government. YOU are the one claiming that rights to free speech and religious expression were denied, he pointed out very well how you are incorrect. He never mentioned government.

AND NEITHER DID I, Einstein!

roflmao

I am referring to universal rights that transcend legally recognized rights, and call for boycott based on that violation, not for government action, dude.

 

[JimBowie1958]

A& E are owned by Disney and the Hearst corp.,it is a private organization and they fire whom they like, when they like.

Why don't you fuck off you little gnat?

Why don't you make me? This is not the A&E channel.

Well, I just got back from taking a shit and I guess I did make a copy of you.

 

[PredFan]

Yes, it is, not against government censorship but of private censorship, and so we do not try to respond by law but by our own retaliatory action.



And we have the right to boycott them for it, and where in the Constitution does it say that a company has the right to fire anyone? You keep playing this game of deliberately obfuscating legal rights with general social rights, where do you see the right to fire people in the Constitution?



I don't want the government to have anything to do with any of this.

Do you even bother to read what you respond to?



And no one is suggesting it. Actually reading things one responds to *is* the conservative way, but cant speak for neocons.

You are not protected from censorship by the constitution when the entity censoring you is private.

Lol, do you think all our rights are enclosed in the Constitution? If so, then where would you get that idea? If not then why do you persist in falling back on said retort that I am falsely trying to use some Constitutional right? I am not and have never tried to.

You simply imagine this for some reason. The general and universal rights we have from God are not restricted to the law of the land, but transcend those laws.

We are not calling for government intervention anyway, but are calling for a BOYCOTT by Christians against A+E as RETRIBUTION for firing Phil for saying the TRUTH.

Can you grok that yet?



No, it is not as no one is calling for the government to do anything, Nimrod, lol.

The bakery shop should have been allowed to deny service to anyone. It was a great injustice that they are being forced to comply. This is exactly the same rights I'm referring to when A&E has the right to fire Phil. It is the same thing wether or not the government is involved.

No, by definition it is not the same if the government is involved or not; the simple involvement of the government changes EVERYTHING from the gitgo.

If you support the right of the employer to conduct his business in the way he sees fit, you cannot say that A&E is violating Phil's rights. I read and understood your point, the fact that YOU cannot understand how they are related is not my fault.

I do not support the right of the business owner to conduct his business anyway he sees fit. I do not support slavery, I do not support debt slavery. I do not support irresponsible use of property that harms the environment, kills endangered species nor puts employees at undue risk of harm.

You are talking about something that is gone with the 19th century and the Johnstown Flood.

As I have already told you many times, I understand. It is YOU who keep trying to claim the his right to free speech and free exercise of religion have been violated. I kept proving to you that they have not.

If you are now trying to backtrack and claim you meant the rights given by God, then that is a whole 'nuther story. In America, so-called rights as interpreted by people of a certain religion, have no place in law. This goes for Christianity, Hebrew, Sharia, or any other religion.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You are not protected from censorship by the constitution when the entity censoring you is private.

Lol, do you think all our rights are enclosed in the Constitution? If so, then where would you get that idea? If not then why do you persist in falling back on said retort that I am falsely trying to use some Constitutional right? I am not and have never tried to.

You simply imagine this for some reason. The general and universal rights we have from God are not restricted to the law of the land, but transcend those laws.

We are not calling for government intervention anyway, but are calling for a BOYCOTT by Christians against A+E as RETRIBUTION for firing Phil for saying the TRUTH.

Can you grok that yet?



No, it is not as no one is calling for the government to do anything, Nimrod, lol.



No, by definition it is not the same if the government is involved or not; the simple involvement of the government changes EVERYTHING from the gitgo.

If you support the right of the employer to conduct his business in the way he sees fit, you cannot say that A&E is violating Phil's rights. I read and understood your point, the fact that YOU cannot understand how they are related is not my fault.

I do not support the right of the business owner to conduct his business anyway he sees fit. I do not support slavery, I do not support debt slavery. I do not support irresponsible use of property that harms the environment, kills endangered species nor puts employees at undue risk of harm.

You are talking about something that is gone with the 19th century and the Johnstown Flood.

As I have already told you many times, I understand. It is YOU who keep trying to claim the his right to free speech and free exercise of religion have been violated. I kept proving to you that they have not.

If you are now trying to backtrack and claim you meant the rights given by God, then that is a whole 'nuther story. In America, so-called rights as interpreted by people of a certain religion, have no place in law. This goes for Christianity, Hebrew, Sharia, or any other religion.

Dude, go back through the thread and reread my posts. I have consistently stated that I was not referring to Constitutional rights. Period. End of story.

 

[PredFan]

Yes, it is, not against government censorship but of private censorship, and so we do not try to respond by law but by our own retaliatory action.



And we have the right to boycott them for it, and where in the Constitution does it say that a company has the right to fire anyone? You keep playing this game of deliberately obfuscating legal rights with general social rights, where do you see the right to fire people in the Constitution?



I don't want the government to have anything to do with any of this.

Do you even bother to read what you respond to?



And no one is suggesting it. Actually reading things one responds to *is* the conservative way, but cant speak for neocons.

You are not protected from censorship by the constitution when the entity censoring you is private.

Lol, do you think all our rights are enclosed in the Constitution? If so, then where would you get that idea? If not then why do you persist in falling back on said retort that I am falsely trying to use some Constitutional right? I am not and have never tried to.

You simply imagine this for some reason. The general and universal rights we have from God are not restricted to the law of the land, but transcend those laws.

We are not calling for government intervention anyway, but are calling for a BOYCOTT by Christians against A+E as RETRIBUTION for firing Phil for saying the TRUTH.

Can you grok that yet?



No, it is not as no one is calling for the government to do anything, Nimrod, lol.

The bakery shop should have been allowed to deny service to anyone. It was a great injustice that they are being forced to comply. This is exactly the same rights I'm referring to when A&E has the right to fire Phil. It is the same thing wether or not the government is involved.

No, by definition it is not the same if the government is involved or not; the simple involvement of the government changes EVERYTHING from the gitgo.

If you support the right of the employer to conduct his business in the way he sees fit, you cannot say that A&E is violating Phil's rights. I read and understood your point, the fact that YOU cannot understand how they are related is not my fault.

I do not support the right of the business owner to conduct his business anyway he sees fit. I do not support slavery, I do not support debt slavery. I do not support irresponsible use of property that harms the environment, kills endangered species nor puts employees at undue risk of harm.

You are talking about something that is gone with the 19th century and the Johnstown Flood.

Exactly what I was trying to say in a roundabout way. Maybe you will be called rude names now by JimBowie?

Already happening, I'm sorry to say.

Ah, am I hoiting your widdle fewwings?

Seriously, stop acting like a stupid ass and I wont call you a stupid ass.

It's really simple.

Normally, you and I agree on things. Im sorry to see you resort to this with me when I have not ever done so with you. Is this how you act when you are losing an argument? Too bad. Go ahead and carry on in your ignorance, I cannot force you to be right. But there is no need for me to respond further to you.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You are not protected from censorship by the constitution when the entity censoring you is private.

Lol, do you think all our rights are enclosed in the Constitution? If so, then where would you get that idea? If not then why do you persist in falling back on said retort that I am falsely trying to use some Constitutional right? I am not and have never tried to.

You simply imagine this for some reason. The general and universal rights we have from God are not restricted to the law of the land, but transcend those laws.

We are not calling for government intervention anyway, but are calling for a BOYCOTT by Christians against A+E as RETRIBUTION for firing Phil for saying the TRUTH.

Can you grok that yet?



No, it is not as no one is calling for the government to do anything, Nimrod, lol.



No, by definition it is not the same if the government is involved or not; the simple involvement of the government changes EVERYTHING from the gitgo.



I do not support the right of the business owner to conduct his business anyway he sees fit. I do not support slavery, I do not support debt slavery. I do not support irresponsible use of property that harms the environment, kills endangered species nor puts employees at undue risk of harm.

You are talking about something that is gone with the 19th century and the Johnstown Flood.

Already happening, I'm sorry to say.

Ah, am I hoiting your widdle fewwings?

Seriously, stop acting like a stupid ass and I wont call you a stupid ass.

It's really simple.

Normally, you and I agree on things. Im sorry to see you resort to this with me when I have not ever done so with you. Is this how you act when you are losing an argument? Too bad. Go ahead and carry on in your ignorance, I cannot force you to be right. But there is no need for me to respond further to you.

Dude, you keep making misrepresentations of what I say.

What else am I supposed to do, call you a liar?

honestly, you were being overly quick and not closely reading what I posted. Your first impression was tat I was talking about Constitutionally protected rights and I repeatedly over and over clarified that I was NOT, and still you persisted.

I am sorry I have offended you, but truth be told, you were being stubbornly stupid.

Instead of getting mad at me for my blunt and frank manner, perhaps you should step down your hubris and try to read posts with more of an open mind?

 

[bodecea]

In any city you will find phone books for Christians only.

Where you live too?