Phil Robertson "Fired"

[CensoredAlso]

And I doubt gay marriage supporters would want to give it, either.

Again, plenty do in New York City.

 

[D'Snowth]

This is off topic, I know, but all of this has suddenly reminded me of a story I once saw on the news maybe a year or two ago. There was this guy who was one of those Neo-Nazi White Supremisists, and he let people know it too, not only would he go around preaching his hatred towards Jews and African-Americans, but he literally had it all over him, as he was tattooed from head to toe with Neo-Nazi signs and propaganda, he even met and married a woman who was in the same sect as he was, and likewise, had hate messages and signs tattooed all over her too.

Then, one day, they both suddenly had a wake up call, I don't remember under what circumstances caused them to really open their eyes, but they both saw the errors of their ways, and they saw how much hurt and destruction they caused, and they completely turned their lives around; the man even started undergoing the process of having all of this tattoos removed (which they said would take up to a year with all the ink he has over his body), the reporter even asked him if this wasn't painful for him, and he said along the lines of, "Yes, but I deserve it, and it's nothing compared to the pain and hurt I've put others through." Not sure how it's all working out for him, or if he and his wife have stuck with their changed ways.

Again, I know this is off topic, but I was reminded of it and felt like sharing.

 

[jvcarroll]

Phil Robertson Suspension Lifted

Call me an optimist, but I don't have much cynicism about this like some other spectators of the controversy. I actually think this is a win for almost all involved and here's why:

• It's a win for Mr. Robertson and his clan because they actually revisited the language used in the GQ article and understand what upset LGBT people. The clan is certain to choose their words more wisely in the future. Their $400 million dollar enterprise depends on it.
• It's a win for the LGBT because the initial suspension was immediate while A&E investigated the situation. Also, A&E and Duck Dynasty folk are slated to participate in "tolerance to all" public service announcements. I prefer understanding over punitive actions anyway.
• It's a win for A&E because the controversy has sparked new interest into what really is a one-note show that will eventually suffer the same fate as Paris Hilton's career in reality television.
• The only loss here is for the African American community. I don't think they've received a sufficient apology - and they sure as heck deserve one.

I found the gay people who claimed that they'd be, "watching a lot more A&E from now on." and the self-professed Christians who shouted things like, "A&E just committed suicide because I'll never watch them again." both to be incredibly stupid. A&E used to be a place for Arts and Entertainment. Now it's mostly trash television. This decision changes nothing on that front. The only thing worth watching on the network is the Bates Motel program. It's surprisingly good.

The latest report about the Mr. Robertson and his clan's take on the language he used in the GQ article pleased me for the most part. Every TV star receives media training from their employers to avoid this very thing. Mr. Robertson should have been able to avoid this trap. I don't think he's a stupid guy. His various statements reflect a small-minded person who isn't able to see outside of his own set of circumstances or to empathize with others. He's a reality star. That level of narcissism shouldn't shock anybody.

On a personal note, this controversy has exposed the rampant bigotry that many "religious folk" have demonstrated when talking about gay people. I didn't think this sort of disrespectful fire and brimstone judgment still existed in such great numbers. Again, maybe I'm too much of an optimist.

 

[CensoredAlso]

Also, A&E and Duck Dynasty folk are slated to participate in "tolerance to all" public service announcements.

You mean like how Corey Feldman did anti drug PSA's in the '80s? Personally I'd rather people be honest, lol. Forced apologies don't make me respect people more. I don't know why so many activists demand them from people.

The clan is certain to choose their words more wisely in the future

There's choosing words more wisely and then there's being terrified of saying the non approved answer. You're never going to get people on your side by dictating what they should and shouldn't say. There's too much potential for a thought police mentality here.

I don't know, I'm just reminded of South Park's Death Camp of Tolerance, lol.

 

[jvcarroll]

You mean like how Corey Feldman did anti drug PSA's in the '80s? Personally I'd rather people be honest, lol. Forced apologies don't make me respect people more. I don't know why so many activists demand them from people.


There's choosing words more wisely and then there's being terrified of saying the non approved answer. There's too much potential for a thought police mentality here.

Wow! Well, choosing to treat others with dignity and respect isn't a "forced apology." A person can maintain their beliefs without being offensive to others and that's what it's about. We all SHOULD take pause in how we communicate with others. That's reportedly what the PSA's will be about. They don't seem to be particularly pointed toward the LGBT or Christians. It's everybody. The fact that the Duck Dynasty people would be involved could only further that message to a place where I know it is needed. That makes me happy. Of course, there will always be impenetrable cynicism and bigotry in some folk. However, I think that most people are good and want to get along. Again, maybe that's the muppetyness that's inside of me.

Just because a person is a Christian, it doesn't give them a free-pass to demean gay people; and just because a person is a San Franciscan, that doesn't mean they should feel superior to America's Southerners. We all share the same country, the same planet and we could do a better job with how we treat each other.

 

[CensoredAlso]

Let's say I encountered someone who said Catholics are the devil because we pray to saints (such criticism does exist). I don't want him or her apologizing to me if they don't really mean it. I'd rather they apologize because they genuinely felt bad.

 

[jvcarroll]

Let's say I encountered someone who said Catholics are the devil because we pray to saints (such criticism does exist). I don't want him or her apologizing to me if they don't really mean it. I'd rather they apologize because they genuinely felt bad.

There is a third option - A Christian can disagree with the way that Catholics pray to saints without holding personal judgment about it. There's no need for the devil rhetoric in that case just as there's no need for the fire and brimstone talk that often accompanies religious discussions about gay people. Affording others that sort of respect falls under the example of Jesus. I see no humility demonstrated in the example you posed, therefore those who speak that sort of venom aren't behaving as Christians in the first place. Their first apology should be in the form of asking forgiveness from God.

You see, the trouble I encounter with so many people is that they see in stark terms. News channels unearth problems that nobody really should care about and then force people to pick a side or else be part of "the problem." I don't see that way. Life isn't black and white, it's not shades of gray. Life is is in bright, vibrant technicolor! It is as complicated as it is beautiful. Those who reduce everything down to two options aren't seeing the bigger picture. I find that frustrating.

 

[CensoredAlso]

Their first apology should be in the form of asking forgiveness from God.

Yes, forgiveness from God, if they honestly want it. But if they're only apologizing because they're afraid they'll get in trouble it doesn't mean very much.

 

[jvcarroll]

Yes, forgiveness from God, if they honestly want it. But if they're only apologizing because they're afraid they'll get in trouble it doesn't mean very much.

I do not understand why cynicism seems to be your first automatic go-to. I just don't operate that way so no response from me will ever be sufficient for your criteria.

 

[CensoredAlso]

I do not understand why cynicism seems to be your first automatic go-to. I just don't operate that way so any response from me will never be sufficient for your criteria.

Isn't that the major criticism given to Christianity? That's it's based in fear of punishment and fire and brimstone? I'm simply telling you I agree, those aren't good reasons for doing the right thing.