no one who knows me would think that. You have no clue what my personal religious beliefs are, and while I don't agree with Phil's reading of the Bible, I emphasized that he has the right to say what he wishes, but he has chosen to enter into a business deal that restricts what he can say, publicly.
Gay liberals have more rights...than anybody in yer view.
Flaming Fag liberals have the most rights in yer view.
'gay liberals'? 'Flaming fag liberals'? I suppose the latter is different or less preferable to 'closet queen liberals', or 'lipstick lesbian moderates' or some such.
People who had their healthcare "robbed" from them and replaced with nothing, have no rights in your view.
the casual reader might have supposed you couldn't come up with a more idiotic statement than the last quoted, but here we are!
Anybody who doesn't agree with you has no rights in your view.
off your meds today?
Pudfark wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2017 11:15 am
I live in Texas....you live in America.
fatman wrote:Now that i ahve read the media wanking themselves over the issue im seeing no issue cant a man have an opionion any more goddam fuckk society these day
as I pointed out elsewhere, this is a business decision and a contractual matter, NOT a free speech issue. Standard contract stuff, I would guess, around bringing controversy to the people paying you money(in Phil's case, Disney corp.)
Pudfark wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2017 11:15 am
I live in Texas....you live in America.
CUDA wrote:Sure you can. But only if you're on the left. If you're on the right they call it hate speech. And people like Piers Morgan want to out law what you say. So much for the first amendment, HUH Piers. The first amendment was established to protect speech people found offensive. I guess not being American he wouldn't have known that
Apparently, someone needs a short Civics lesson. The First Amendment enables most any form of speech, beyond directly, overwhelmingly panic-inducing or threatening speech. However, it doesn't not prevent other citizens from commenting on, or expressing a dissenting opinion with that speech. In an organized fashion, such expression is called a BOYCOTT or PROTEST. For the record, I have always been very leery of any prosecution of 'Hate Speech', as I feel that is a slippery slope unless direct threat is involved.
Pudfark wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2017 11:15 am
I live in Texas....you live in America.
And how does that contradict what I said? Or did you just feel the need to go all knee jerk and post a comment that you "thought" was contradictory to mine?
"In reality, there exists only fact and fiction.
Opinions result from a lack of the former and a reliance on the latter."
CUDA wrote:And how does that contradict what I said? Or did you just feel the need to go all knee jerk and post a comment that you "thought" was contradictory to mine?
you make it seem as if 'hate speech' or supression of thought only comes from the left. Ask the Dixie Chicks about that one. For the record, I have yet to read one person suggesting that what Phil said was 'hate speech', and as a follower of the Duck Dynasty FB site, I have been subjected to a lot of verbiage in both directions the last few days. If I didn't like the show, I'd be getting real tempted to 'unlike' them, because of the sheer clutter. What HAS been said, that I've read, at least, is that Phil's words were 'hurtful' and 'disrespectful' of gay fellow citizens. I agree with that. Frankly, I find his comments regarding black people more offensive, but that is just me.
Pudfark wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2017 11:15 am
I live in Texas....you live in America.
For the record, I have yet to read one person suggesting that what Phil said was 'hate speech'.
I mentioned Piers Morgan for a reason. And if you havent heard a single person say that. then you havent really been paying attention to this whole contoversy.
"In reality, there exists only fact and fiction.
Opinions result from a lack of the former and a reliance on the latter."
"Phil's words were 'hurtful' and 'disrespectful' of gay fellow citizens. I agree with that."
They (the words) were the same for R_D as in bestiality and most of Hollywood as in adultery and applied the same way. The only reason yer panties are in a bunch? Cuz yer totally caught taking it out of context.
Just so ya know....GLAAD has probably set their cause and your socialist/progressive cause back....about 20 years, if not longer....and you're helping.
Look, the way I see it is this: Nothing that Phil has said, regarding gays, blacks, etc, shocks me. Were I sitting in a duck blind, or fishing with him, I would expect to maybe hear such comments, just like I hear them in Virginia and here at times from Southern outdoorsmen especially. Now, in that setting, unless the comments are over the top, I just sort of ignore them, and move on to the next cast, or change the topic to who carves the best decoys on the Shore. I have taken issue with really stupid stuff, and, frankly have always been able to have civil exchanges over it, this despite the fact that all parties involved are usually consuming adult beverages. The difference here, and I tried to lay this out at the outset, is that the Robertsons sort of sold their collective souls to Disney Corporation(A and E parent) for MONEY and FAME. As such, they set themselves up for this sort of excess scrutiny from millions of people. Now, in my view of Christianity, chasing the almighty buck is FAR, FAR more of a no-no than ANY sexual inclination or activity(save maybe adultery). Jesus was real specific on that matter, and rather judgemental about it. In a way, it seems to me that what is happening around Phil is a sort of Christian version of Karma coming back to bite his ass. Perhaps, this might cause him and the whole clan to reflect on the values they claim to extoll. I damn near threw up the other night on a group interview to hear Uncle Si saying how much better it was to be rich than poor. It seems that they are unwilling to walk the walk that goes with their talk.....
Pudfark wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2017 11:15 am
I live in Texas....you live in America.
I love how you say he sold out his family for money.
A little judgemental on your part dont you think? You have NO idea why he did the show. And you have NO idea what he does with his money and who he might donate to. If he is follow his faith as he claims, then I would suspect that he is giving away a fair portion of it in tithe.
and in the Bible NO WHERE does it say you cannot have money. King David was probably one of the richest men to have ever lived, and God called him a man after his own heart. What it says is do not be a lover of money, and again you judging his heart in this matter is just as bad as the comments that you are so upset that he made.
"In reality, there exists only fact and fiction.
Opinions result from a lack of the former and a reliance on the latter."
What I find interesting about this mess is that people generally seem to be surprised by this whole thing.
If you ask me, it was only a matter of time.
It's like, are we really going to be all that surprised when HH gets caught making pressure cooker bombs in his basement?
