"Duck Dynasty"...is our freedom of speech being stifled?
Quote: RonCA&E thought they would get great press from suspending him because GLAAD convinced them that they would take away all the money (advertisers). A&E found out that a lot less people supported GLAAD's position than GLAAD told them supported it.
A&E was profit motivated.
GLAAD did want to stifle speech they did not believe in, of course. Phil stated his beliefs and they wanted to shut him down. He did not speak out of hate or contempt, he simply stated things he believes are sin that will keep people out of heaven. He also mentioned how to get there in spite of sin.
My position remains unchanged--Phil had every right to say what he said; A &E had every right to fire him. They just wouldn't have done anything without GLAAD trying to bully them and they did not stand up for what they did when it came down to the possibility of losing the show.
America won.
Again though how did America win. You have 3 groups each using their first amendment rights Robertson, A&E, and GLAAD. No first amendment rights ever came up since the government never intervened. Saying America won here is as stupid as saying America lost when Martin Bashir was fired. This was not a victory for America nor was it a defeat it simply was an event unrelated to our rights.
Quote: Beethoven9thdeleted Beethoven's fantasy
This is some fantasy you keep having about me, and you've repeated it several times.
Quote: TwirdmanAgain though how did America win. You have 3 groups each using their first amendment rights Robertson, A&E, and GLAAD. No first amendment rights ever came up since the government never intervened. Saying America won here is as stupid as saying America lost when Martin Bashir was fired. This was not a victory for America nor was it a defeat it simply was an event unrelated to our rights.
America won because everyone had their say and GLAAD did not prevail. Had Robertson's speech been different--as was Bashir's turning Palin's point about how the increasing debt to the Chinese eventually putting us in servitude towards them (she used slavery--as in we will be slaves to them) into something about a guy who made slaves shit in their mouths or something.
Slavery was horrible. Using the word slaves is done all the time and it is never quite in the context of what our slavery was like--wage slaves, slaving over a hot stove, we'll be slaves to the Chinese. etc. Bashir took it to a horrible level to try to make Palin look bad and only succeeded in making his network look bad. He could have called her out without getting that vicious. He needed to be fired.
Had Robertson said that we should harm gays or anything like that, he should have been fired. He didn't.
It was a victory for America because a very vocal minority group was stopped from having a man fired just because they were offended by what is a widely-held position in some churches. Offensive speech is not hate speech.
Quote: rxwineThis is some fantasy you keep having about me, and you've repeated it several times.
Someone's trying to hide their rage and doing everything possible to NOT lash out like last time. Not fooling anyone though. ;)
Quote: Sabretom2Why aren't the tactics of Rainbow Push and GLAAD called extortion? "Behave like we tell you, or else."
Because it's PC to kiss the butts of Gay and Black activist
groups. If you don't, you're a racist homophobe. Like
there's something wrong with that..
Maybe I miss this but, here goes anyway, the American people have spoken, now maybe the will speak-up for things that make a difference, but I doubt it!
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/dec/27/e-reverses-course-says-duck-dynasty-patriarch-can-/
Quote: Beethoven9thSomeone's trying to hide their rage and doing everything possible to NOT lash out like last time. Not fooling anyone though. ;)
Can you be a troll without breaking any rules? Can you not be a troll while breaking rules once in awhile?
You're the one who is trying to hide.
Go Ducks!
Sure. You've already done it plenty of times.Quote: rxwineCan you be a troll without breaking any rules?
From what? I'm not filled with rage like you are.Quote: rxwineYou're the one who is trying to hide.
Quote: Beethoven9thFrom what? I'm not filled with rage like you are.
An idiot talks like you do, as this can't be proved that I'm "filled with rage." It's just another lame troll.
Quote: rxwineAn idiot talks like you do
Careful. I know it's hard, but control yourself, man.
Robertston's remarks, while stupid, echoes the sentiments of a fair portion of American society, and a large proportion of Christians. There was never any threat of prosecution or intervention by the government, so this wasn't a first amendment or free speech issue. It was a public image and profit issue, pure and simple.
GLAAD is bigoted.
Quote: Beethoven9th‘Duck Dynasty’ Reversal Shows GLAAD Has an Expiration Date
GLAAD is bigoted.
I'm not anti Gay at all. What I am against is
the in your face Gay lifestyle that is being
shoved at us all the time. Gays make up
at the most, 2-3% of the population. That's
a minority's minority. Yet they act like it's
50%.
Quote: boymimboObviously this was a ratings ploy by A&E and its ownership. A&E played Duck Dynasty marathons through the holiday season just to bolster the image of the show, and as the #2 regular show on cable, why not?
Robertston's remarks, while stupid, echoes the sentiments of a fair portion of American society, and a large proportion of Christians. There was never any threat of prosecution or intervention by the government, so this wasn't a first amendment or free speech issue. It was a public image and profit issue, pure and simple.
That's because a majority of Americans do not view his remarks as stupid either.
Quote:Quote: rxwineCan you be a troll without breaking any rules?
Quote: Beethoven9thSure. You've already done it plenty of times.
So, you're on record with your own words saying you can be a troll without breaking any rules. And you've never been banned, AFAIK. But you(Beethoven) can still be a troll.
Now I'll give Beethoven9th a chance to be a hero or a testicle-less zero.
Most people making offensive troll comments aren't dumb enough to take me up on this, but let's see how you do.
----------------------------------------------
Challenge:
If I, or anyone for that matter, copies any variation of your routine of:
Doh!!!!
lollollollollollollol
facepalm,facepalm,facepalm,facepalm
(post) stupid ass picture of facepalming
to the Wizard posts, and other mods, you Beethoven stand by your word it will not start looking like offensive trolling to them?
-----------------------------------------------
Time to man up, Beethoven. Most people including myself know when they have made an offensive troll, but are not stupid enough to deny it.
SO HAVE YOU BEEN MAKING OFFENSIVE TROLLS ALL THIS TIME OR NOT? If so, you sure have a lot. Just be a man and admit it.
Wow, what a lie. I've never written "Doh!!!!" or "lollollollollollollol" or "facepalm,facepalm,facepalm,facepalm". Not once. Ever.Quote: rxwineIf I, or anyone for that matter, copies any variation of your routine of:
Doh!!!!
lollollollollollollol
Also, only about 2-3 members go off on tangents & warrant a *facepalm*. The other 7,000 are cool people, not ADHD sufferers.
Quote: Beethoven9thWow, what a lie. I've never written "Doh!!!!" or "lollollollollollollol" or "facepalm,facepalm,facepalm,facepalm". Not once. Ever.
Also, only about 2-3 members go off on tangents & warrant a *facepalm*. The other 7,000 are cool people, not ADHD sufferers.
It's easy to copy and post what you have written, if that's your only complaint.
This is not going away.
My complaint is that you lied.Quote: rxwineIt's easy to copy and post what you have written, if that's your only complaint.
This is not going away.
Like I said, I've never written "Doh!!!!". (I'm not much into the Simpsons) Or "lollollollollollollol" with one 'lol' right after the other. (That's just repetitive) I did write "hahahahaha" before, but that's accurate because that's how most people laugh.
Quote: Beethoven9thMy complaint is that you lied.
Like I said, I've never written "Doh!!!!". (I'm not much into the Simpsons) Or "lollollollollollollol" with one 'lol' right after the other. (That's just repetitive) I did write "hahahahaha" before, but that's accurate because that's how most people laugh.
Essentially, you didn't say bitchbitch
You said bitch.
That is your defense?
Quote: rxwineEssentially, you didn't say bitchbitch
You said bitch.
That is your defense?
Yes it is. There's a difference between posting "lol" (which means "laugh out loud") and "lollollollollollollol" (which is childish & repetitive). You purposely did that to exaggerate. Not to say that I didn't expect such dishonesty.
It's pretty cool that I've gotten into your head though. I bet you deliberately log in to WoV just to see if I've written you. :)
Quote: Beethoven9thYes it is. There's a difference between posting "lol" (which means "laugh out loud") and "lollollollollollollol" (which is childish & repetitive). You purposely did that to exaggerate. Not to say that I didn't expect such dishonesty.
It's pretty cool that I've gotten into your head though. I bet you deliberately log in to WoV just to see if I've written you. :)
I'm just documenting more trolling now. He's trying to get into my head? To cause a reaction.
Quote: rxwineI'm just documenting more trolling now. He's trying to get into my head? To cause a reaction.
Nope, didn't say that at all. More twisting of words & intellectual dishonesty. I can't help it if you overreact to perfectly legit posts.
Quote: Beethoven9thNope, didn't say that at all. More twisting of words & intellectual dishonesty. I can't help it if you overreact to perfectly legit posts.
I do find it ironic to be accused of intellectual dishonesty and twisting of words. But whatever.
Quote: rxwineI do find it ironic to be accused of intellectual dishonesty and twisting of words. But whatever.
I didn't say that you weren't intellectual. I implied that you weren't intellectually honest. There's a difference. Duh!*
*That's the word I use. ;)
Quote: Beethoven9thI didn't say that you weren't intellectual. I implied that you weren't intellectually honest. There's a difference. Duh!*
*That's the word I use. ;)
I substituted "Doh" when you actually say "Duh".
Okay. Great. I'm not actually sure why anyone bothers to argue with you.
Quote: rxwineI'm not actually sure why anyone bothers to argue with you.
Just ask yourself. You're more qualified than anyone else to answer that question. Duh!
Quote: TwirdmanWhy are GLAAD and other gay rights groups suppose to cease exercising their first amendment rights
Jesus H Christ...this guy's always shifting the argument. NOBODY questioned GLAAD's 1st Amendment rights.
Quote: Beethoven9thQuote: TwirdmanWhy are GLAAD and other gay rights groups suppose to cease exercising their first amendment rights
Jesus H Christ...this guy's always shifting the argument. NOBODY questioned GLAAD's 1st Amendment rights.
OK maybe a little hyperbolic but the fact is everyone seems offended that GLAAD spoke out. People on this thread called it extortion here is Sabretom's quote "Why aren't the tactics of Rainbow Push and GLAAD called extortion? "Behave like we tell you, or else.""
Its not extortion. GLAAD commited no crime and simply said we will not support A&E if they support Robertson.
Here is RonC comment about it "GLAAD did want to stifle speech they did not believe in, of course." acting as though we should be offended that GLAAD spoke out against speech it found offensive. Here he is claiming its a victory for America "It was a victory for America because a very vocal minority group was stopped from having a man fired just because they were offended by what is a widely-held position in some churches."
Again what did GLAAD do that was so offensive other than use their free speech and money to say we will not support Robertson? The answer is nothing. Just like right wingers did nothing wrong by saying they would boycott A&E for removing Robertson.
Um...RonC never said that.Quote: TwirdmanHere is RonC comment about it "GLAAD did want to stifle speech they did not believe in, of course." acting as though we should be offended that GLAAD spoke out against speech it found offensive.
Yes, this deserves another...
Quote: Beethoven9thUm...RonC never said that.Quote: TwirdmanHere is RonC comment about it "GLAAD did want to stifle speech they did not believe in, of course." acting as though we should be offended that GLAAD spoke out against speech it found offensive.
Yes, this deserves another...
Fine disregard that one. What about Sabretom2 saying its extortion. Again extortion is a crime yet all GLAAD did was say they wouldn't support a station that had Robertson on it. Hardly rising to the level of extortion or something to find offensive. No one is saying that the Right wingers were practicing extortion when they said they would boycott A&E. So why is it extortion when GLAAD does it.
Or how about EvenBob "What I am against is
the in your face Gay lifestyle that is being
shoved at us all the time. Gays make up
at the most, 2-3% of the population. That's
a minority's minority. Yet they act like it's
50%."
Basically saying I'm fine with gays existing but really why should they be able to say anything. Again why is it so offensive when gay people speak out about discrimination or boycott things. Just because they are the minority population they should shut up.
Also why the continual posting of repetitive and boring pictures. You've done probably close to 100+ of them now and they are just stupid. They add nothing to the story and they stopped being funny 100+ pictures ago. A joke is ok when you tell it once or a few times but when you only have one joke and you repeat at every opportunity it just gets stupid.
Quote: TwirdmanAlso why the continual posting of repetitive and boring pictures. They add nothing to the story and they stopped being funny 100+ pictures ago.
Simple solution. Stop writing facepalm-worthy posts, and the *facepalm* pictures will disappear!
Quote: TwirdmanJust because they are the minority population they should shut up.
No, they should just quit making such drama out of
everything that offends them. It's the end of the
fricking world when a Gay guy gets dissed. Get
over it already.
Quote: Beethoven9thSimple solution. Stop writing facepalm-worthy posts, and the *facepalm* pictures will disappear!
Ok well you facepalmed with and claimed no one said no one questioned GLAAD's first amendment rights yet again here is one such post Sabretom's quote "Why aren't the tactics of Rainbow Push and GLAAD called extortion? "Behave like we tell you, or else." All GLAAD did in this case was exercise their first amendment rights by saying they wouldn't support or watch A&E yet Sabretom's thinks that is extortion and hence a crime.
So will you admit you're wrong about no one questioning GLAAD's rights?
Quote: EvenBobNo, they should just quit making such drama out of
everything that offends them. It's the end of the
fricking world when a Gay guy gets dissed. Get
over it already.
So people should just be able to say whatever they want about gays because gays are the minority. I mean what right have they to be offended and to say they are offended there are so few of them and so many bigots.
Oh my freakin god. He didn't mean that literally, Einstein.Quote: Twirdman...Sabretom's thinks that is extortion and hence a crime.
I swear, you are going to set the daily WoV record for facepalm-worthy posts.
Quote: TwirdmanSo people should just be able to say whatever they want about gays
People are able to say what they want about
anybody, it's called free speech. That's what
you really have a problem with.
Quote: EvenBobNo, they should just quit making such drama out of
everything that offends them. It's the end of the
fricking world when a Gay guy gets dissed. Get
over it already.
I just watched The Mighty Ducks, got all three of them for Xmas and had myself a little marathon.
In the first one, which came out in '92 (ish), their second offensive line had a white center and two black wingers. The kids, the coach, that line themselves, and even the twin black kids' father (also obviously black) referred to this line as "the Oreo line". The reference was made no less than 4 times throughout the movie.
This is '92. This is Disney. This is a wholesome children's movie.
Goddamn it was refreshing. I forgot I had lived in a time where every single thing wasn't offensive to someone. What a difference 20 years makes. /sigh
Quote: EvenBobPeople are able to say what they want about
anybody, it's called free speech. That's what
you really have a problem with.
No biggest victory for free speech in recent memory was Snyder v. Phelps. Phelps has every right to say what he said even though it is far more offensive than anything Robertson said. My issue is why do you say Robertson can say whatever he wants and yet when GLAAD says thats offensive you attack GLAAD. All they were doing is voicing their first amendment rights.
You have a right to say whatever you want about any group you want, with very few exceptions like libel and inciting violence, that does not mean you have freedom from consequence. You can act like a jackhole all you want, but you should expect people to call you a jackhole. Consequently if enough people find you a jackhole and that cost a company money they may very well fire you.
Quote: TwirdmanConsequently if enough people find you a jackhole and that cost a company money they may very well fire you.
Didn't work that way for Phil, did it. He said
his piece and still has a job. Who knew that
most of America agreed with his views.
Quote: EvenBobDidn't work that way for Phil, did it. He said
his piece and still has a job. Who knew that
most of America agreed with his views.
No simply most of the viewers of his show. And yeah he didn't end up getting fired because enough of his audience didn't think he was a jackhole. Hence A&E didn't feel they were losing enough money and that is probably the right economic choice for them given the most likely audience of the show. Doesn't change the fact that even if A&E fired him there would be no 1st amendment violation. Or that GLAAD was well within their rights to threaten a boycott.
I mean this http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1961 list support of same sex marriage as 56%.
This list 54% supporting same sex marriage and 52% saying they would vote for same sex marriage http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1961 .
But again duck dynasty probably attracts a more southern conservative audience, just a guess haven't looked at demographics of who watch the show, which only has a roughly 30-low 40s range of support. So for the audience who watches Duck Dynasty there probably wasn't much outrage over the comment made so no reason to pull him. A&E was just thinking about money there and there's nothing wrong with that. Their decision however does not mean a majority of Americans agree with him.
How did I shift my argument I've always claimed this wasn't a first amendment issue and that Phil Robertson and anyone else involved were within their right to say whatever they wanted. This includes GLAAD and rightwingers.
Quote: TwirdmanI mean this http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1961 list support of same sex marriage as 56%.
This list 54% supporting same sex marriage and 52% saying they would vote for same sex marriage http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1961 .
Here we go, the shift to gay marriage!
Next Twird shift: Interracial marriage (just like earlier in this thread).
Quote: Beethoven9thHere we go, the shift to gay marriage!
Next Twird shift: Interracial marriage (just like earlier in this thread).
That was done strictly to refute BoBs point that the majority agree with Robertson. Do you read any post in a thread besides mine or do you just focus on harassing me?
Quote: TwirdmanNo simply most of the viewers of his show. .
No, most of America. There no major outcry from
anybody but Gays and Jesse. Which is pretty
much nobody.
Quote: TwirdmanThat was done strictly to refute BoBs point that the majority agree with Robertson. Do you read any post in a thread besides mine or do you just focus on harassing me?
Ah, but you're the only serial shifter here.
Quote: EvenBobNo, most of America. There no major outcry from
anybody but Gays and Jesse. Which is pretty
much nobody.
No lack of opposition is not the same as support. It may be the fact that not many people feel strong enough to actively oppose what he says that does not mean the majority support what he said. I pointed to two polls that show that over 50% of people disagree with his views on gays.
