"Duck Dynasty"...is our freedom of speech being stifled?
Quote: 24BingoQuote: Beethoven9thIf the Pope and every single cardinal got together and all agreed to support abortion, that does not make it part of church doctrine.
I suppose you're a sedevacantist, then?
(Or in Beethoven9th-approved verbiage: maybe not exactly, but an ecumenical council git-together of churchy folks could.)
No I think he is a deny reality kind of person. I mean nothing he says makes it sound like he rejects the legitimacy of the pope, though he might don't know him. Seems he rejects that the pope can change certain church laws and demands that dogma has some special existence outside of the church. Point out historical flaws like the fact abortion rules have been changed multiple times and yet he'll still claim victory on the point they can't change abortion rules since there are somethings they are incapable of changing.
Quote: mickeycrimmHow many mormans should you invite on a fishing trip? You should always invite two. Because if you only invite one, he'll drink all of your beer, and smoke all of your cigarettes.
I love that joke. Heres another one of my favorites.
Jews don't acknowledge Jesus.
Protestants don't acknowledge the Pope.
Mormons don't acknowledge each other in the liquor store
Quote: Twirdman
Mormons don't acknowledge each other in the liquor store
Neither do Amish. Drinking is a huge problem with
the Amish. You can get arrested for drunk driving
a horse and buggy in PA and IN.
Quote: TwirdmanI love that joke. Heres another one of my favorites.
Jews don't acknowledge Jesus.
Protestants don't acknowledge the Pope.
Mormons don't acknowledge each other in the liquor store
That's funny stuff, Twirdman. I LMAO.
http://tv.yahoo.com/news/duck-dynasty-fallout-glaad-reeling-biggest-backlash-years-010050637.html
First, the comments that are so controversial did not express hatred for anything but did express his religious convictions on the matter. So what? He didn't just say something about homosexuals; he talked about many forms of things considered sin. He did not attack anyone and he admitted to his own sinful past.
“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”
Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson#ixzz2o6tnfWTC
So instead of just stating their disagreement with the statement, GLAAD decided to meet with A&E and try to get A&E to take theri side, which they did. GLAAD now seems to be facing more of a backlash than ever because of this.
Why couldn't groups that oppose or object to his position (including any advertisers who do so) make statements against his position and pull advertisements instead of trying to attack him for his beliefs and get the show canceled? No, they have to act as if their view of the matter is the only one that is relevant. Why did A&E cave to GLAAD instead of just saying "Phil has a show on our network but his views are not our views"?
This "winner take all" mentality by some truly does not do the "gay agenda" or whatever you properly call it any good. If you try to stifle someone for having an opinion--a belief--other than yours, there will eventually be a backlash. In an exchange like this, GLAAD loses more than it gains and the average gay person out there just trying to live his or her life is done no favors either.
If he had said we should mistreat gays or anyone else, I would understand. He stated a religious viewpoint which may or may not be correct (see "Is There A God"..or whatever that thread is) but is what he beliefs in. Then, after the interview, he tried to help someone to a better way of life:
"There will be only the realest version of Phil Robertson, hosting a private Bible study with a woman who, according to him, “has been on cocaine for years and is making her decision to repent. I’m going to point her in the right direction.”"
Quote: RonCIf he had said we should mistreat gays or anyone else, I would understand. He stated a religious viewpoint which may or may not be correct (see "Is There A God"..or whatever that thread is) but is what he beliefs in.
I think it's hard to convincingly wave your hands and say it's only about speech when we have laws that do actively restrict marriage, having significant, tangible, non-speech, effects on gay people. I have one FB friend from Virginia, and comments on his (pro-Phil/DD) thread got particularly nasty. Whatever points GLAAD isn't scoring, the christian right isn't scoring them either. Of course, Virginia passed anti-gay marriage amendment with 90% of the voters in favor so maybe they just feel safe to say what many really think. But everyone agrees that this is only about speech...
I actually liked the show. But this just turns me off. I could shrug off what he said, if was just about speech, but I don't see it that way at all. Hell, I don't even advocate gay marriage. I just wish the government would get out of marriage. But everyone has to choose a team now, I guess.
Quote: socksI think it's hard to convincingly wave your hands and say it's only about speech when we have laws that do actively restrict marriage, having significant, tangible, non-speech, effects on gay people. I have one FB friend from Virginia, and comments on his (pro-Phil/DD) thread got particularly nasty. Whatever points GLAAD isn't scoring, the christian right isn't scoring them either. Of course, Virginia passed anti-gay marriage amendment with 90% of the voters in favor so maybe they just feel safe to say what many really think. But everyone agrees that this is only about speech...
I actually liked the show. But this just turns me off. I could shrug off what he said, if was just about speech, but I don't see it that way at all. Hell, I don't even advocate gay marriage. I just wish the government would get out of marriage. But everyone has to choose a team now, I guess.
No one "has" to choose a team. You can simply say I disagree with his position and let it go.
It is amazing that we are madder than heck about this when there are people out there who would stone gays around the world if they had there way. Now THAT is a real problem that we should pay attention to...
Haha...this is hilarious. You claim I'm wrong after admitting you haven't read the very thing that you claim is your evidence.Quote: TwirdmanHow can you be continually shown wrong and claim victory. You might be right it might not be in D&C I am not of the mood to read the whole thing right now...
Epic fail on your part.
*facepalm*Quote: Twirdman...demands that dogma has some special existence outside of the church.
Please educate yourself. From Catholic.com: Can the Church change its doctrines?
"No, the Church cannot change its doctrines no matter how badly some theologians may want it to or how loudly they claim it can. The doctrines of the Catholic Church are the deposit of faith revealed by Jesus Christ, taught by the apostles, and handed down in their entirety by the apostles to their successors. Since revealed truth cannot change, and since the deposit of faith is comprised of revealed truth, expressed in Scripture and Sacred Tradition, the deposit of faith cannot change."
I suppose you have no idea what you're talking about. (As usual...lol)Quote: 24BingoI suppose you're a sedevacantist, then?
For example, Cardinal Timothy Dolan:
"A second common misperception is that a new Pope can “change doctrine.” That, of course, is impossible..."*
...unless you believe in E.D.
In ducks he has to be unique in all other things he has to be bland and unoffensive.
Political correctness in the extreme.
Quote: RonCStart with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”
This statement itself is taken way out of context and throws many a good Christian for a loop. The fact is that if you are Christian, you go to heaven based on your belief in Christ alone. It is God's grace, and God's grace alone, that gets you into heaven.
The New King James Version for 1 Cor 6:9-10 is:
Quote: God's wordDo you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.
Let's bring in the next verse:
Quote: 1 Cor 6:11And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.
We are all sinners. The list given above is simply a list of sins and applies equally to homosexuals as it does to hole counters (extortioner) and those who swear alot (revilers). According to the bible, you can go through life having done nothing in that quote and still not go to heaven if you don't believe that Jesus Christ went to the cross for you.
Quote: John 3:14-19, JesusAnd as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Quote: boymimboThis statement itself is taken way out of context and throws many a good Christian for a loop. The fact is that if you are Christian, you go to heaven based on your belief in Christ alone. It is God's grace, and God's grace alone, that gets you into heaven.
So if you believe Jesus went to the cross for you, then you can do whatever you wish -- murder, rape, steal, torture -- and still go to heaven?
Quote: WizardSo if you believe Jesus went to the cross for you, then you can do whatever you wish -- murder, rape, steal, torture -- and still go to heaven?
Of course! Just study the life of the Apostle Paul. It's up to you, of course, to determine if that's rubbish.
My point is that if you're Christian, stop taking the bible out of context to persecute homosexuals when in the next passage from that same chapter it says that some of them would be saved. Clearly there are other passages in the bible that indicates that your belief in Christ alone and His resurrection is your ticket to heaven.
Quote: Beethoven9thHaha...this is hilarious. You claim I'm wrong after admitting you haven't read the very thing that you claim is your evidence.
Epic fail on your part.
*facepalm*
Please educate yourself. From Catholic.com: Can the Church change its doctrines?
"No, the Church cannot change its doctrines no matter how badly some theologians may want it to or how loudly they claim it can. The doctrines of the Catholic Church are the deposit of faith revealed by Jesus Christ, taught by the apostles, and handed down in their entirety by the apostles to their successors. Since revealed truth cannot change, and since the deposit of faith is comprised of revealed truth, expressed in Scripture and Sacred Tradition, the deposit of faith cannot change."
Well again what Catholics say about it is immaterial given I was talking about Mormons. Also these issues are not the same things. You seem to thing church law is unchanging and it clearly isn't. I mean amongst the Catholic church there was the multiple changes regarding abortion over multiple different centuries. The Doctrine referred to is almost definitely referring to matteres of scriptural fact and importance for instance bodily resurruction of Christ or the assumption of Christ or perhaps deeply rooted church believes about the nature of church and reality for instance transubstantiation not church rules like abortion which again has changed multiple times. Similarly the Mormon church would also have certain unchanging doctrines like the revelation of Joseph Smith by Moroni or the fact Jesus came to America these are matters of certainty in the church. Church rules however are changing for instance the ban on blacks in the priesthood was rescinded we know this one occured and we can both agree on it. If you think I'm arguing that the Mormon church had a rule regarding interracial marriage occupying the same level of importance as Jesus in the America you would be clearly right in saying this never existed. I am arguing instead it had a rule in the same vein as the rule regarding blacks in the priesthood.
Quote: boymimboMy point is that if you're Christian, stop taking the bible out of context to persecute homosexuals when in the next passage from that same chapter it says that some of them would be saved. Clearly there are other passages in the bible that indicates that your belief in Christ alone and His resurrection is your ticket to heaven.
The statement did not say anything about persecuting anyone--it simply said that sinners would not get into heaven unless their sins were forgiven.
“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”
Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson#ixzz2o8H3cGjO
If he had said something about persecuting them or doing hateful things to anyone, it would be a whole different story. Trying to turn his statement into anything more than a statement about his beliefs is ridiculous. It is political correctness gone nuts.
At the end of the interview, he was helping a sinner...another sinner, just like him...towards what he believes is a better life with Christ.
You don't have to agree with him but he certainly did not attack anyone.
Quote: RonCThe statement did not say anything about persecuting anyone--it simply said that sinners would not get into heaven unless their sins were forgiven.
“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”
Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson#ixzz2o8H3cGjO
If he had said something about persecuting them or doing hateful things to anyone, it would be a whole different story. Trying to turn his statement into anything more than a statement about his beliefs is ridiculous. It is political correctness gone nuts.
At the end of the interview, he was helping a sinner...another sinner, just like him...towards what he believes is a better life with Christ.
You don't have to agree with him but he certainly did not attack anyone.
I hate this attitude. He didn't say anything hateful he just stated his belief. His belief entails eternal punishment for homosexuals. If I say I'm going to beat an imprison a homosexual I am adequetly deemed a monster, but if I say just you wait God will beat and imprison you for all eternity well I'm just showing Gods love. No it still incredibly hateful and bigoted just because you have a justification for it doesn't suddenly make it acceptable.
It doesn't mean that he should lose his job or that he shouldn't have the right to say it. He is expressing his freedom of speech in a different magazine that don't represent the views of his network. Mickey Mouse and the Hearsts (co-owners of A&E) overreacted.
YOU brought up the Pope earlier. *facepalm*Quote: TwirdmanWell again what Catholics say about it is immaterial given I was talking about Mormons.
Let's go back to the link that YOU cited:Quote: TwirdmanI am arguing instead it had a rule in the same vein as the rule regarding blacks in the priesthood.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctrine_and_Covenants
The priesthood is mentioned, but where's the ban on interracial marriage?
For everyone else: Just watch Twird now. He's gonna backtrack and say that the very link HE introduced doesn't matter. lol...
Anyway for what it is worth I thought I would make a comment since there has been so much about the Catholic Church's position thrown around. I think both of them make accurate statements about the Catholic Church's teaching on the possibility or impossibility of doctrine changing, but I must admit that I think Twirdman's more nuanced position better expresses the possibility of doctrine developing (not changing) as overarching Biblical truths such as the sacredness of every human life becomes more informed by modern science.
Also just to clarify, belief in Jesus is not a "get out of jail free card" that allows you to do anything you want without eternal consequences.
Quote: Beethoven9thYOU brought up the Pope earlier. *facepalm*
Let's go back to the link that YOU cited:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctrine_and_Covenants
The priesthood is mentioned, but where's the ban on interracial marriage?
For everyone else: Just watch Twird now. He's gonna backtrack and say that the very link HE introduced doesn't matter. lol...
I will admit it may not be int there I simply pointed out that the Mormon church can change Doctrine and have in the past. If Joseph Smith and The Quorum of 12 felt they weren't changing Doctrine it wouldn't be in D&C just as no ban on stealing is mentioned in D&C since stealing was already regarded as a sin from the bible. Similarly there was scriptural evidence to ban interracial marriage.
Also about the never changing dogma of the Catholic church it was only in the 19th century that the Immaculate Conception was codified and it was in 1950 that the assumption of Mary was made doctrine. So again tell me how the pope is completely unable to change doctrine given this event happened less than 70 years ago under Pope Pius VII. Also lets go with your super Pope definitely can't change law regarding abortion since it has only been done by 5 previous popes. But you know that rule is totally unchanging right.
Quote: TwirdmanI hate this attitude. He didn't say anything hateful he just stated his belief. His belief entails eternal punishment for homosexuals. If I say I'm going to beat an imprison a homosexual I am adequetly deemed a monster, but if I say just you wait God will beat and imprison you for all eternity well I'm just showing Gods love. No it still incredibly hateful and bigoted just because you have a justification for it doesn't suddenly make it acceptable.
You are the one talking about hate.
He talked about things his reading of the bible and that his church consider sins...sins with a punishment (as ALL sins have, according to the same bible) and the opportunity for salvation. The bible says what will happen to those who sin, not Phil Robertson. If you don't believe in the bible, it is easy enough to just ignore the whole thing... He isn't calling on anyone to be punished at all; just to repent and be forgiven. That is such a hateful message.
Again, if you don't believe at all, who cares? His words should mean nothing to you!!
Quote: FrGambleAlso just to clarify, belief in Jesus is not a "get out of jail free card" that allows you to do anything you want without eternal consequences.
Of course a Catholic would say just that!
Quote: FrGamble
Also just to clarify, belief in Jesus is not a "get out of jail free card" that allows you to do anything you want without eternal consequences.
I'd like to point out that this is especially true amongst the Catholic church where it was never seen as a get out of jail free card. In Catholicism both works and belief are necessary for salvation and even in most Protestant religion people would argue a deeply held religious belief necessary for salvation would be accompanied by a deep moral change and thus continuing to live in sin would represent a lack of an actually held religious belief so would not garner salvation.
Quote: boymimboOf course a Catholic would say just that!
Matthew 25: 41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Get away from me, you who will receive terrible things. Go into the unending fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 I was hungry and you didn’t give me food to eat. I was thirsty and you didn’t give me anything to drink. 43 I was a stranger and you didn’t welcome me. I was naked and you didn’t give me clothes to wear. I was sick and in prison, and you didn’t visit me.’
44 “Then they will reply, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison and didn’t do anything to help you?’ 45 Then he will answer, ‘I assure you that when you haven’t done it for one of the least of these, you haven’t done it for me.’ 46 And they will go away into eternal punishment. But the righteous ones will go into eternal life.”
Of course Jesus would say just that!
Quote: boymimboNo, stating the bible out of context to tell gay people that they won't go to heaven (therefore to hell) sounds a heck of alot like persecution to me. Of course, the bible is chock full of contradicting statements that it's easy to justify an action or statement by quoting the bible. And my "interpretation" might not be correct either.
He didn't just offer up hell as the only option--salvation is also there, according to his beliefs. The "persecution" is that the wages of sin are death? That is his belief but not what he wishes for people.
Like it or not, some people do not believe homosexuality is right, yet they don't persecute those who choose, or are chosen, to that way of life.
He preaches that it is wrong and there is salvation. A religion preaches that they should be stoned. We have pages upon pages written about him; no one dares question the religion that really would persecute them...
Quote: boymimboIt doesn't mean that he should lose his job or that he shouldn't have the right to say it. He is expressing his freedom of speech in a different magazine that don't represent the views of his network. Mickey Mouse and the Hearsts (co-owners of A&E) overreacted.
He has every right to say what he wants; they have every right to fire him. They may have made a mistake but they did not do anything they did not have the right to do.
Look at the life of Paul before he became a Christian. Look at David, who murdered and adultered after he professed his deep love for God. Both went to heaven, according to the bible.
Quote: boymimboTwirdman, I respectfully disagree. We all live in sin. A Christian life is supposed to be full of good works due to your love and faith in Jesus Christ, but we are all human and we all falter to one degree or another.
I respectfully agree wholeheartedly! [edit: agree with boymimbo that is]
Quote: boymimboOne can have a deep belief and still manage to be gay or an adulterer or a thief, etc. One of the great issues with many Catholics is the deep sense of guilt they feel for sinning.
Look at the life of Paul before he became a Christian. Look at David, who murdered and adultered after he professed his deep love for God. Both went to heaven, according to the bible.
We should all feel guilt for sinning it is what leads us to conversion like the two great people you mentioned; David and Paul. Hopefully we also feel the much stronger and wonderful feeling of relief and freedom from guilt and sin that come through forgiveness in Christ.
(From Wiki -Phil Robertson (Philip Alexander Robertson) created the Duck Commander duck call in 1972 and incorporated the Duck Commander Company in 1973.[4][5] He played college football at Louisiana Tech University and was offered a contract by the Washington Redskins after his junior year. He turned it down and quit football because it interfered with duck season.[6] Phil graduated from Louisiana Tech with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Physical Education and later received a Masters of Arts degree in Education via night classes while working as a schoolteacher.[7] Phil is known for his dislike of modern technology (he proudly admits that he does not own a cellphone or a computer) and his concern that his grandchildren are becoming "yuppies". Phil also professes belief in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Like others in the Robertson family, he participates in the White's Ferry Road Church of Christ.[8] -Wiki
Quote: FrGambleMatthew 25: 41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Get away from me, you who will receive terrible things. Go into the unending fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 I was hungry and you didn’t give me food to eat. I was thirsty and you didn’t give me anything to drink. 43 I was a stranger and you didn’t welcome me. I was naked and you didn’t give me clothes to wear. I was sick and in prison, and you didn’t visit me.’
44 “Then they will reply, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison and didn’t do anything to help you?’ 45 Then he will answer, ‘I assure you that when you haven’t done it for one of the least of these, you haven’t done it for me.’ 46 And they will go away into eternal punishment. But the righteous ones will go into eternal life.”
Of course Jesus would say just that!
He was talking about judging the nations, not individual people, on judgement day, not on the day you die. The two parables before this in the same chapter are talking are clearly talking about judgement day. It is more a statement on how to treat people, and that it is just not good enough to do good things for Christ Himself, but for all people.
That said, of course there is a judgement when you die, based on your beliefs and your deeds. According to the bible, it is clear that God sees everything in what you do be it in deeds, actions, thoughts or words as a reflection in your belief in Christ. You can profess all you want that you are a believer, but as a believer, you also [generally] do acts that reflect those beliefs. The bible is filled with warnings about how you behave and consequences when you don't.
As a Christian, you MUST believe that Jesus died on the cross to save you from your sins. All Christians have to believe this.
Quote: KeyserI was fascinated to learn about his success in college football.
He graduated the same year as Terry Bradshaw
and was more sought after than Bradshaw. He
turned down a football career because it would
take hunting and fishing out of his life for six
months every year. All his sons have college
degrees, as do their wives. He's quite literally a
self made millionaire. They started the duck call
business on the kitchen table.
He's an American success story. We need more role models like Phil Robertson and his family, and fewer idiots like Kanye West and Kim Kardasian.
Quote: wizardSo if you believe Jesus went to the cross for you, then you can do whatever you wish -- murder, rape, steal, torture -- and still go to heaven?
Quote: boymimboOf course!
Then I think the church could use a little help in the marketing department, since it seems to want to maximize the number of souls they save. I think the message should be what you just said. Believe that Jesus already paid for your "get into Heaven free card" and do whatever you wish. Never lift a finger to help anybody but yourself. Much like a buffet, you may as well sin as much as possible, since Jesus already paid for your right to do so.
Your team would get a lot more converts than with the message about loving your neighbor.
Quote: KeyserHe's an American success story. We need more role models like Phil and his family, and fewer idiots like Kanye West and Kim Kardasian.
Why they're all liars making money by tricking people into believing they are something they're not. http://www.refinedguy.com/2013/03/27/duck-dynasty-cast-before-and-after-style-pics/#25 its amazing how they all decided to go from clean cut yuppies to hillbillies when they got a show. Now I will admit the uncle was in the military and thus had to be clean cut and the father was playing football in college and they may have required it, but all his sons were super clean cut on the beach and now suddenly bearded hillbillies seems a little unlikely that they'd all decide you know what screw shaving I want to look like a mountain man for some reason other than a tv show. Now I will admit they did run a successful business and that's awesome but plenty of people run massively successful business and then don't go and misrepresent themselves.
Quote: TwirdmanNow I will admit they did run a successful business and that's awesome but plenty of people run massively successful business and then don't go and misrepresent themselves.
How did Robertson misrepresent himself?
Quote: Beethoven9thI suppose you have no idea what you're talking about. (As usual...lol)
For example, Cardinal Timothy Dolan:
"A second common misperception is that a new Pope can “change doctrine.” That, of course, is impossible..."*
...unless you believe in E.D.
What you said is that "if the Pope and all the cardinals..."
From a lay perspective, doctrine has changed. The excuse given for that is that the old doctrine was a miscommunication. An ecumenical council could, as far as anyone on Earth can say, tell the world that this doctrine was a miscommunication as well. The Church position is only that they wouldn't, since now there isn't a miscommunication. "If two equals three, then I am Pope." So from either perspective, if an ecumenical council found such, abortion would be in compliance with church doctrine.
Wait, sorry.
Captioned for Beethoven9th: Even if it ain't true, it sure looks like it. They say they said it wrong. If they got together and told us they'd said it wrong agin, it'd look like it changed agin. O'carse, they wouldn't, since now they ain't sayin' it wrong. If'n they said they was, y'could go ahead n' kill yer baby 'till it's born. O'carse, it don't seem like that "if" - which is more or less yer "if" - 'dever happen, but that just makes it tautological-like.
Quote: Rob45How did Robertson misrepresent himself?
By being a Christian, successful, and a great role model. The left doesn't like that.
Quote: rob45How did Robertson misrepresent himself?
I showed you the pictures where they mysteriously go from super clean cut yuppies basically to looking now like mountain people. I will say possibly appearance only but they want to portray themselves as rugged outdoorsmen and for some reason people think grizzly adams when they hear that so thats what they did. I will say I have no problem believing they love hunting and fishing, but both me and my dad loved fishing and both were clean shaven except for a moustache and my uncle loves both hunting and fishing and he is completely clean shaven. Now I will admit I can say nothing of patriarch of the family and his brother since those pictures are from a time when they may have been forced to shave, the brother definitely its a picture of him in his uniform, patriarch not sure what rules were regarding shaving if you were on football team at time would assume clean cut but not sure. But his children looked nothing like they do now.
Quote: KeyserBy being a Christian, successful, and a great role model. The left doesn't like that.
No I feel one of the greatest role models to aspire to is Mr. Rogers and he was a deeply religious man. Definitely starting to take a shining to Pope Francis and you'd be hard pressed to argue he is not Christian. My problem is the Robertson's suddenly when from what looks like yuppies on the Hamptons to a stereotypical red neck which does nothing but harm all people living in the south.
Quote: TwirdmanWhy they're all liars making money by tricking people into believing they are something they're not. http://www.refinedguy.com/2013/03/27/duck-dynasty-cast-before-and-after-style-pics/#25 its amazing how they all decided to go from clean cut yuppies to hillbillies when they got a show. Now I will admit the uncle was in the military and thus had to be clean cut and the father was playing football in college and they may have required it, but all his sons were super clean cut on the beach and now suddenly bearded hillbillies seems a little unlikely that they'd all decide you know what screw shaving I want to look like a mountain man for some reason other than a tv show. Now I will admit they did run a successful business and that's awesome but plenty of people run massively successful business and then don't go and misrepresent themselves.
""Once you get used to it, it's not bad. I think 1988 was the last time Phil shaved his beard. He lost a bet to a preacher, shaved his beard, and wore a suit and he said he'd never do it again. When [my brother] Jase and I were younger and running the business, we thought we had to clean it up and put suits on to have business meetings with big companies. But about eight years ago, I told Jase, 'Forget that. Let's just go like we normally are,” shared Robertson."
http://www.examiner.com/article/willie-robertson-of-duck-dynasty-reveals-reason-behind-their-long-beards
Yes, there are pictures of them without beard. That hardly makes the case for them growing the beards just for TV.
Why not attack some folks who are really out to hurt people instead of someone who simply believes differently than you do? The Khardashians and there ilk are much more harmful to society than Phil Robertson and his family. He created a company that made something consumers wanted. Their story is an American success story. Why all the ill will because he believes differently than some of us?
what. They sell duck calls, are they supposed to
dress in pin striped suits? The show is also mostly
fake. Do you really think they supply hundreds
of stores with duck calls with 4 men making them
on a table in a warehouse? They have a factory
that makes them. The show is scripted, it's all
outlined. Si wins a motorhome, Willie's daughter
goes on a date, Phil goes hog hunting. It's about
family values, and people love it. They wish they
were the Robertson's. The Cosby show was a huge
hit in the 80's for the same reason.
The Robertsons, on the other hand, are promoting a twisted kind of magical thinking - "don't act like those pagan stuffed suits, just be a good ol' boy remember the powers that be are ordained by Jesus!" - and misrepresenting themselves to do so. And people like RonC are taking them seriously.
the youngest one.
Quote: RonC""Once you get used to it, it's not bad. I think 1988 was the last time Phil shaved his beard. He lost a bet to a preacher, shaved his beard, and wore a suit and he said he'd never do it again. When [my brother] Jase and I were younger and running the business, we thought we had to clean it up and put suits on to have business meetings with big companies. But about eight years ago, I told Jase, 'Forget that. Let's just go like we normally are,” shared Robertson."
http://www.examiner.com/article/willie-robertson-of-duck-dynasty-reveals-reason-behind-their-long-beards
Yes, there are pictures of them without beard. That hardly makes the case for them growing the beards just for TV.
Why not attack some folks who are really out to hurt people instead of someone who simply believes differently than you do? The Khardashians and there ilk are much more harmful to society than Phil Robertson and his family. He created a company that made something consumers wanted. Their story is an American success story. Why all the ill will because he believes differently than some of us?
OK while I agree that Kim Kardashian is vapid she also has a successful clothing line. Also your wrong in this thinking causes no harm. Uganda just passed a law where gays will spend life imprison and people who know another is gay must turn them in. This law was lessened from the original execution but is still pretty bad with life imprisonment. This law was possibly because of religious fundamentalist who see gays as deserving of punishment. In fact it was an American evangelicist who helped design this law. These people believed that gays were sinners who could only be saved by the power of Christ and if they weren't saved and recanting their evil ways you just have to eliminate them. So if he the Christian right just believed differently than us I could say fine I think you're wrong but you're not hurting anybody. That's not what's happening what is happening is laws are being made across the world that harm a good deal of people all in the name of religion. And I will admit there are many religions doing it Christianity in the US and parts of Africa and Islam in the Middle East. But I will not pretend that because it's worse in the Middle East with Islam that bad things aren't happening in the US because of Christianity.
Again I have talked about people who I disagree with in terms of belief I mean as an atheist I clearly disagreed with the religion of Mr. Rogers but he was one of the best people who will ever live on Earth. The difference between him and Robertson being his philosphy and his beliefs did not lead to peoples lives getting worse. Similarly Pope Francis and I have a lot of disagreements in terms of beliefs but he is shaping up to be a fantastic pope.
So again while I think Kardashian is incredibly vapid and shallow I'd prefer her over someone who feels the need to spew the vile parts of their religion.
Quote: EvenbobIt's about
family values, and people love it.
Geez, Evenbob!
You're in rare forum today! Correct again! It's all about family values. That's why the left hates it. The foolish left has been working so hard to package and sell the left's new perverted family values, and then a show like this comes along and slaps them in the face.
-Keyser
Quote: EvenBobYup, the sons grew the beards for the show, so
what.
No they should dress and act how they normally act. People are pretending that this guy is some great role model the fact of the matter is he found a way to market and doll up his family to increase profits. Signs of a savvy businessman and a shrewd money maker but hardly a role model unless you believe money comes before all else.
Quote: 24BingoThe Kardashians, at the end of the day, are harmless specifically because they don't have anyone defending them like those here are defending the Robertsons. They're lucky idiots, and everyone watching that show knows they're lucky idiots.
The Kardashians are more harmful because they promote a set of values that doesn't help our society.
Quote: 24BingoThe Robertsons, on the other hand, are promoting a twisted kind of magical thinking - "don't act like those pagan stuffed suits, just be a good ol' boy remember the powers that be are ordained by Jesus!" - and misrepresenting themselves to do so. And people like RonC are taking them seriously.
What? How in the name of twisted logic do you think I take them seriously? I have defended their right to say something others might not agree with and also the right of A&E to shitcan them. Just because I don't jump on the politically correct bandwagon about what was said doesn't mean I take them seriously--their show is just like every other reality show.
