jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (37 posts)

Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty sharing his opinion of homosexuality.

  1. flacoinohio profile image83
    flacoinohioposted 3 years ago

    If Phil Robertson was inappropriate in sharing his opinion with Drew Magary I could understand the outcry from the GLBT community and the GLAAD organization.  I know many gay and lesbian couples who openly discuss the intimate parts of their relationships (sometimes quite loudly I might add) and promote their lifestyle to others even if they are aware that those around them do not personally accept or support same sex relationships and rights.  When was the last time a GLBT celebrity was sanctioned for expressing their opinion about heterosexual relationships?   It is very rare to see a GLBT community member bashing heterosexual beliefs, but it is very common to hear the promotion of same sex relationships and gay rights even if a venue does not concern GLBT issues.   What is your opinion on this recent incident?

    1. Zelkiiro profile image82
      Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Gee, I can't imagine what could be so offensive.

      /facepalm

      1. 61
        retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Offensive to whom, those seeking to be offended?  The perpetually offended class?  Whining babies all.

        1. Zelkiiro profile image82
          Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          And if someone from a major TV network said "All Christians are promiscuous and commit bestiality," you wouldn't be fazed whatsoever.

          Oh wait, no, you'd launch a tirade about "the Left" for an hour and a half, in typical retief2000 fashion.

          1. 61
            retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I wonder who said homosexuals are all promiscuous and commit bestiality?  I understand it is hard  to resist confirmation bias, but it would be nice if there was some tiny effort to do so.  I also understand that it is very hard to think in complete ideas rather than merely vent the spleen.

    2. gmwilliams profile image85
      gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Not surprised by Mr. Robertson's opinion on the matter.  It does not matter to me in the slightest.  There are more issues to be concerned with besides Mr. Robertson's opinion on the issue at hand.  There are issues of homelessness especially in families, child and spousal abuse, racism, ageism, high unemployment rate, and the deteriorating quality of education in this country.   Mr. Robinson can say what he wants as long as he does not harm anyone.

    3. Silverspeeder profile image61
      Silverspeederposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I didn't see the interview, was he asked his opinion or did he just offer it?

      Everyone has an opinion on everything if the question is asked of them, to castigate someone for their answer if you don't like or agree with it is easy.
      If you think you are not going to like the answer to your question don't ask it. Unless you are looking for the argument of course.

      1. 61
        retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        It was a magazine interview and he responded to the interviewer causing a kerfuffle.

    4. EncephaloiDead profile image60
      EncephaloiDeadposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      LOL. I love that, Phil was "sharing his opinion". If it was his opinion to be shared, I could understand that, but it's not his opinion, its' already a well know common hatred shared by hypocritical bible thumpers. Phil would have to be a whole lot more intellectually challenged than I could imagine if he actually didn't know his comments were going to viewed as inappropriate, but I could be overestimating his capacity for rational thought as he most likely believed they were appropriate and "shared" by every other God fearing Christian.



      Perhaps, they're going out their way to annoy you because they're fully aware your position on the subject. I find it very hard to believe you know many gay and lesbian couples.



      Obviously, Phil's not very bright, despite the shows success, but that success reflects more of the not so very bright who watch it and what they believe.

      1. bBerean profile image60
        bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Excellent illustration of someone assigning lack of intelligence to another simply because they disagree with them.  Masters in education, pro level QB (even if he turned down the offer), and a highly successful business man...all before reality TV courted him.  We get you don't like him, but your allegation Mr. Robertson is "obviously not very bright" is merit-less.

        1. gmwilliams profile image85
          gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Mr. Robertson does have a Masters in Education and was a teacher for a while.

          1. bBerean profile image60
            bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            ...and for the sports fans, Terry Bradshaw was his backup quarterback at Louisiana Tech.  Folks can argue against his views all they want, but make themselves look silly saying the man is stupid.  wink

            1. 61
              retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

              They also make themselves look silly (and many more things) arguing that he is a bigot.

            2. gmwilliams profile image85
              gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Yes, he did play football for a while.  He just voiced his opinion according to what he believed to be in the bible, that's it.

              1. Zelkiiro profile image82
                Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                And if he voiced his opinion that disobedient children should be murdered in the city square by the entire town?

                That's in the Bible, too, you know. And it's actually a commandment of God, right next to killing nonbelievers, selling your just-raped daughter to her rapist, and not wearing two kinds of fabric at once!

                1. gmwilliams profile image85
                  gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  To reiterate, I said that he voiced his opinion; however, I DON'T agree with it!

                  1. Zelkiiro profile image82
                    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    It's not so much a matter of disagreement as it is a matter of putting into perspective how lousy the "just stating his opinion" argument is when you bring up equally-offensive scripture.

                2. 61
                  retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Nothing like being willfully ignorant - have fun with that.

                  1. Zelkiiro profile image82
                    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Oh, do you have the verse where Jesus says the Law of Moses no longer applies? (If so, have fun with Matthew 5:17-18, chuckle-head!)

                    Or are you going to try to dismiss the Old Testament entirely by quoting Paul and defeating your own argument before it even takes off?

        2. EncephaloiDead profile image60
          EncephaloiDeadposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there,” he said. “Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.”

          Are you actually trying to equate what Robertson said with his credentials? Are you saying his credentials make him smart?

          1. bBerean profile image60
            bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Would you suggest we shelve his masters, his bachelors, his teaching, all of his business achievements and relegate him to the "not bright" pile because his view of sin, (first that it exists and second what constitutes it), does not align with yours?  Must one be subject to the Dawkinsian sect of Scientism to qualify as "bright" in your book?

            1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
              EncephaloiDeadposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Firstly, we don't base a person's intelligence on their credentials, that is a fallacy.

              Secondly, He does not have a view of sin, he has an indoctrinated belief to hate homosexuals and believes that is an appropriate thing to say in an interview. That makes him fit quite well in the not bright pile.



              Does one merely have to have credentials to qualify as bright in yours?

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Can one's friends be an indication of intelligence?  Seems that both Westboro Church as well as Terry Jones (of Quran burning fame) have endorsed Robertson.

                http://guardianlv.com/2013/12/westboro- … k-dynasty/

                1. 0
                  Sooner28posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I think in a sense yes.  If all my friends are members of the KKK or the flat earth society, I think you may rightfully wonder about my intelligence.

              2. bBerean profile image60
                bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Those "credentials" were earned with study, testing and proven performance, all of which required intelligence.  Ask yourself how your "credentials" and achievements stack up to his.  It certainly makes no difference to me, but I am not going to consider someone stupid or "not bright" simply because I disagree with them.


                He never said he hates homosexuals...that is the projection of you and others on him.  He said he believes it is one out of a list of sins he gave when specifically asked to do so.  He holds a very common belief, that all men are sinners, and that is just one of many sins.  I am not sure how people get "hate" unless perhaps they want to believe that to justify their hatred toward him.

                Robertson was asked a question that was intended to extract something that could be used to vilify him, and although I expect he was fully aware of that, he answered honestly.  It appears he was not worried if he would be viewed as bright by those who clearly are bigoted against him, and have chosen to hate him for daring to voice views they feel should be stifled. 



                I'll take that as a yes.

                1. Zelkiiro profile image82
                  Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Intelligence has nothing to do with getting a degree (look at me, for example!). All you need to do to get a degree is take the least difficult classes required (e.g. Math 017, 019, and 021, got my Math credits, baby!) and not completely and totally fail said classes. Yes, getting a C- counts as a pass. Yes, you can get your degree on nothing but a C-. Yes, it even works at Harvard--just ask George W.!

                  It's all about abusing the system and not utterly failing.

                  1. bBerean profile image60
                    bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    It would be safe to say Louisiana Tech, circa 1965, (guessing as I don't know what year Robertson graduated), was not as easy.

                  2. 61
                    retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    How entertaining, you are aware that a Harvard MBA requires far more effort than failing divinity school - even with mediocre grades - which was not the case with GWB versus either the Tennessee Two-by-Four or Lurch.

                2. EncephaloiDead profile image60
                  EncephaloiDeadposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  It's not about disagreeing with them or their credentials, it's about what is being said about homosexuals.



                  If it were a very common belief, then most of the world would believe it, but since it is a belief amongst Christians, then over 5 billion people in the world don't believe it, so it actually turns out to be a belief held by a minority of people in the world. And, of those who hold it, many of them do not believe homosexuality is equivalent to bestiality. Many of them actually accept homosexuals, unlike Robertson and his ilk.



                  Robertson has full support for freedom of speech and freedom of religion, just look at the passages that support his view:

                  Jude 7 "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example, in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire." Any sinner should always remember that the God who commands us to love our neighbour is the same God who will cast any and all unrepentant sinners into the "eternal fire".

                  Lev 18:22-23 "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death."

                  Cor 6:9 "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals"

                  Tim 1:9-10 "realizing the fact that (civil) law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers"

                  Rom 1:26-27 "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."

                  Again, Robertson and his minority of people who still hold those medieval beliefs are free to do so and free to air them. Their kind are vanishing, and it's this exact kind of exposure that causes many people to revisit and rethink their beliefs, and their numbers dwindle as a result. They do more harm to their religious convictions than anything else.

  2. Robephiles profile image88
    Robephilesposted 3 years ago

    When has a gay person ever expressed an opinion that straight people will burn in hell, are immoral or shouldn't get married?  Oh wait, never.

    1. 61
      retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Robertson never said anything about anyone burning in hell, in fact, quite the opposite.

  3. Alphadogg16 profile image88
    Alphadogg16posted 3 years ago

    I have to agree with gmwilliams, there are bigger issues to be concerned with, the man voiced his opinion which he is entitled too, whether you think its right or not. Everyone has a right to their own opinions. Why would you care what he thinks anyway? Does his opinion somehow effect your life? preventing you from doing/accomplishing anything?

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Does  a celebrity opinion affect the opinions/actions of others?  And can those actions then affect my life?  Even to the point of preventing me from doing something?

      I would have to say that yes, such a thing is not only possible but extremely common.  The words of Mormon VIP's (celebrities in their religion) had a massive effect on gays in California, after all.

      1. Superkev profile image86
        Superkevposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Yep, right along with conservative black and Latino pastors.

  4. 0
    Sooner28posted 3 years ago

    The problem is that there are no good arguments against homosexuality, just like there weren't any against interracial marriage.  When people start trying to defend "traditional marriage" (a completely false view of history, mind you), their prejudice shows.

    What are the arguments?  That it's unnatural?  That kids raised by homosexual couples turn out poorly?  That the "Bible" says it's wrong?  That it will lead to bestiality?  That it's a choice?

    All of these arguments are ridiculously weak, so this raises the question of why people are so against it when they have no case.  I think it's nothing more than homosexuality is just different than what many are accustomed to.  Most people aren't intellectually aware enough to understand that different does not equate to immoral, so anytime something is substantially different than what they believe the world to be, it's immediately said to be immoral.

    If anyone thinks they have a solid case against gay marriage though, I'd love to hear it.

 
working