Susan's Place Transgender Resources

okay. before everyone pops with whatever opinion is in their heads

1 : i just read about this

2: i want the opinion of trans women on the subject
3: i dont want arguments just rational discussion

4: if this thread has gotta be moved thats fine but i dont see why it should have to be frankly. if it gets out of hand ill personally ask for it to be deleted

okay. so the gist of it that im getting is that an old man on a reality show said that in his pre civil rights experience there werent race relations issues from the perspective of blacks. not irrelevant but for the purposes of this discussion thats clearly an opinion that hes entitled to.

he also said that homosexuals are going to hell and described graphically gay sex. why? whatd he say? no clue.

the point is theres a whole controversy over this and i really think that the whole pc thing has gone too far.

i dont watch tv. ive got movies and video games. even the free channels are unavailable in the middle of nowhere. so i have no connection to this person as a tv character. real or otherwise.

but it seems to me that organizations like glaad and people like jesse jackson have gone so over the top with hyperbole and condemnation that they seem to have forgotten that this guy is not only entitled to his opinion hes entitled to say what it is. publicly or otherwise. i cant speak to the race issue because aside from the fact that im white i wasnt alive before civil rights was a major issue. i was born 20 years after it became official.

as to the comments about gays going to hell and 'graphic descriptions of homosexual' intimacy acts. who cares. seriously. people are entitled to that opinion. and his expression of it is at worst offensive at best polite compared to the stereotyped nonsense and ignorance spewed by the general media and the fact that marriage equality is still an issue.

as a politically independant transwoman. is anyone else more irritated at this mans being attacked for his expression of his beliefs than at the beliefs themselves. its not like theyre new.

again i cant speak to the race issue. its not my place. 
but id rather be told im going to hell by the people who believe it than be told anything along the lines of 'dont worry. they wont be expressing hateful opinions anymore'

seriously. there is a place to draw the line. and its when you incite violence. not express conflicting or offensive viewpoints.

anyway.
sorry.
rant over.

anyone care to discuss?

also. just fyi kinda thing. id really like transwomens opinions but anyones would be cool. so. not discriminatimg just sayin. : p

nonameyet-

Phil Robertson (the duck dynasty guy) expressed his opinion in an GQ article in response to a direct question by GQ. GLAAD responded to the GQ article by expressing their own opinion about what Phil said. Both entities are perfectly within their rights to state an opinion; we still have that right in this country for the most part.

A&E (the network that hosts duck dynasty) pulled Phil out of the show in response to what GLAAD said, and that's when the fireworks started.

Phil has made no secret that he and his family are Christian. Viewers of the show took it that GLAAD was responsible for Phil disappearing, when it was actually somebody at A&E that made that decision in response to GLAAD's statement. A rookie mistake on A&E's part, and now they have quite a PR mess to clean up.

This reminds me of the big deal with chick-fil-a when Mr. Cathey expressed his Christian opinion about gays and everyone got excited about it. He has a right to his opinion just like Phil does, or just like you and I do.

My .02

I don't really care; about his views or what the media's doing about it. I think they are overreacting a bit, I mean what did they expect? They're a bunch of rednecks, I thought they'd be even more homophobic.

Meh...

The dude is a wanker and so-called "reality television" is garbage.

jesse jackson said. and im getting that question reality feeling typing it.

that what he said racially was worse than the man who asked rosa parks to give up her seat. because at least that man was within the scope of the law. this guy was just expressing his opiniom (paraphrasing but that was the gist of the words he used)

as for glaad freaking out i just feel that theyve been going too far for a while. im kinda saddened that theyre considered the go to organization for official statements on lgbt issues.

when eminem did his show with elton john they protested because of homophobic lyrics in his music. they protested. a straight man. working publicly and musically onstage. with a gay man. because of what they interpreted to be homophobic. so they didnt even want eminem to publicly express his support (in a way) or at least indifference to sexual orientation. because they disagreed with what he had to say.


i cant be the only one who sees contradiction there. i feel like glaad is made up of straight people who are trying too hard.

but the point is. this guy wasnt enciting action against blacks or gays. as far as i read he wasnt even being racist. but youve got people protesting his appearance on the show and all that. im glad ( no pun intended) hes going back on it.

im just frustrated with the backward attitudes and double standards from people that one would think would be more open to free expression of ideas.

While I think what he said was rather homophobic and racist I couldn't really care less. In my opinion it is bad journalism. There is so much going on in our country, peoples whose rights are being trampled on and all we can focus are the ramblings of an old rich white person. Jeez our news is horrible and this is one of the many reasons why I believe Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are the best news reporters in this country. There are so many things that need to be covered and fought for and it is a shame that we focus on such trivial matters and kick those who need it on the ground and steal everything from them....

Quote from: nonameyet on December 27, 2013, 11:22:39 PM
im just frustrated with the backward attitudes and double standards from people that one would think would be more open to free expression of ideas.

It is free. He has something to say about it, and everyone else has something to say about him. But he's not getting arrested for it or anything.

i would like to note that what i mean is that its not racist to say 'i didnt see racism at the time' its kinda like saying 'he didnt seem gay'



im actually worn out on the subject already. i didnt think anyone would respond, really : / i just wanted to rant.

kinda wishing i hadnt said anything : |

im just gonna let this one play out without me now.

You don't have to we're just talking about it because it's fun to talk about :3 lol

As a newcomer to the LGBT community, I might have responded a little more fervently than someone jaded by a long struggle.

I don't watch Duck Dynasty, but I've been noticing their merchandise just flooding the local Wal-Mart where I shop, and beyond almost mistaking a pair of slippers with a bearded guy on them for Hobbit merchandise, they haven't annoyed me.

However, when I read about it and heard about it, I now go through Wal-Mart and I can't resist a moment of contempt or disgust whenever I see that bearded guy.

Sure, he's just some idiot on a reality TV show.  What difference is there if there's one more ignorant redneck?  But the fact is, it's not just his impact as an individual.  It's his impact on his viewers, and to everyone who hears his views.  Views are not challenged in these viewers, they are reinforced and justified, by having a guy on TV confirm them.  When younger viewers who may be gay hear this, they are dehumanized and discouraged from fulfilling their true selves. 

As for the freedom of speech thing, I think it's a matter of imbalance.  A lot of people are in arms over Robertson being suppressed for "political correctness", and the fact is that many more LGBT people have been suppressed and silenced for centuries.  It's not a matter of restricting speech- if you do that, you create a bigger evil.  But censuring and punishing people who do is right, because it has to be demonstrated that those kind of statements are now inappropriate, and the more times that happens the more times people will learn that it's wrong.

So, maybe I'm just not jaded, but that's why I'm not happy with this thing, cause I live in a community where this smeghead has a lot more impact than he ought.

As a former Law Enforcement Officer what I am going to say may upset some folks here, but that is not the intent. He has a Constitutional right to free speech the same as we do. No one wins any type of controversy such as this. If he pushes, he is discriminating. If we push back and try to silence him, we are discriminating. Just let it roll off your back folks. OK, enough said, address all hate mail to me by PM please and I will keep it confidential and not reprint or address it in an open forum. I hope, however, that everyone see's this type of controversy for what it really is....RATINGS, RATINGS, RATINGS! A&E is being successful in getting publicity like crazy for the show and increasing it's audience by making this bigger than it is. It's Hollywood people.  :)

Quote from: mountainhun on December 27, 2013, 11:41:04 PM
It's his impact on his viewers, and to everyone who hears his views.  Views are not challenged in these viewers, they are reinforced and justified, by having a guy on TV confirm them. 

Well, honestly, only a complete and utter moron would base their views on a television program. People that are that stupid are beyond all hope anyway. As far as Duck Dynasty is concerned, I didn't even know what it was until all of this crap started. I thought it was a cartoon program judging by the title and I don't pay much attention to current TV shows since I don't have cable TV and I don't pay attention to stupid, new shows since I hold the opinion that pretty all new stuff sucks (both TV and music).

Besides, I don't give a duck about some dorky redneck so, duck him. That dude can duck off and go duck himself.

I actually feel bad for him.

Here he is, on a show about a certain type of person, and then he gets in trouble for being that type of person. He made the network a lot of money.

I am not surprised that he is fundamentalist Christian nor am I surprised, he shares their biased beliefs of people like me. Many elected politicians believe the same or similar things. They get time on TV and make money for news networks.

Never watched the show.

I'm a Christian and I can say from my own study from the bible that you will most definitely not go to hell for this. The only unforgivable sin is intentionally leading others into sin.

It's not wrong to feel a certain way about someone.

I can understand people being hurt by this, though it's hardly something to get so riled up over.
It's his opinion. Just like someone's opinion of him might be derogatory.
But 2 "wrongs" don't make a right.
We all need to watch ourselves so we are not hypocritical.
That's what I think is wrong with our country.
Too many hypocrites on liberal AND the conservative side.

My parents like watching the show. The times I have seen it, it was entertainment. Like many books and movies written about people, things are hyped up to become more interesting. Real life is a drag so any drama, humor or otherwise is built in to produce the kind of programs that will drive viewership.
Opinion given by himself (Mr. Robertson) does not necessarily reflect A&E or their company. It reflects solely on his character as a person and his own given beliefs. Opinions of which (as an American citizen) are held as a 1st amendment right in the US that shall not be infringed.

Quote from: Emo on December 28, 2013, 12:29:16 AM
I'm a Christian and I can say from my own study from the bible that you will most definitely not go to hell for this. The only unforgivable sin is intentionally leading others into sin.

It's not wrong to feel a certain way about someone.

I can understand people being hurt by this, though it's hardly something to get so riled up over.
It's his opinion. Just like someone's opinion of him might be derogatory.
But 2 "wrongs" don't make a right.
We all need to watch ourselves so we are not hypocritical.
That's what I think is wrong with our country.
Too many hypocrites on liberal AND the conservative side.

i can say from my own reading of the bible and interpretation of christs teachimgs that there is no unforgivable sin.

in fact gods willingness to forgive in any situation is strongly emphasized throughout. though there are contradictions scattered throughout that lead to other conclusions. likely the cause of meddling by interpreters over the years.

anyway. point being that the whole notion of christ is that he died for our sins. and therefore by definition all are forgiven.

anyway. there are any number of ways to look at it but the way i see it there are far
far. far worse sins than leading others into sin.

id also like to note on the 'what is and what isnt appropriate anymore' note.

mongoloid is a word that was once considered a technically accurate term for people with down's syndrome ( i think it was down's anyway) its now considered a vulgar term.

the movie shrek 2 has a giant mentally challanged gingerbread man character.

hes referred to by shrek as a great stupid pastry.

his name. is Mongo


then again that movie has a pretty vulgar cross dressing joke too.  pinnochio is wearing a thong and blah blah. its really gross and dumb.

anyway. its a kids movie and the retarded character is mongo. and the wooden puppet is teased for cross dressing. the thong is even pulled and snapped by someone else. i find that way more offensive than being told im going to hell.

While I agree everyone should be able to have their own opinions. Yet does it really fall under freedom of speech? and if it does should being hateful or spreading hateful speech there of be allowed to be covered under freedom of speech?

Also in today's day and age should we really be publicizing it on such a massive scale?

I dunno, I don't agree with what he said, I don't believe it his "right" to say it openly on tv/mass media. Yet that is my opinion and i'd like to say if I don't have anything nice to say I won't say nothing at all, but I have said pretty hateful things to the people on the other side of the fence, not really sure if that makes me as guilty as him.

I think just rambling...

id also like to note on the 'what is and what isnt appropriate anymore' note.

mongoloid is a word that was once considered a technically accurate term for people with down's syndrome ( i think it was down's anyway) its now considered a vulgar term.

the movie shrek 2 has a giant mentally challanged gingerbread man character.

hes referred to by shrek as a great stupid pastry.

his name. is Mongo


then again that movie has a pretty vulgar cross dressing joke too.  pinnochio is wearing a thong and blah blah. its really gross and dumb.

anyway. its a kids movie and the retarded character is mongo. and the wooden puppet is teased for cross dressing. the thong is even pulled and snapped by someone else. i find that way more offensive than being told im going to hell.

@ aina

from my understanding it falls out of the realm of free speech when it incites violent behavior against others. which happens to coincide with my personal views so im not sure if thats factual or just my views.

seems right though.

To incite violence or promote any harm to others is not upheld by the constitution as it is violating someone's rights at that point.

It is not a shrewd move to promote such an opinion as he has and many others have as public relations will sour (public backlash, etc.). The attention span of any given group would be called into question as well. Will this blow over like nothing has ever occurred in a few weeks? or will people understand, that although he is within his right to say so, it would be an ethical challenge to continue to support such a viewpoint through currency, viewership, etc.

I think there is plenty to be upset about in what he said, but every time I start getting worked up about it I immediately realize I don't care about these duck idiots, and then I go back not acknowledging they exist, just like before he said anything in the first place.  I wish people would stop talking about it.  I reserve no space for these people in my head, yet they keep trying to move in.  No.  Stay out.  Go away.

It's not uncommon for people that have had brain damage, organic, traumatic, or like the duck, heavy drug induced to embrace cult-like religious doctrine. In that religious doctrine the mentally ill fall lockstep with groupthink for the security it engenders knowing that they're both part of something bigger than themselves, and the rush of superiority they feel over others that aren't part of the cult's collective experience. The world saw it with the rise of the Third Reich, and more recently , jihadi Islam. Here in America it was hatred for blacks, hispanics, then gays, lesbians, and now transsexuals.

A&E's pandering executives had to know that their group of fundamentalist religious white trash were (are) homophobic, transphobic and racist. They chose to put them on the air, instead of doing what any sane person would have done with trash--throw it out.

We're fighting for out civil rights and making excuses for religious zealots must stop. 

i was not impying that the incitement of violence or hate against others would be xovered under the constitution. quite the opposite. i was trying to emphasise that as far as i know the incitement of violence against others is where the line is in fact drawn as having gone too far. but the incitement of hate against others is a fuzzier line and as far as i can tell he certainly didnt cross it by expressing his religious views on the matter. particularly given the widespread popularity of those views in our society.

as far as the ethical concerns in his views theyre exactly at the core of this issue. people are entitled to believe that we are going to hell and to express those views. and i certainly wont advocate for their being silenced.  show me the stats that indicate his words did actual harm and i may change my views. but probably not.

the suppression of thoughts and words in the name of protecting me from others is a much farther step than the suppression of real violence for the same reason.

@ dr zoey

i reject the notion implied (though i doubt intentionally) that we are naive and pandering weaklings in the face of religious zealotry.

i reject also the notion that anyone who holds these views is somehow mentally challanged, whether by default or injury.

that someone who certainly (i presume you are trans) falls outside the social behavior norms, would use mental handicap as a thinly veiled insult against those who have conflicting moral values, i find disconcerting and upsetting.
i find that most people i meet who hold these views are otherwise kind and understanding people. but there is no moral magnet in the human mind whereby views are categorized and polarized. there are shades of grey and, to outsiders, contradictions, which, while most certainly a bit of a burden on society are ultimately harmless.

im not going to hell based on how many people believe i am. and im not being harmed by the thoughts of others.

you may be offended. but at the end of the day youve gotta shrug it off.

shows like family guy and american dad are all kinds of offensive. but they also happen to be very open in their support of gays on issues such as adoption and marriage. albiet in parody form. but clearly siding with gays nonetheless.

would you rather that they didnt show support given the smut and offensive humor its wrapped in. i wouldnt.

im off topic but im sure that if youve read this far you got the point.

My whole thing with this is that it's all fine as long as certain people aren't apart of the groups being offended. But it's no longer a non issue once your apart of the group being offended.

Case & Point.... Had he went on a rant about the Jewish community all HELL would've broken loose. We all know the pull that Jewish people have. That show would've been axed so fast we'd being saying Duck who??

What's good for the goose should/is good for the gander.

But because he was "Only quoting whats in the bible" or practicing his "First amendment rights" it wasn't that bad. People fail to realize that free speech comes with responsibility. Just because you can say something doesn't mean you should. People are fired every day for doing and saying things they had the right to say Phil is no different.

A&E is a company in the business of making money. If Sponsors are turned off by someone benefiting from their money they have the right to complain to A&E. A&E will do what's best for business. So if that means suspending or firing a old prehistoric redneck that's what they have the right to do as a business.

I've been shaking my head at the people who are defending him. I'm also side eyeing the fact that most of the attention is being placed on what he said about gay's but no one's talking about what he said about the African American community. But then again I'm not really surprised.

Also....Passing the buck and saying that you don't care adds to the problem.

I don't watch the show and shiver every time I see them on tv. I just want to give his entire family a bleach bath. They look like they've been living under a over pass for yrs but I digress.

If his comments are allowed to go unchecked it sends a clear message that says it's ok to say whatever you want no matter who you offend. Words have power. And no one should be paid to spew their bigoted views on tv. I commend those who've spoken out publicly against him. Someone has to do it no matter how unpopular it may be.

my primary focus on what he had to say about gays has more to do with the forum than a moral issue. this is a trans forum. but point taken.

as for what he did say about race relations. first of all what he said was wrapped in what seemed to be typical ignorant old man confusion but it isnt hard to work it out. based on the quote i read all he said was that he worked with blacks  before the civil rights changes and that he hadnt noticed any animosity from them. he also didnt seem to hold racist views.
also. and im waaay off topic here. the term african american is in my view a far worse term than black. a black person born in the u.s. is no more african american than i am irish american or polish american or german american or scottish american.
it also implies that all africans are black. there are white african americans too.

but aside from that it bugs me because africa is not a country. thatd be like me moving to africa and being called north american-african

way off topic but if were going to address the racial aspect of it i had to bring that up. please please please dont take offense. its a linguistic issue for me not a race issue.

at any rate

@ janae

the religious aspect of this is something you are missing entirely. he is perfectly entitled to spew whatever views he wants to provided he does not incite or promote violence against others.

you can be as upset as you like but the fact of the matter is that his expressing his views isnt harming you. those who agree will continue to agree. those who disagree will continue to do so.
just as we are entitled to believe that he is morally wrong he is entitled to the same views about us. the fact that he puts an afterlife of misery on it doesnt change that.

i guess this brings up another question of subjective and objective morality.

It doesn't matter what group is offended under any way to be viable for 1st amendment so long as it does not incite any criminal or heinous act.

I agree with you Nona (if I may call you that), the ethical standpoint is absolutely the main point behind the argument and understanding of why people should be offended to rise to action. Regardless of law, people should be able to recognize that unethical behavior is not justified by any means, religious or otherwise. Though the law permits them to say such things, I would urge the public to become aware and otherwise boycott any affiliation or support towards them and urge others to do the same. Though, my main concern again is follow-through.

Mr Robertson has already been reinstated to the show.

Nothing like a little controversy to boost revenue.

First of all, I never heard of duck dynasty before the controversy.  Well, saw something about it once during an award show, but it really didn't appeal to me and I pretty much blacked it out.  After seeing what it's about, I am even less interested than I was originally inclined.  As for the comments he made, they were horrible and it pissed me off, but that's his view and he is free to believe what he wants.  That's the extent of my involvement in this whole fiasco.

What I wanted to comment on is that his constitutional 1st amendment rights only apply to the federal government and state governments (through incorporation).  While he has the right to say what he wants without facing penalties by the government, his statements don't guarantee that he won't be judged by his employer.  As a company A&E have the right to decide who represents their company.  Barring any discrimination clause in their human resources policy or in anti-discrimination laws themselves (which his statements aren't protected under), they can hire or fire who they please.  Therefore, his views may be constitutionally protected, but that doesn't mean that it can't be used against him by his employer.  Nonetheless, I could care less whether they keep him or not.  I really don't have a dog in this fight. 

Lastly, let's refrain from using the term "redneck".  There are southerners on the site who take offense to the use of this phrase because it's a demeaning statement that unfairly paints a broad brush against all southerners.  We didn't like it when the fool from Duck Dynasty did that to the gays, so let's not do the same to another group in turn. 

i also didnt realize that both of the comments i was replying to were from janae. rendering the @ unnecessary. i feel like an idiot now.
my bad


haha. am i Nona?


@ jamie
i dont think he should have been taken off in the first place. ive only seen it once and dont even know the characters names but its irrelevant. he is entitled to his views. no matter how controversial. provided they dont incite violence or any like act. that goes for anywhere. not just here where we're lucky enough that its covered under the constitution.


@learning

agreed on the redneck thing but its not just a southern thing anymore i promise.

also. there are conflicting legal points on free speech and employment since employers started checking facebook pages. its a whole big convoluted thing but the point is that you can not necessarily be fired for what he did. and certainly not for religious views. while the burden of proof is on you in an at will state there are things they cant fire you for.

Well I am black so the term AA doesn't offend me. I'm not going into weither or not it's correct or appropriate that's pretty much irrelevant.

What he said about gay's being a religious thing is a cop out to me. By your logic it's ok to offend tons of people based on what the bible says. Not everyone is Christian and not everyone believes what he does. There are people who are Christians who's views differ. I could argue that that little part of Deuteronomy that bible tumpers love to quote is outdated along with a list of other things. I could also bring up the fact that Jesus never spoke on homosexuals, but he did preach love and kindness and loving you neighbor as yourself. Something people like Phil conveniently forget when they go on these anti-gay bible rants.

In any event he was wrong. He had a right to say what he wanted that doesn't mean the public or paying sponsors had to agree.

A&E reinstated him so at this point all of this is pointless.

To everyone reading this thread, I would also urge that opinions of the individuals here are also that of opinion and by no means makes them wrong for having their thoughts. So if someone prefers not to take action or disagrees with your point of view please, don't attack-argue. That's how locked threads happen. It probably goes without saying but just a forewarning just in case. So far this thread has been rather insightful though.

Quote from: nonameyet on December 28, 2013, 03:06:13 AM
haha. am i Nona?

Shh.. I thought it was cute lol.

I'm not a transwoman but I will add a point of view on this thing called free speech.

Many use this term incorrectlly in order to fill their own agenda.For example:

A christian man stands in front of a crowd and says 'according to what I believe,gays are going to hell' but then let's say another says 'it may be against what I believe but I love and support all people'

Which would have the most negative impact? What defines it as 'free speech' and 'hate speech' ? Do we know where the line is or do we draw the line only for others while we cross it daily?

And where does hate and prejudice come into play?

Allow free speech but the moment ANY negativity comes into play,then it turns into hate speech and should be trodden on like a horse running from a buring stable.

Quote from: nonameyet on December 28, 2013, 03:06:13 AM
i also didnt realize that both of the comments i was replying to were from janae. rendering the @ unnecessary. i feel like an idiot now.
my bad


haha. am i Nona?


@ jamie
i dont think he should have been taken off in the first place. ive only seen it once and dont even know the characters names but its irrelevant. he is entitled to his views. no matter how controversial. provided they dont incite violence or any like act. that goes for anywhere. not just here where we're lucky enough that its covered under the constitution.


@learning

agreed on the redneck thing but its not just a southern thing anymore i promise.

also. there are conflicting legal points on free speech and employment since employers started checking facebook pages. its a whole big convoluted thing but the point is that you can not necessarily be fired for what he did. and certainly not for religious views. while the burden of proof is on you in an at will state there are things they cant fire you for.

He was not suspended for being Christian.  For example, if I'm a democrat and suspending for being that, then perhaps I could challenge my company for being discriminatory (if there are laws against such things or it's covered in their hr policy).  If I take a heavy stance on a controversial issue which is seen as a typical democrat view and my company fires me, that's not the same as being fired from being a democrat.  It would be the view not the group I'm in which got me in that situation, which is what happened to Robertson.  Even so, the first amendment does not apply to companies at all, so it's really not relevant.  What matters is that A&E doesn't break their own anti-discrimination policy or break any laws that are applied to them, the first amendment being one that is not.  The first amendment was created to protect people from being punished by the federal government and was incorporated to include state gov as well. It was not written to protect you from your employer.   This is not and never was a constitutional issue. 

i just wanted to clarify why i said blacks instead of african americans.


also. yeah. it is okay to offend tons of people based on what the bible says. consider how many people youd be offending by quoting jesus.

hes not saying that god wants him to send us to hell. hes saying that god will send us there himself. i just dont get why thats such a huge deal.

he may as well have said all gays were ->-bleeped-<-gots. itd have the same emotional impact on me.

by arguing that his job should be taken youre effectively saying that those with viewpoints you consider dated and morally objectionable shouldnt be in positions of minimal influence in our society. is it your place to decide who those people and what their viewpoints are? judge not

jesus also spoke of taking the plank out of your own eye before you call attention to the piece of sawdust in someone elses.

point being its not up to us to judge whether someone elses views are right or wrong.

@fox

i laughed cause i thought it was cute too.

@ learning. im really just gonna have to agree to disagree on that one

@chaos the same

My comment was to clarify what hate speech and free speech is as many confuse the two but maybe the reason for that is done purposely.if any form of speech downgrades,causes loss of confidence,self esteem,humilates,causes any emotional harm-then as the term says,it is for that exact purpose.free speech is there for us to respectfully express our opinions while not purposely targeting a group or another human being to do just that.and anyone who does not understand the above needs to stop using free speech as a means to destroy another.that is the truth.otherwise,I could really careless about this crappy a©© show and the people on it.you all have a good day :)

Quote from: nonameyet on December 28, 2013, 03:30:11 AM
i just wanted to clarify why i said blacks instead of african americans.


also. yeah. it is okay to offend tons of people based on what the bible says. consider how many people youd be offending by quoting jesus.

hes not saying that god wants him to send us to hell. hes saying that god will send us there himself. i just dont get why thats such a huge deal.

he may as well have said all gays were ->-bleeped-<-gots. itd have the same emotional impact on me.

by arguing that his job should be taken youre effectively saying that those with viewpoints you consider dated and morally objectionable shouldnt be in positions of minimal influence in our society. is it your place to decide who those people and what their viewpoints are? judge not

jesus also spoke of taking the plank out of your own eye before you call attention to the piece of sawdust in someone elses.

point being its not up to us to judge whether someone elses views are right or wrong.

@fox

i laughed cause i thought it was cute too.

@ learning. im really just gonna have to agree to disagree on that one

@chaos the same

As you said, employers have fired people from facebook statements.  While those comments are likely constitutionally protected speech, it doesn't prevent an employeer from taking action. It only prevents the government from doing so, not private corporations.  You're free to disagree, but I haven't heard that employers are supposed to uphold their employees speech.  Personally, I could care less about what he says and whether he is on tv.  It's fine to believe companies shouldn't regulate their employees speech. Whether there is a legal restriction that means they are obligated to protect their speech is a whole other thing. 

Quote from: Jamie D on December 28, 2013, 02:52:34 AM
Mr Robertson has already been reinstated to the show.

Nothing like a little controversy to boost revenue.

Money talks. A&E fouled their bed (to say it in a polite way) when they kicked Phil off of the show. A&E ate crow and the money is rolling in once again.

There have been some unflattering comments made in this thread about about their appearance - how they look is baked into the show & it's probably required in their contract with A&E. I believe that each of them has a college degree except for Si; they are actually very well educated.

As far as them being hicks (I'm avoiding another word that some consider derogatory) and the popularity of the show - some of y'all have obviously never lived in the south, or have never been to West Monroe, LA (I have done both). This country does have major regional differences and people in the south tend to hunt and have religious leanings, so this show resonates with other people like that. It is a clean show without cursing or crude sexual references and some people find that very attractive.

Silencing someone is a risky business - the same criteria that is used to silence them could also be used to silence you.

Quote from: Janae on December 28, 2013, 02:30:50 AM
Also....Passing the buck and saying that you don't care adds to the problem.

I don't watch the show and shiver every time I see them on tv. I just want to give his entire family a bleach bath. They look like they've been living under a over pass for yrs but I digress.

If his comments are allowed to go unchecked it sends a clear message that says it's ok to say whatever you want no matter who you offend. Words have power. And no one should be paid to spew their bigoted views on tv. I commend those who've spoken out publicly against him. Someone has to do it no matter how unpopular it may be.

I disagree.  This whole thing is the most disingenuous farce I have seen in a while.  When you have a star of a tv show that has taken a marketing strategy of relentlessly playing up rural southern stereotypes for profit, that says something outrageous that continues with that strategy, you should realize that is exactly what it is. 

Now his base is worked into a froth, making him out to be a victim of oppression, with no acknowledgment of the irony/hippocracy of that, and nobody in the country isn't talking about this show.  Meanwhile, as somebody that lived in the south for a long time, and knows people and has family from the rural areas of the region, I feel everybody in the show is coming across very larry the cable guyish, i.e. FAKE.  In fact, I bet if you pulled hard enough on their beards, they would come right off.

I think if you let yourself get swept up in the fervor, you are playing right into their hands.  They make A&E enough money, and he stopped short of saying anything too vile, so they will be taken back FOR SURE, and then you can all just wait for the chick-fil-a effect to get in full swing, and they will make loads more money, and sell more ugly hats and whistles, than they were already making off this whole sorry affair.

I think he does deserve to be fired, I also think the people that rush to the defense of his bigotry are the real problem and the most disturbing thing in all of this.  So, to a point, I am with everybody that is mad, but in a world where a leader of a first world country is putting actual people in jail for just showing support of gays and nobody seems to give a damn, idk, I don't feel like I have room for outrage over an obvious marketing campaign that is banking in my outrage so they can profit off the backlash against my feelings.  In other words, I won't feed these trolls.   I already feel tricked enough that I have even responded to this lol.

in russia, gay and trans peeps are in danger od being locked up. It's the law. Howld that law start? I bet it originated in a vacuum and no one in a position of power and responsibility ever said bad things about the lgbt community. For real, words matter. This guy should keep his hateful thoughts to himslelf. It's not a free speech issue. No one said he can't say it but to listen to people tell me I have to accept it and stay quietm that's oppression. And that's what most in this thread said. He has a right. Blah, blah blah. But I guess everyone can go ahead and not care. It's not like you may ever be a victim of hate. Hate that starts with words.

None of it shocks me. I've seen the show a few times. Just another scripted "reality show". From what I've read Mr. Robertson wanted off the show. So he make insensitive remarks about people he has no knowledge of. GQ gets the story they wanted, He gets a chance to leave without voiding contract for show, A&E makes a stand then retracts it. Nothing changes for any of them. They all make money of the shock value of it. His first amendment rights were not violated he was fired from a worthless "reality show". All he has done is incite hate on the GLBT community. I'm really disappointed in the man as a Christian. It was beyond irresponsible. I hope and pray some poor soul in LA. doesn't pay for all the hate he stirred up. Being from the south myself there is plenty without him getting involved.

Quote from: LJP on December 28, 2013, 10:08:28 AM
None of it shocks me. I've seen the show a few times. Just another scripted "reality show". From what I've read Mr. Robertson wanted off the show. So he make insensitive remarks about people he has no knowledge of. GQ gets the story they wanted, He gets a chance to leave without voiding contract for show, A&E makes a stand then retracts it. Nothing changes for any of them. They all make money of the shock value of it. His first amendment rights were not violated he was fired from a worthless "reality show". All he has done is incite hate on the GLBT community. I'm really disappointed in the man as a Christian. It was beyond irresponsible. I hope and pray some poor soul in LA. doesn't pay for all the hate he stirred up. Being from the south myself there is plenty without him getting involved.

I agree 100%

Quote from: Eva Marie on December 27, 2013, 11:05:35 PM
nonameyet-

Phil Robertson (the duck dynasty guy) expressed his opinion in an GQ article in response to a direct question by GQ. GLAAD responded to the GQ article by expressing their own opinion about what Phil said. Both entities are perfectly within their rights to state an opinion; we still have that right in this country for the most part.

A&E (the network that hosts duck dynasty) pulled Phil out of the show in response to what GLAAD said, and that's when the fireworks started.

Phil has made no secret that he and his family are Christian. Viewers of the show took it that GLAAD was responsible for Phil disappearing, when it was actually somebody at A&E that made that decision in response to GLAAD's statement. A rookie mistake on A&E's part, and now they have quite a PR mess to clean up.

This reminds me of the big deal with chick-fil-a when Mr. Cathey expressed his Christian opinion about gays and everyone got excited about it. He has a right to his opinion just like Phil does, or just like you and I do.

My .02

I don't think rights are the subject here. No one is denying anyone's right to free speech, not in the DD event, not in the Chick-Fil-A event. Responding to someone who says something bigoted doesn't infringe upon their right to say bigoted things, and responding to bigotry with boycotts/criticisms/ridicule/etc is just as much free speech as the original statement.

GLAAD, et. al., are all phony hypocrites. They're democrat political groups only. They should be ignored.

I don't agree with Phil Robertson, but I don't fear him or others like him. He doesn't have the power to do anything to me. His comments regarding homosexuals were crude and gross, certainly doesn't make 'Duck Dynasty' appealing to me to start watching (haven't seen a single episode). GLAAD has done more to increase the popularity of the show and point out the hypocrisy of A&E and the Cracker Barrel restaurant better than anyone could. How can anyone be SO clueless regarding their customers as the Cracker Barrel??? I always thought the 'Cracker' was a description of their clientele.  :D  Good goobilee goo...

Oh well... on to the next faux outrage!

Oi i can already imagine the hate mail im gonna get for this:

I support Phil Robertson. I supported him to the point of boycotting A&E until he was returned to the show. I would not watch any of there shows, i would not buy anything they own the rights to, and that's just the short list.

Not only am i glad that Phil is back on the show, but i even bought 3 new duck calls from Duck Commander instead of going to Cabellas again.

Let the hate mail begin.

Quote from: kariann330 on December 28, 2013, 10:54:52 AM
Oi i can already imagine the hate mail im gonna get for this:

I support Phil Robertson. I supported him to the point of boycotting A&E until he was returned to the show. I would not watch any of there shows, i would not buy anything they own the rights to, and that's just the short list.

Not only am i glad that Phil is back on the show, but i even bought 3 new duck calls from Duck Commander instead of going to Cabellas again.

Let the hate mail begin.

Why would a trans person support bigotry against LGBT people?

I have several different reasons for supporting Phil Robertson, none of which i will voice publicly as i have already been warned by mods when voicing one of them publicly.

Quote from: kariann330 on December 28, 2013, 11:06:59 AM
I have several different reasons for supporting Phil Robertson, none of which i will voice publicly as i have already been warned by mods when voicing one of them publicly.

So your post was just an attempt to fan the flames? You seem to be toeing a very fine line. Why?

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 11:08:56 AM
So your post was just an attempt to fan the flames? You seem to be toeing a very fine line. Why?

Ok fine here we go....
I support free speech.
I support the Constitution over anyone's feelings
I hate liberals who want EVERYTHING to be pc so no one gets hurt.
I personally have about as much camo as they do and wear it proudly.
My views on life are equal to there's.....if it flies it dies, if it hops, it drops.
Im a redneck from the woods of south Tennessee and support my redneck family.
I believe in the Bible and what it says.

The rest of my personal views will get me banned so if you want them PM me.

Okay, folks, I'm going to step in here and say let's try to be careful not to start scrutinising other members, but keep it to the topic at hand.

like jen said the real problem are the people who rush to the defense of this filth. This is a support forum for women to talk about female issues. So my bad I I must have clicked on the wrong site since all I see are a bunch of phony victims talking about their right to hate being trampled on. But I do know who to never respond to now. And to the comment on GLAAD being hypocrites or whatev, wow just wow. I consider myself queer and part of the lgbt community. And most here are so I wish that would be repsected. I'm gonna have to rethink even coming to this forum anymore. I don't need this. I have a life, a BF, and things are great and thought maybe I could help others. But not at the expense of my happiness. This thread doesn't belong here. Point blank. Isn't there a politics subforum where crap like this can be discuessed. Oh yeh it's not posted there since this is the most popular section and the thread itself is meant to incite.

Quote from: Joanna Dark on December 28, 2013, 11:40:26 AM
like jen said the real problem are the people who rush to the defense of this filth. This is a support forum for women to talk about female issues. So my bad I I must have clicked on the wrong site since all I see are a bunch of phony victims talking about their right to hate being trampled on. But I do know who to never respond to now. And to the comment on GLAAD being hypocrites or whatev, wow just wow. I consider myself queer and part of the lgbt community. And most here are so I wish that would be repsected. I'm gonna have to rethink even coming to this forum anymore. I don't need this. I have a life, a BF, and things are great and thought maybe I could help others. But not at the expense of my happiness. This thread doesn't belong here. Point blank. Isn't there a politics subforum where crap like this can be discuessed. Oh yeh it's not posted there since this is the most popular section and the thread itself is meant to incite.

I think you give people way to much power over the way you feel. It's just a discussion.

I think most people are hypocrites, so no biggie really.  ;)

Quote from: Nikko on December 28, 2013, 11:58:46 AM
I hope that's tolerated here?

I don't see any intolerance towards LGBT people, besides from those who support bigotry.
Other people do have power over how others feel, by the very nature of humans being social animals. Don't be dismissive of other's feelings.

Quote from: kariann330 on December 28, 2013, 11:22:10 AM
I support free speech.
I support the Constitution over anyone's feelings
I hate liberals who want EVERYTHING to be pc so no one gets hurt.
Im a redneck from the woods of south Tennessee and support my redneck family.

I agree with points 1-3.

I'm a townie and I hate living in the country, so, that part I don't agree with. (Good on ya for supporting your family, though)

The rest of the post? I will just leave it at this:                 

Quote from: Joanna Dark on December 28, 2013, 11:40:26 AM
like jen said the real problem are the people who rush to the defense of this filth. This is a support forum for women to talk about female issues. So my bad I I must have clicked on the wrong site since all I see are a bunch of phony victims talking about their right to hate being trampled on. But I do know who to never respond to now. And to the comment on GLAAD being hypocrites or whatev, wow just wow. I consider myself queer and part of the lgbt community. And most here are so I wish that would be repsected. I'm gonna have to rethink even coming to this forum anymore. I don't need this. I have a life, a BF, and things are great and thought maybe I could help others. But not at the expense of my happiness. This thread doesn't belong here. Point blank. Isn't there a politics subforum where crap like this can be discuessed. Oh yeh it's not posted there since this is the most popular section and the thread itself is meant to incite.

I agree. It's sad that those who have traditionally held power over minority groups (e.g. LGBT people) cry victim when their oppression is fought against. It's nonsense to the highest degree.

Quote from: Laura Squirrel on December 28, 2013, 12:11:13 PM
I agree with points 1-3.

I'm a townie and I hate living in the country, so, that part I don't agree with. (Good on ya for supporting your family, though)

The rest of the post? I will just leave it at this:                 

Well, no one in this thread, or who criticises bigotry, is against the constitution or freedom of speech. Dressing this up as a freedom of speech issue is confusion at best, and disingenuous at worst.

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 12:10:30 PM
I don't see any intolerance towards LGBT people, besides from those who support bigotry.
Other people do have power over how others feel, by the very nature of humans being social animals. Don't be dismissive of other's feelings.

Well, other than saying some don't belong here?        :D  :D  :D

Ok, I'll go now, I'm typing way too much logic and that never leads to good.  ;)

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 12:13:36 PM
Well, no one in this thread, or who criticises bigotry, is against the constitution or freedom of speech. Dressing this up as a freedom of speech issue is absurd.

Well, people do have the right to say what they wish as long as it doesn't escalate into action. Sure, if I hear someone making bigoted statements, does it make me cringe?

Of course it does.

BUT!

As long as someone making, say, a racist/homophobic/transphobic statement leaves it at that, then whatever. Words can not harm you physically. Emotionally & Psychologically? Yes.

Sure, you can make the claim that these thoughts are leading to actions, but it depends on the individual. I've had situations where someone called me a '->-bleeped-<-' but they did it from the safety of a moving car. Not once has someone walked up to my face and said it. (Not in my adult life, anyway.)

Are those types of word and statements deplorable? Yes. But if you restrict free speech for others, than you eventually end up restricting free speech for all somewhere down the line.

It is simply the ugly side of the 'free speech' coin and nothing more.

Quote from: Nikko on December 28, 2013, 12:15:27 PM
Well, other than saying some don't belong here?        :D  :D  :D

Ok, I'll go now, I'm typing way too much logic and that never leads to good.  ;)

No one was told to leave these forums. Even if they were, that's not intolerance towards LGBT people. The self-aggrandizing snark is unappreciated, as is the sneaky post editing after being quoted/responded to.

Quote from: Laura Squirrel on December 28, 2013, 12:20:53 PM
Well, people do have the right to say what they wish as long as it doesn't escalate into action. Sure, if I hear someone making bigoted statements, does it make me cringe?

Of course it does.

BUT!

As long as someone making, say, a racist/homophobic/transphobic statement leaves it at that, then whatever. Words can not harm you physically. Emotionally & Psychologically? Yes.

Tell that to all the LGBT youth who commit suicide every day.

Quote
Yes. But if you restrict free speech for others, than you eventually end up restricting free speech for all somewhere down the line.

Still, criticism of bigotry is not an infringement upon the bigot's freedoms or rights. The whole point here is that no one is restricting anyone's freedom of speech.

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 12:23:51 PM
Tell that to all the LGBT youth who commit suicide every day.

Speaking as someone that almost blew her brains out with a 20 gauge shotgun at the age of 10, I'm calling 'low blow' on this statement. Only a fool would think that a transperson wouldn't consider this.

I've been in those situations before, so don't talk to me like you know my personal life, since you obviously have no clue, M'kay?

Quote from: Laura Squirrel on December 28, 2013, 12:28:31 PM
Speaking as someone that almost blew her brains out with a 20 gauge shotgun at the age of 10, I'm calling 'low blow' on this statement. Only a fool would think that a transperson wouldn't consider this.

I've been in those situations before, so don't talk to me like you know my personal life, since you obviously have no clue, M'kay?

I didn't talk to you like I know your personal life, and yeah, I don't have a clue what you've been through. I also attempted suicide. That's neither here nor there.

You said words can't physically hurt anyone, only emotionally. Emotional and psychological health are strongly tied to physical health, and as my example was intended to show, words can end up hurting people physically. Your personal experience should only affirm this, so it makes me confused as to why you believe words have no power to cause physical harm.

And I'm sorry for what you've been through.

 hahaha. i came so close to asking for this topic closed. its so polarizing. 'i dont need this' came from joanna. agreed in full.

then i realized itd make me a hypocrite and a whiner.

and the fact that im being stereotyped that way is getting on my nerves.

im not some nitwit doormat who cant see the point. im supporting free speech.

its gotten stupid now. im really sick of this 'they shouldnt be allowed to say it if i consider it hateful' crap.

by that logic all the out of date material in the bible should be banned.

guess what people. its all out of date. and where do you draw the line on it?

if i were to say that i believed they were going to hell for expressing a belief in my going to hell would that be as offensive? probably not. because he hasnt experienced the same hard ships and on and on.

this whole conversation has become redundant.

he has a right
its hate speech
its free speech
he has a right

maybe it should be locked.
for our own good. because i find the whole thing offensive and hateful and stereotyping toward white people. its hateful and we have no right to engage in such behavior publicly.

Quote from: Laura Squirrel on December 27, 2013, 11:59:14 PM
Well, honestly, only a complete and utter moron would base their views on a television program. People that are that stupid are beyond all hope anyway. As far as Duck Dynasty is concerned, I didn't even know what it was until all of this crap started. I thought it was a cartoon program judging by the title and I don't pay much attention to current TV shows since I don't have cable TV and I don't pay attention to stupid, new shows since I hold the opinion that pretty all new stuff sucks (both TV and music).Besides, I don't give a duck about some dorky redneck so, duck him. That dude can duck off and go duck himself.

That's your opinion.  And you're entitled to express it.  That's not everyone's opinion.  Phil Robertson is also entitled to express his opinion.  None of us have to agree with it.  The whole thing really doesn't apply to you at all if you don't even have cable.  If you just want to jump on some PC bandwagon because it's the liberal thing to do, that's cool too.  The way I see it, today's society is PC run amuck.  Does free speech really exist anywhere?
Yes, I think Phil's opinion was expressed in a coarse way, but oh well.  If you don't like it, don't acknowledge it.  I happen to enjoy DD.  I don't think I've missed one episode.   Does that mean I agree with everything that comes out of Phil Robertson's mouth?   No, not by a long shot. 
I'm a transwoman.  I have a penis.  Do you think Phil would approve of that?   I kinda doubt it.  But I don't care.  Life goes on, ya know?    ;)

Quote from: nonameyet on December 28, 2013, 12:54:56 PM

im really sick of this 'they shouldnt be allowed to say it if i consider it hateful' crap.

Said no one ever.

Quote from: JordanBlue on December 28, 2013, 01:04:05 PM
The whole thing really doesn't apply to you at all if you don't even have cable.  If you just want to jump on some PC bandwagon because it's the liberal thing to do, that's cool too.  The way I see it, today's society is PC run amuck. 

And yet again, we see yet another case of the dreaded "Foot In Mouth Syndrome". When someone uses the internet, they are bound to come across things such as these (particularly when they have a Yahoo account and this crap is plastered all over their page. The same applies for websites that...wait for it.... :o HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH DUCK DYNASTY BUT THEY STILL TALK ABOUT IT.) Who woulda thunk, huh?

I don't give a damn about liberal this or conservative that. If you took the time to read some of my other posts in this here thread, boy howdy, you would see that I abhor the concept of "Political Correctness".

The fact that I choose to not throw money at douchebag cable companies has NOTHING to do with any of my viewpoints on this issue.

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 01:11:06 PM
Said no one ever.

i was paraphrasing and if you like misquoting.

the attitude of many here is (in my opinion) that if its offensive. its hate speech. which shouldnt be tolerated. it was just my interpretation of what some are saying.

it certainly doesnt take a great leap of reasoning to see that attitude on this topic.

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 01:11:06 PM
Said no one ever.

Hmmm... what do you think this whole Duck Dynasty controversy is all about?

Please stop splitting hairs, and while you're at it, stop with the low blows, twisting people's comments, creating and defeating strawmen, etc., etc.  It's annoying.

SPAM is offensive to me. Should grocery stores be forced to remove it?  :)

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on December 28, 2013, 01:27:56 PM
SPAM is offensive to me. Should grocery stores be forced to remove it?  :)

I grew up on SPAM! How dare you!!!!!!!!!!!!!  :D

given the incredible amount of traffic and the absurd amounts of what i see as hate speech on this topic ( the whole redneck douchebag mentally challanged fundamentalist christian etc thing)


i am starting to see this topic as counterproductive though. 22 guests viewing? never know who or why.

im gonna add a poll if i can for closing it or not.

@ nikko i assume youre referring to me.

but. i dont know what to say. ive become apathetic on the subject. for real this time. im just more concerned with the fact that its started so much animosity.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on December 28, 2013, 01:27:56 PM
SPAM is offensive to me. Should grocery stores be forced to remove it?  :)

A&E has just suspended you from this forum for that statement.

Think of all the cute little spigs who died to make delicious SPAM!

Quote from: Tori on December 28, 2013, 01:32:16 PM
A&E has just suspended you from this forum for that statement.

Think of all the cute little spigs who died to make delicious SPAM!

not to mention chickens cows and assorted

Quote from: Tori on December 28, 2013, 01:32:16 PM
A&E has just suspended you from this forum for that statement.

Think of all the cute little spigs who died to make delicious SPAM!

A&E will cave...............

(nonameyet, I wasn't referring to you, I think we're on common ground............)

BTW, I enjoy these discussions, maybe I'm weird or something....  :embarrassed:

Quote from: Tori on December 28, 2013, 01:32:16 PM
Think of all the cute spigs who did to make delicious SPAM!

*GIGGLE*!  :)

Now everybody, this is more like it. Let people say what they want (as long as it is not to physically attack us) and take care of each other and not let this stuff divide us. We are all much better than to go after ourselves over stuff like this topic. Relax and take a deep breathe! This does not mean to let people use us as doormats or joke material, just let it be what it is, a ratings boost for A&E and Duck Dynasty. Now, can we all get back to being there for each other? BIG HUG to everyone who felt attacked by this topic!  :)

Quote from: Laura Squirrel on December 28, 2013, 01:11:54 PM
The fact that I choose to not throw money at douchebag cable companies has NOTHING to do with any of my viewpoints on this issue.

Ok...You haven't watched one second of DD...all you know are the misquoted words that were chopped from a GQ interview with Phil Robertson.  You don't like it.  Big deal. That's your 'opinion'.
Fine, we get it. Next subject?   ;)

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F_Fp5_e5aPqUY%2FSVkWA1zJUbI%2FAAAAAAAAG-4%2FmKu3y1vyEbY%2Fs400%2Fdeadhorse2.jpg&hash=ec27fee54f13ca5e7f45f93d81e0360317882366)

Quote from: nonameyet on December 28, 2013, 01:36:33 PM
not to mention chickens cows and assorted

Mmmmmmmm chickows and assorted... drool.

Quote from: Tori on December 28, 2013, 01:39:22 PM
Mmmmmmmm chickows and assorted... drool.

Tori, you kill me!  ;D

Quote from: JordanBlue on December 28, 2013, 01:39:02 PM
Ok...You haven't watched one second of DD...all you know are the misquoted words that were chopped from a GQ interview with Phil Robertson.  You don't like it.

So, now you have stuck both feet in your mouth.

How the hell do you walk?

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on December 28, 2013, 01:43:07 PM
Tori, you kill me!  ;D

I only kill you because I consider you assorted and wish to add you to my SPAM!

Quote from: Laura Squirrel on December 28, 2013, 01:45:39 PM
So, now you have stuck both feet in your mouth.

How the hell do you walk?

No, hon...my feet are right here on the ground.   :) That's just your misguided observation.  Relax, it's not personal at all, this is simply my opinion.  Just like you expressed YOUR opinion.  Get it?   ;)

Quote from: JordanBlue on December 28, 2013, 01:49:19 PM
No, hon...my feet are right here on the ground.   :) That's just your misguided observation.  Relax, it's not personal at all, this is simply my opinion.  Just like you expressed YOUR opinion.  Get it?   ;)

You have every right to express your opinion but don't assume anything about what I have or haven't done, M'kay?

HON.  ::)

I do not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

- Voltaire

Quote from: Tori on December 28, 2013, 01:47:25 PM
I only kill you because I consider you assorted and wish to add you to my SPAM!

:o :o :o
Oh, I am "assorted" alright! *giggle*
CAUTION: Serial SPAMMER in the house!  ;D Sorry for the brief hijacking topic!

Everyone else, PLEASE, don't attack each other, OK? We are supposed to be here for each other, not provoking each other. We are each the only people we can count on. Have you thought this controversy was MEANT to do this to all of us? Think family, think.

Well said Jessica.

We are individuals, we will not share the same opinions all the time, and it is ok that we don't. Life would be boring otherwise. AND we wouldn't need sites like this because people would only tell us what we already knew.

Hey yall, how bout i keep this really simple....if yall don't like what Phil said, if yall are offended by the hunting on the show, if yall are offended by the Confederate flag that makes an occasional appearance on the show or in real life, if yall hate guns or our southern way of life......CHANGE THE DAMN CHANNEL instead of whining about it like a dangon baby.

Stay happy happy happy yall.

His interview wasn't on A&E.

;)

Quote from: Nikko on December 28, 2013, 01:26:37 PM
Hmmm... what do you think this whole Duck Dynasty controversy is all about?

Please stop splitting hairs, and while you're at it, stop with the low blows, twisting people's comments, creating and defeating strawmen, etc., etc.  It's annoying.

I'm not doing any such thing. Low blows? Twisting comments?
I think what you're doing is a low blow, since you're just throwing accusations without actually providing examples.

What you responded to twisted nothing. No one said anyone's freedom of speech should be restricted. The controversy is because many people misunderstand this.

Quote from: Tori on December 28, 2013, 01:52:09 PM
I do not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

- Voltaire

News flash................... Voltaire was just banned from A&E...

Quote from: kariann330 on December 28, 2013, 02:00:15 PM
Hey yall, how bout i keep this really simple....if yall don't like what Phil said, if yall are offended by the hunting on the show, if yall are offended by the Confederate flag that makes an occasional appearance on the show or in real life, if yall hate guns or our southern way of life......CHANGE THE DAMN CHANNEL instead of whining about it like a dangon baby.

Stay happy happy happy yall.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia-cache-ec0.pinimg.com%2F236x%2F43%2F4f%2F07%2F434f07006f631103d573a2e9d38a0c9a.jpg&hash=9c9fd2108ba16d2e08d46e7dac3863189f01eddd)

Kariann, BIG HUG baby! Well said!  ;D

This just in: Voltaire is dead.

Quote from: nonameyet on December 28, 2013, 01:23:37 PM

i was paraphrasing and if you like misquoting.

the attitude of many here is (in my opinion) that if its offensive. its hate speech. which shouldnt be tolerated. it was just my interpretation of what some are saying.

it certainly doesnt take a great leap of reasoning to see that attitude on this topic.

Not tolerating hate speech is not at all the same thing as saying those who speak it should be banned from saying it. No one has suggested that speech should be banned. Again, being critical of someone's speech is not an attempt to silence them. Criticism is part of free speech. No one has called for a ban.

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 02:04:08 PM
I'm not doing any such thing. Low blows? Twisting comments?
I think what you're doing is a low blow, since you're just throwing accusations without actually providing examples.

What you responded to twisted nothing. No one said anyone's freedom of speech should be restricted. The controversy is because many people misunderstand this.

split.... split..... twist... split................   ;)

Quote from: Tori on December 28, 2013, 02:06:00 PM
This just in: Voltaire is dead.

I didn't even know he was sick!    8)

Sadly, I bet this thread gets locked before we get to find out who in here wins the Internet.

Quote from: Nikko on December 28, 2013, 02:07:05 PM
split.... split..... twist... split................   ;)

Nope.
Is your entire point just to antagonize?

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 02:06:10 PM
Not tolerating hate speech is not at all the same thing as saying those who speak it should be banned from saying it. No one has suggested that speech should be banned. Again, being critical of someone's speech is not an attempt to silence them. Criticism is part of free speech. No one has called for a ban.

And yet, the called for ban was just lifted on Phil (whatever his last name is)


(I find this guy creepy and gross! How did I get lumped in with his fans?????????  :D)

I really don't see why people are saying this is a constitutional issue when no one's speech was suppressed by the government.  Private corporations can do what they please as long as they aren't violating any anti-discrmination laws or violating there own hr policy.  Government and private enterprise are not one in the same.  Companies have the right to employ those who represent their views and are not obligated to keep someone controversial for the sole purpose of free speech. 

Lastly, I find some of the negative sentiments shared towards the lgbt community in this thread to be pretty odd considering that transgender individuals are part of the queer community.  Like it or not, most of those people who bash the gays would put you and I right in the same place.  I will stand up for my gay brothers and sisters the same way I would stand up for my transgender ones.  What "Mr. Duck Dynasty" said was disgusting (as is his appearance) and he deserves all the criticism he gets.  Whether he gets fired or not is irrelevant to me as that is A&E's call on how they wish to proceed (either way I won;t watch them) but I am free to think he's a moron and express my feelings, just as he is free to do the same. No freedom of speech protections will be violated in either case because I don't see the federal government coming to take either of us in for expressing our views and that was never a threat.  Of course, you have to be careful about what you say as an employee or representative of any company and that applies to non-celebrities as well.   That's not a constitutional issue. 

Quote from: Nikko on December 28, 2013, 02:09:52 PM
And yet, the called for ban was just lifted on Phil (whatever his last name is)


(I find this guy creepy and gross! How did I get lumped in with his fans?????????  :D)

Good, we're getting back on topic.
How was his right to speak banned at any point?

Quote from: Tori on December 28, 2013, 02:08:20 PM
Sadly, I bet this thread gets locked before we get to find out who in here wins the Internet.

No kidding! Momma Susan needs to give out some time outs for a while. Yeesh, you would think we should fight them, not each other. We have enough issue's to face each day of our lives.

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 02:08:30 PM
Nope.
Is your entire point just to antagonize?

Ouch... low blow.  8)

STOP IT! Enough already. Mods please lock this up.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on December 28, 2013, 02:11:39 PM
No kidding! Momma Susan needs to give out some time outs for a while. Yeesh, you would think we should fight them, not each other. We have enough issue's to face each day of our lives.

But you don't share my exact opinion!

Perhaps if I state my opinion again and attack your beliefs at the same time, that will change your mind.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on December 28, 2013, 02:15:37 PM
STOP IT! Enough already. Mods please lock this up.

Seriously, people would rather just be snarky with each other than keep their posts on topic.

Hmm, this thread is doomed now.

Quote from: Thylacin on December 28, 2013, 02:11:22 PM
Good, we're getting back on topic.
How was his right to speak banned at any point?

Again, you're twisting and splitting hairs, I haven't argued that at all. I believe this controversy is about A&E banning Phil (whatever his last name is) for comments GLAAD found should get him kicked off the air (they had no problems with Alec Baldwins statements until they were forced kicking and screaming to make a weak hearted statement). I'm well aware Phil (whatever his last name is) doesn't have a right to a cable TV show.

"Oh Nikko... no one has ever kicked and screamed, no one has ever said that!"  (there, I responded for you  ::))

Quote from: ~RoadToTrista~ on December 28, 2013, 02:19:22 PM
Hmm, this thread is doomed now.

I voted not to lock it in the poll.............. so you're probably right.  ;)

Lolz there's 40 guests viewing this topic though. That's the most I've ever seen. >.<

Clearly this is not a debate forum and we do not have the rules and infrastructure to promote healthy debate. First rule, in most cases, debate the post not the poster. Until this thread is locked folks, keep that in mind.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on December 28, 2013, 02:04:48 PM
Kariann, BIG HUG baby! Well said!  ;D

I say the same thing to my brother when he whines about my unpaved driveway, my double wide, the deer heads, mounted squirrels, bear skins, rabbit pelts and every other trophy animal in my trailer, my woods, my diesel truck, my lack of gas heat or the confederate flag on my truck.....man yall city folks confuse me and i got one simple solution to about 90% of the worlds problems....a dirt road and a bonfire. Do yall realize how many problems, how much "hate", how much "bigotry" would be ended if yall gave up your paved roads, yalls tall buildings, yalls daily stress and came back to the woods, relaxed around a fire with a cold brew, or soda if yall don't drink, or a shot of shine and effin talked to each other!?!?!? Yeah there might be a scuffle or a couple of fists thrown, but in the end yall hug it up and build a friendship. Cuz weather your a country fried, baptized in gravy, corn bread fed redneck like me, or some big city Cadillac pedal pushin office freak, we all got one goal in life, to live and stay happy happy happy, not crabby crabby crabby. So like i said before, toughen up cupcake cuz the world is a dirty, grimey place....if yall disagree, i respect that, but change the damn channel instead of expecting us to change to make you happy.

How in the world are some of you ever going to transition (if you are) if a duck hunters comments offend you? How will you face the world and pass without ever being able to take comments for what they are worth, a point of view. Do you think me for example could have begun the transition process at 47 after being a fake alpha male Firefighter/Paramedic for 28 years if people like these fired me up by personal viewpoint comments? Yikes!

Quote from: kariann330 on December 28, 2013, 02:23:48 PM
I say the same thing to my brother when he whines about my unpaved driveway, my double wide, the deer heads, mounted squirrels, bear skins, rabbit pelts and every other trophy animal in my trailer, my woods, my diesel truck, my lack of gas heat or the confederate flag on my truck.....man yall city folks confuse me and i got one simple solution to about 90% of the worlds problems....a dirt road and a bonfire. Do yall realize how many problems, how much "hate", how much "bigotry" would be ended if yall gave up your paved roads, yalls tall buildings, yalls daily stress and came back to the woods, relaxed around a fire with a cold brew, or soda if yall don't drink, or a shot of shine and effin talked to each other!?!?!? Yeah there might be a scuffle or a couple of fists thrown, but in the end yall hug it up and build a friendship. Cuz weather your a country fried, baptized in gravy, corn bread fed redneck like me, or some big city Cadillac pedal pushin office freak, we all got one goal in life, to live and stay happy happy happy, not crabby crabby crabby. So like i said before, toughen up cupcake cuz the world is a dirty, grimey place....if yall disagree, i respect that, but change the damn channel instead of expecting us to change to make you happy.

OMG! I have a twin out there!  ;D

Quote from: Nikko on December 28, 2013, 02:19:41 PM
Again, you're twisting and splitting hairs, I haven't argued that at all. I believe this controversy is about A&E banning Phil (whatever his last name is) for comments GLAAD found should get him kicked off the air (they had no problems with Alec Baldwins statements until they were forced kicking and screaming to make a weak hearted statement). I'm well aware Phil (whatever his last name is) doesn't have a right to a cable TV show.

"Oh Nikko... no one has ever kicked and screamed, no one has ever said that!"  (there, I responded for you  ::))

Not twisting anything. Someone suggested that people shouldn't be banned for offensive speech. I said no one has been trying to ban anyone from speaking (i.e. arguing for freedom of speech makes no sense in this discussion), you said he had been banned. I am responding to your disagreement.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on December 28, 2013, 02:26:15 PM
OMG! I have a twin out there!  ;D

Not TWO of you!

Wait, twice the assorted for my SPAM!

Nevermind. Two is better than one.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on December 28, 2013, 02:26:15 PM
OMG! I have a twin out there!  ;D

Hun you got more then just me out here. I'm sure in every farm town, in every woods, in every mud bog there are plenty more of us...but just aren't as outspoken as those of us who are out because they prefer not to be. Hell i once met a farmerwho at first.look you wouldn't think anything different about, but once you got inside his house, it was skirts, dresses, heels and a bottle of E on the kitchen counter.

I will have you know Kariann, Cadilac pedal pushing office freaks are already filing a petition to have you removed from the Internet.

Quote from: Jessica Merriman on December 28, 2013, 02:25:10 PM
How in the world are some of you ever going to transition (if you are) if a duck hunters comments offend you? How will you face the world and pass without ever being able to take comments for what they are worth, a point of view. Do you think me for example could have begun the transition process at 47 after being a fake alpha male Firefighter/Paramedic for 28 years if people like these fired me up by personal viewpoint comments? Yikes!

Everyone has the right to be offended as he has the right to offend (well, within legal boundaries).  Just like A&E has the right to employ who they wish, whether he or she be pro or anti lgbt. it's their right to choose who represents them.

Why should we speak up? Well, we may wish to speak up when we see social views being promoted that make it harder for people to come out, transition or live the lifestyle they are comfortable with.  Like it or not, the views of your neighbors can impact your rights or ability to transition or to live an alternative lgbt lifestyle.  This is common knowledge.  I personally could care less about this moron, but I do care about the the way his views impact society overall.  While he has to a right to say what he wants, we also have the right to state why we disagree and promote a better society for the lgbt community.  Again, I don't care if he's on tv or not, but I will speak against him regardless because I dislike and disagree with anti-lgbt views.  It's my right to say what I feel as he has the right to disagree. 

I think this has run its course.

Thread locked.