3 votes

Patriarch kicked off 'Duck Dynasty' after gay comments

Old Phil may not be very PC, but the A&E media owners still are.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — "Duck Dynasty" patriarch Phil Robertson is off the hit A&E reality series indefinitely after disparaging gays as sinners akin to adulterers and swindlers, the network said.

Related StoriesA&E announced Wednesday what it called a "hiatus" for Robertson, 67, after he disparaged gays in the January edition of GQ magazine. He also said that, growing up in Louisiana before the Civil Rights movement, he never saw mistreatment of blacks.

In a statement, A&E said it was extremely disappointed to see Robertson's anti-gay remarks, which it said were based on his personal beliefs and do not reflect those of A&E Networks or the show. A&E called itself a supporter of the lesbian and gay community.

The channel's move was lauded by the gay civil rights group GLAAD, which had quickly condemned Robertson's comments.

http://news.yahoo.com/patriarch-off-39-duck-dynasty-39-gay-c...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Yup

Actions have consequences. A&E is a private company and can fire someone based on their policies and rules. It is possible that his contract with the show didn't address things such as this, but I highly doubt it. Even federal government workers have to abide by certain policies about equality.

The rest of the responses here will be the absurd "Freedom of Speech" and "First Amendment" arguments without merit or legal standing.

He has every right to hold that view - but as a representative of the show and the network, his public persona is required to follow certain rules. That's just the way it is.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Ah, but who actions will be vindicated?

A&E can certainly exercise their policy prerogatives, and GLAAD can celebrate that the network,"has sent a strong message that discrimination is neither a Christian nor an American value", but to the rest of the audience looking on this fairly, I don't believe that either won the popular vote.

Answering the question the way he did, was not to condemn or harm anyone, but to warn about outcomes for deeds that his biblical faith informs him of. The verses that he paraphrased used ten distinct terms to describe, "the unrighteous", who,"shall not inherit the kingdom of God". After clearly drawing the line of expectation on who won't, Paul addresses those who will. "And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God" - 1Co 6:11 In Christ, who we were is no longer who we are!

How many of us were/are as deserving of God's judgement for being somewhere among those ten, say, for instance: "fornicators,...adulterers,...covetous,...revilers", are listed as no better off on that final judgement day than, "abusers of themselves with mankind"?

Reconciliation is the goal, not condemnation:

"Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
)And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
)To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
)Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
)For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." - 2 Corinthians 5:17-21

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

Fine then

Then he can be treated as a financial martyr and celebrated as someone who stood up for his beliefs. I'm fine with that. But, people are saying A&E was wrong and not justified in their act - I just disagree.

You can have all the fantasies you want about "vindication" - makes no difference to me. If your imaginary sky daddy is happy with the duck guy in your mind, that is great for you.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Aw, Mo, say it ain't so!

Phil neither set himself up to be a martyr, nor is he suffering more than a financial inconvenience by what's being said about him, or against him.

All I've said is that I'm not surprised at who A&E execs felt most beholden to. The GLAAD gang has powerful ties in the TV world ranks.

These duck-hunting entrepreneurs have more-than-meets-the-eye appeal going for them. Their family, faith, and food-freedom caused a core belief in these intrinsic values to emerge. These values became more popular among the Duck Dynasty audience than A&E comfortably expected.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

I agree with you. Boycotting A&E is a legitimate response

for those who are unhappy with this decision.

https://www.facebook.com/Philrobertsonsupport

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

Very true

You are absolutely correct. It won't work, but you are right. Showing support for a bigot and someone devoid of basic scientific reasoning is your choice.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

One of those rules

would be, 'No quotes from historical reference'?

?whaaaa?

What are you talking about?

First, if you are referring to quoting the Bible - that is not a historical reference, it is a religious text. Not the same thing.

But secondly, if he had just done that probably nothing would have happened. But, saying homosexuals are "sinners" is an inference. And, even that might not have caused the scuffle. Comparing homosexuals to criminals or people committing acts of aggression against others is where he crossed the line.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

The Bible is a better historical text than you give credit

And, "abusers of themselves with mankind", either refers to those who you commonly refer to as, "homosexuals", or it doesn't. If Phil might have misunderstood what was written, perhaps you might know better how he might have misapplied it?

There's a magazine based on the archeology of Biblical times and events. Here's a link to the folks who are behind this effort:

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/about-the-biblical-archae...

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

No Thanks

I will agree that there are some actual historical events and places written about in the Bible. But, the same could be said for Huckleberry Finn and The Bourne Supremacy. They are all books of fiction. (And, before you accuse me of not knowing the Bible, I know it quite well and have read it all - I know it better than most)

There are a few big moments in the Bible with no historical evidence. Aside from these it really doesn't matter. (And, ignoring creation v. evolution of course and we'll ignore really old stuff like the flood):
1. Jews in Egypt & the high-ranking Moses & their escape - no evidence at all and the Egyptians were good record-keepers.
2. 12 Tribes of Israel
3. King David
4. The Nativity
5. Jesus - zero, nada, zilch
6. The Crucifixion - zero, nada, zilch
7. The Resurrection of course

When they find some evidence of these then I'll pay some attention, even though it still wouldn't demonstrate if the stories were true or not. They won't find any of course - apparently your deity likes everything to be based purely on faith alone.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Ezekiel 26 detailed prediction of the destruction of Tyre

I like how the number of details in this fulfilled prophesy compound the chance factors against it being just random words tossed out by some fanatic Jewish prophet.

Since you've read the Bible and, "know it better than most", then I'm sure you've got a simple answer to explain away the odds against this many details falling into place, in the exact order, over an extended period of time, well after the prophesy was known, and extending to this day.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

No thanks

I have no desire, much less experience in statistics, to do such a silly thing as find out the odds of a "prediction" that was written after an event happened.

And, as is typical, you don't address the important stuff of my request but focus on a prophesy about a little town.

Sad...

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

You're welcome, kinda

There's more than enough archeology and historical records to address each of the issues you raised, externally from the Bible, that could be worth exploring with a skeptic; but I chose a more easily tracked prophetic event with abundant records to see what kind of cynic you are, Mohusk. There's just no pleasing a cynic.

So your theory of how this prophesy of the fall one of the most powerful and wealthy city/states to ever exist on the shore of the Mediterranean, was that it was crafted afterwards to sound cryptically and detailed about these events, and then inserted into a recognized historical record to seem prophetic. Clever conspirators, you say these folks were, eh?

Here's a archeologist's writing on his researching of this. My position is the one held by the secular historians, and yours by the religious liberals. Go figure, eh?

https://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/12/07/Ezekiel-261...

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

And.......as always, ignore the questions

"There's more than enough archeology and historical records to address each of the issues you raised, externally from the Bible"

No - there is no archeology or historical records at all. If you have some, please release them. You would be a millionaire! That is always the response I get, but no one ever knows what the evidence is. Some try the Josephus angle, but it has been proven to be a forgery decades ago.

I will say: "there is no evidence of Jesus' existence". The response: "there are many Roman records and archeological finds". Me: "Where are they? I've never seen or heard about them". The response: "There are many, I don't know where but the experts know".

The same goes for the Jews in Egypt, etc... There is some interesting archeology happening concerning a real King David, but contrary to the Bible, it is a small and primitive city. And, you are still obsessed with this Tyre thing. I don't care, it is inconsequential considering the hundreds of other predictions.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

An excellent place to start, among many!

No millionaire reward ought be expected for just stating the obvious, eh?

Either the predictions of Tyre's demise were sooo off, in so many ways; OR something supernatural happened with Ezekiel, eh? The only other way to explain this is that it was written after the fact, right, as you assert?

Details ARE details; and FACTS are stubborn things.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

A deflection again?

Three deflections and nonsense in a row. I'm sure I could find other instances in other religious books and make the same claim. At this point it is clear you are incapable of discussing with any clarity or understanding.

Merry Christmas.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

A dodge indeed, on your part!

You made claims that the Bible had only lose connections with geographic places and historical people, as other books, and was worse than spurious on key people and events. I chose a prime example, although not on your list, to try and address how the record gave great details of events that occurred hundreds of years AFTER being written, are still true today, and can be confirmed by secular sources.

I understand why that would disturb your fixed paradigm, but claiming that I'm, "are incapable of discussing with any clarity or understanding", will have to be up to the other readers here. You're smart enough to catch on that if something this detailed can be demonstrated to be that accurate, then your whole "false until proven otherwise" premise is broken.

And a Happy New Year!

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

Sheesh - you are thick

"You made claims that the Bible had only lose connections with geographic places and historical people, as other books..." -- No, I was saying that real places and event were in the Bible, how is that a "loose" connection? That is a "tight" connection.

"great details of events that occurred hundreds of years AFTER being written" -- You have no evidence of that.

"You're smart enough to catch on that if something this detailed can be demonstrated to be that accurate, then your whole "false until proven otherwise" premise is broken." -- Even if you are correct and the fall of this city was predicted, that has nothing to the truth of the Bible. That is why I asked for evidence of important stories that actually make a difference. And, you obviously have nothing.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Tyre?

He says the ancient city was never rebuilt, but it's easy to find it on google maps and see that it has in fact been rebuilt, both the island and the causeway that he's showing on that map. If he's talking about a different island that hasn't been rebuilt and that is only used by fishermen spreading their nets, where is it?

https://goo.gl/maps/4mTnp

I'll quote one of the replies below the video cited

"Everyone has something to say, but showing no proof. Google this:
1. "HOUSING for the FISHERMEN of TYRE, Lebanon by Hashim Sarkis Studios"
2. "Trip advisor Tyre: Traveler Reviews"
Tyre may be a little more than dusty ruins, but it's definitely not the economic, prosperous trading center of the world it was in biblical times. I'd say it's a poor, overcrowded "town" who's primary revenues come from fishing and tourism."

Thank you, teachevery1, for giving such a great answer!

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

EVERYONE who disagrees with me on THIS, is STUPID!

Ah, I see that I've got you're attention with such a bold subject line, but HEY, somebody's gotta say IT!

I'll take a chance right now, and risk ALL the credibility I've work so long and hard to earn among the DP readers and subscribers here, and lay it on the line that NO ONE of ANY rank,of either economic and/or political influence can explain away the statistical probability that:

"Son of man, because that Tyrus hath said against Jerusalem, Aha, she is broken that was the gates of the people: she is turned unto me: I shall be replenished, now she is laid waste:

"Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Tyrus, and will cause many nations to come up against thee, as the sea causeth his waves to come up.
)And they shall destroy the walls of Tyrus, and break down her towers: I will also scrape her dust from her, and make her like the top of a rock.
)It shall be a place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD: and it shall become a spoil to the nations.
)And her daughters which are in the field shall be slain by the sword; and they shall know that I am the LORD.
)For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north, with horses, and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much people.
)He shall slay with the sword thy daughters in the field: and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee.
)And he shall set engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers.
)By reason of the abundance of his horses their dust shall cover thee: thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horsemen, and of the wheels, and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach.
)With the hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground.
)And they shall make a spoil of thy riches, and make a prey of thy merchandise: and they shall break down thy walls, and destroy thy pleasant houses: and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water.
)And I will cause the noise of thy songs to cease; and the sound of thy harps shall be no more heard.
)And I will make thee like the top of a rock: thou shalt be a place to spread nets upon; thou shalt be built no more: for I the LORD have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD.
¶ Thus saith the Lord GOD to Tyrus; Shall not the isles shake at the sound of thy fall, when the wounded cry, when the slaughter is made in the midst of thee?
)Then all the princes of the sea shall come down from their thrones, and lay away their robes, and put off their broidered garments: they shall clothe themselves with trembling; they shall sit upon the ground, and shall tremble at every moment, and be astonished at thee.
)And they shall take up a lamentation for thee, and say to thee, How art thou destroyed, that wast inhabited of seafaring men, the renowned city, which wast strong in the sea, she and her inhabitants, which cause their terror to be on all that haunt it!
)Now shall the isles tremble in the day of thy fall; yea, the isles that are in the sea shall be troubled at thy departure.
)For thus saith the Lord GOD; When I shall make thee a desolate city, like the cities that are not inhabited; when I shall bring up the deep upon thee, and great waters shall cover thee;
)When I shall bring thee down with them that descend into the pit, with the people of old time, and shall set thee in the low parts of the earth, in places desolate of old, with them that go down to the pit, that thou be not inhabited; and I shall set glory in the land of the living.
)Son of man, because that Tyrus hath said against Jerusalem, Aha, she is broken that was the gates of the people: she is turned unto me: I shall be replenished, now she is laid waste:" - Ezekiel 26:2-21

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

Disagree with what, exactly?

You talk about the "statistical probability," but when the prophecy says it would never be rebuilt, and in fact it's been rebuilt to the point of overcrowding, what probability is it that you want to calculate?

You'll have to be more clear about what it is you're claiming before I can figure out if I'm disagreeing with you, and therefore stupid.

Stated below

Awaiting your reply!

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

a construction boom in a city that was never to be rebuilt?

I understand that you didn't write that comment, but does it seem like a plausible way of defending the claim that the prophecy was fulfilled? The video makes it sound like there's nothing there other than a small fishing village and a place where fishermen spread their nets. The commenter allows that it may be "a little more" than that. In fact the island has restaurants, hotels, a school, a university, a hospital -- and those are just the things labeled on google maps. Here's one hotel on the island:
http://alfanarresort.com/aboutus.asp
Here's a photo that gives an idea of how many building there are there:
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/17016288
More here:
http://www.panoramio.com/map/#lt=33.271928&ln=35.193880&z=0&...

The commenter you quote even says it's *overcrowded*. How can it be both "never rebuilt" and "overcrowded"? One of their suggested searches takes you here:
http://architecturelab.net/2011/05/housing-for-the-fishermen...
where an architecture company is designing housing for fishermen's families because: "The fishermen’s families in Tyre were did not to benefit from the construction boom that the region witnessed during the last three decades, due to their lack of financial resources or urban regulation and constraints in the old city quarters." It also notes that "the surrounding agricultural property was already being subdivided for speculative construction."

How do you reconcile a "construction boom that the region witnessed during the last three decades" with the prophecy that the city would "never be rebuilt"? At the very least, that video is *extremely* deceptive.

You call ANY housing at all a RECONSTRUCTION of what was?

*Extremely* deceptive, my foot! That city/state was once a MAJOR hub of economic and political influence! Do you REALLY want to compare what IS with once was? There is simply NO comparison, or do you disagree?

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

But that's not what the prophecy says

First, the deceptiveness of the video. It says (2:50): "The remnants of Tyre remained until it was utterly destroyed by Muslims in AD 1291 during the Crusades. At that point the city of Tyre was turned to ruins, and remains ruins to this day. Although the modern city of Tyre exists a few miles down the coast the ancient city has never been rebuilt, thus fulfilling that prophecy. The fulfillment of another prediction can be observed today. The only thing left on the site of the original city is a small fishing village. Even today fishermen can be seen drying their nets on the rocks." At 3:18 and following there are pictures of desolate coastline, and fishermen.

In fact, there's a lot more on the island than just ruins and a small fishing village. As the comment you quoted indicates, it's been rebuilt so much that it's overcrowded, and had (at least as of 2009) a construction boom lasting 30 years. Even if the few photos they use in that video are from somewhere along the coast there, you wouldn't have to walk much further along that coast to see hotels and restaurants and so on like any other coastal city around there. The video tries to create a much different impression than what's actually there.

It's true that Tyre was once a major hub of economic and political influence, and now it (specifically the part now called Soûr) is according to the link referenced in the comment you posted, "a city of 25,000 residents." But what does the prophecy say?

And I will make thee like the top of a rock: thou shalt be a place to spread nets upon; thou shalt be built no more: for I the Lord have spoken it, saith the Lord God.

Like the top of a rock. Built no more. Should those things be interpreted literally? Or are you taking "built no more" figuratively to mean "rebuilt to the point of overcrowding, thanks to a booming tourist industry, especially after a thirty-year construction boom about twenty six hundred years from now"? Because if you're going to interpret "like the top of a rock" and "built no more" literally then that's clearly not true.

It "was built no more", "like the top of a rock" ,as it once was

That there are buildings erect upon it is irrelevant. That city/state was destroyed because they boasted in their strength.

Population density is not the same as political and economic superiority, right; or am I missing something?

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

So you're interpreting it figuratively, not literally?

So you're interpreting "built no more" figuratively to mean that it would never be rebuilt to the same level of political and economic power it once had, rather than literally, to mean "built no more"? The video, however, tries hard to create a the impression that the prophecy was *literally* fulfilled. It says the land is still in ruins, as if it were *literally* never rebuilt, and uses images of barren beaches to suggest that this is literally true to this day, not just true in some poetic sense the way you're now suggesting.

Similarly I guess you're taking "like the top of a rock" not to mean like the top of a rock, i.e., a barren place used for nothing but the spreading of nets as the video tries to suggest, but in some figurative, poetic sense in which it's as if there's "nothing" there at all when you think about what it is now as compared to its former power. *Literally* of course there's a city of 25,000, with a hospital, schools, hotels, restaurants, shops, apartment buildings, houses, etc., built up after a thirty year construction boom to the point of overcrowding and housing prices getting so high that some of fishing families couldn't afford to live there any more. But in some poetic sense it's been scraped clean like the top of a rock.

I'm not going to try to disagree with your poetic interpretation because poetry isn't something you can proof or disproof, or calculate statistical probabilities about.

Tyre was considered inpregnable in it's day

This fishing town, not so much, eh?

Odds-makers would have given slim chances of a city so well situated, fortified, and defended by the best navy in the entire Mediterranean, would ever fall, much less fall over time exactly as it was foretold.
Each detail of the fulfillment of this prophesy compounds the chance factor against its happening at all by magnitudes of powers.

Do you really want to try and discount all of these facts of history being applicable to Ezekiel 26, because a significant population of people happen to live where once one of the greatest, wealthiest, military and commercial ports in the world at that time was prophesied never to be built again?

According to this archeologist's research, secular historians agree with me here.
https://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/12/07/Ezekiel-261...

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

You're convinced, obviously, but why?

You're convinced that "never be rebuilt" only needs to mean that it won't ever again be "one of the greatest, wealthiest, military and commercial ports in the world." I'm not sure why that seems reasonable to you, but at least you aren't doing what the video is doing and trying to misrepresent the facts by making it sound like there are only ruins left and a few fishermen.

The article you link to has to go to some lengths to make things fit. He has to say that verse 12 picks up where verse 6 leaves off, and verses 7 through 11 are an interruption, and 1-6 and 12-14 are about the island part of the city but 7-11 is only about the old city on the mainland, so that, for example, "all your streets" is taken to mean "some of your streets, not including the ones on the island" even though that's not what it says. Why is that convincing?

As for probabilities, the probability of being able to find a creative interpretation like this is pretty close to 100% if you're willing to go to lengths like these to make things fit.