panpareil Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 in the same interview he suggested that people of color were "just as happy" before the civil rights movement.okay.personally, I don't care if he is on a reality show or not, I don't have to watch it. and while gays may be a minority, friends of the family are many, myself and my family included Not all blacks agreed with the goals of the civil rights movement. Not all blacks feel the civil rights movement has been successful or made things better. So, this would mean that they are no happier now than they were before with society. This goes all the way back to the disagreement between Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. du Bois. Washington was born in slavery, son of a slave and an unknown white planter, and raised by his mother and step father, whom she married shortly after emancipation. He worked in coal mines for several years to earn the money to attend the Hampton Institute, which he had to travel 200 miles on foot to enter, and then Wayland Seminary. He sought to educate all blacks in vocational skills and applied sciences so that they could demonstrate "industry, thrift, intelligence and property," and thereby gain their civil rights. In other words first gain economic power through education and hard work then press for civil rights from a position of economic equality through cooperation.Du Bois was a free Northerner, son of an abandoned mother, an unwed grandmother, and a slave owning great grandfather. He attended Fisk University, Harvard College and The University of Berlin, paid for mostly with inheritance, donations from neighbors, scholarships, fellowships, and loans from friends. He wanted to create a liberally educated black elite to lead the black lower classes in claiming their civil rights through activism. In other words push for political equality through activism, which would be run by a liberally educated black elite, blame racism as the cause for inequality, and embrace socialism as its cure.While du Bois has seemingly won the poplar fight, and has fostered a rich black elite ruling class, those who cleave to the principles of Washington have not disappeared, and still offer the greater economic hope for the black underclass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fawzo Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 As long as they keep digging up video clips of him speaking folks will get angry with the ignorance from which he speaks. Here he is professing girls should marry when they are 15 and 16 and a whole lot more nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokigami Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 I don't understand why one's own reality is so dull or unimportant that one must watch a scripted "reality" program on TV and then put any stock into what they are watching. If you want reality, look out your window.People seek out things with which they can identify and commiserate, and things that they find foreign and strange. They seek drama, and 'reality" shows are designed to amp up drama, while presenting "everyman" figures that we can either relate to, or mock. Personally, I think that A&E over reacted to this. What he said was not that horrible, and completely in line with his character. That is to say, no one should be surprised he said it. He didn't advocate any oppression, he simply expressed his lack of understanding, and lack of any interest in understanding, the lifestyle of others. I read the article, and it is well written.What I find most interesting about this episode is not the Phil/A&E dynamic, but the social dynamic of the supporters and attackers. The conservatives have lept up screaming about freedom of speech, when this isn't a freedom of speech issue. It is a contractual issue, between a star and his shows owners. I never saw these people leaping up when Charlie Sheen was having comflicts with the two and a half men people.. I don't see them leaping up to defend the Satanists and the Hindus trying to put a monument next to the 10 commandments in --- Oklahoma.. I think.. ?Defending the free speech of someone one agrees with is easy and of no merit. I fully support Phils right to say whatever he wants. I also support A&Es right to enforce their contract.. or not, as they have chosen it seems... I support wackos at the Westboro Babtist church. I don't agree with any of them. And that was the phrase I had hoped to see from some of those leaping to his defence.. It didn't happen.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokigami Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 Robertson was fired for answering a question, yes it is bullying, by the minority.No different than if I was thrown-off the ULC forum for writing what I just wrote. First, he wasn't fired. He was suspended. A pretty minor punishment, designed to look like A&E was doing something when it wasn't.Second, like most stars, he has a contract, which, probably, stipulates how he can represent himself as his behaviour reflects on his employers. A bit like that "Dude, I'm getting a Dell" guy got canned for marijuana. I could find others. This is about bullying, I suppose, if it is bullying to enforce a contract. Like, say you hire a contractor to fix paint your house blue, and they paint it rainbow.. would you take them to court? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Cornelius Posted January 1, 2014 Moderator Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 (edited) Washington never said that as Phil claims. •The quote is frequently misattributed to Washington, particularly in regards to his farewell address of 1796. The origin of the misquote is, perhaps, a mention of a similar statement in a biography of Washington first published in 1835. However, the quote that appeared in the biography has never been proven to have come from Washington http://www.mountvernon.org/educational-resources/encyclopedia/spurious-quotations Edited January 1, 2014 by Stormbringer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fawzo Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 Washington never said that as Phil claims.http://www.mountvernon.org/educational-resources/encyclopedia/spurious-quotations"It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible."I think common sense tells us even if Washington did state this then he and Phil and anyone who believes such nonsense is dead wrong. Defining the word "rightly" though may cause some problems, especially with all those foreign countries who have done quite splendid jobs governing without the Bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Cornelius Posted January 1, 2014 Moderator Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 Common Sense is not so common ~Voltaire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokigami Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 "The problem with internet quotes is that you cant always depend on their accuracy" -Abraham Lincoln, 1864 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 "If the Confederacy falls, there should be written on its tombstone: Died of a Theory." ~ Jefferson Davis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan56 Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 I'm curious Dan. Were you ever the victim of bullying growing up? Because your understanding of bullying seems to be the opposite of mine and the Dictionary's. The privileged bully is not usually labelled the victim.No I was never bullied, a few tried, but I never allowed it.You seem to be saying that a person with money (privileged) can't be bullied. Bullying does not discriminate. A poor big kid beating-up a small rich kid is bullying. To imply that a person of wealth can't be a victim is ridiculous.First, he wasn't fired. He was suspended. A pretty minor punishment, designed to look like A&E was doing something when it wasn't.Second, like most stars, he has a contract, which, probably, stipulates how he can represent himself as his behaviour reflects on his employers. A bit like that "Dude, I'm getting a Dell" guy got canned for marijuana. I could find others. This is about bullying, I suppose, if it is bullying to enforce a contract. Like, say you hire a contractor to fix paint your house blue, and they paint it rainbow.. would you take them to court?Robertson was put on indefinite hiatus by A&E for paraphrasing 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. So yes, imo its about bullying, its about an anti-Christian network hating a Christian for reciting a bible passage, and that same network trying to stop a man from saying what he believes. You are correct, A&E had every right to fire Robertson or cancel Duck Dynasty, but they backed-down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 Robertson was put on indefinite hiatus by A&E for paraphrasing 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. So yes, imo its about bullying, its about an anti-Christian network hating a Christian for reciting a bible passage, and that same network trying to stop a man from saying what he believes. You are correct, A&E had every right to fire Robertson or cancel Duck Dynasty, but they backed-down. Sounds like moral censorship found it's way home. Bummer. Or maybe it was all that Dungeons and Dragons I played as a kid. Nah, probably karma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokigami Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 Robertson was put on indefinite hiatus by A&E for paraphrasing 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. So yes, imo its about bullying, its about an anti-Christian network hating a Christian for reciting a bible passage, and that same network trying to stop a man from saying what he believes. You are correct, A&E had every right to fire Robertson or cancel Duck Dynasty, but they backed-down. That is just a persecution complex, which, I understand to be a tenet of your faith. A&E is not anti christian. They are very friendly to profits.. (see what I did there..). Someone thought this was going to create a public relations problem and hurt the bottom line, so they (admittedly over) reacted and created a public relations problem. That is a pretty common scenario, and has nothing to do with issues of faith or oppression thereof. I have my own theory, which is that Phil is trying to get A&E to break the contract, or at least get himself some leverage for new negotiations. He doesn't seem dumb, despite him appearing ignorant. He knew the interview would create a frickus, and he knows there are currently others who would give them a better percentage to ride the shows popularity. I think someone at A&E underestimated him. Yes they backed down. They would have backed down soon enough anyway. This was just a damage control manoeuvre to try to quell a protest movement. He would have been off hiatus before they ran out of episodes already filmed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordie Posted January 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 I agree and i never thought of it that way kokigami Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan56 Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) A&E is not anti christian.I'd disagree... When you threaten someone for essentially paraphrasing what the bible says, that's about as anti-Christian as it gets. They only relented because they love money more than they hate Christ.Statement from A&E; "His personal views in no way reflect those of A&E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely." Edited January 3, 2014 by Dan56 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordie Posted January 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 I think i got a better view I wanted to b part of a group on fb that was a baptist women minister group they wouldnt let Me in because i dont go to a brick anf mortal church and i watch catholic mass on tv and i preach online and the big one i support the gay community I find this group anti christian And dan i knowA&e support gay that one reason i like the channel . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fawzo Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 I'd disagree... When you threaten someone for essentially paraphrasing what the bible says, that's about as anti-Christian as it gets. They only relented because they love money more than they hate Christ.Statement from A&E; "His personal views in no way reflect those of A&E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely."So Dan if someone supports killing folks who work the Sabbath, killing disobedient children, and condones owning slaves they should be able to propose such ignorance on A&E with no qualms. So you see Dan, standing against such bigoted intolerance isn't anti-Christian it is anti-Ignorance and that is a very good thing to many of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Cornelius Posted January 3, 2014 Moderator Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) Edited January 3, 2014 by Stormbringer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fawzo Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan56 Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) So Dan if someone supports killing folks who work the Sabbath, killing disobedient children, and condones owning slaves they should be able to propose such ignorance on A&E with no qualms. So you see Dan, standing against such bigoted intolerance isn't anti-Christian it is anti-Ignorance and that is a very good thing to many of us. Your comment is way out of context. Robertson doesn't support, nor did he even imply that anyone should be killed. Your exaggerating what happened by reverting back to Mosaic law. Robertson expressed an opinion that was based in Christian scripture, he didn't advocate anything further. The only intolerance was demonstrated by those who disagreed with his Christian opinion, by wanting to punish him for what he thinks. That's ignorance and its anti-Christian. It would be no different if your job was threatened because of your pro-gay opinion. Your justifying hurting a person because you think they're ignorant, and you claim that's a good thing? That's sad... Edited January 4, 2014 by Dan56 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Nihilo Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 I agree Dan. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts