A&E suspended Phil Robertson

Jarod said:
Can a white person believe that dark skinned people are inferior on a personal and religious level and not be a bigot? No, and I think the same way about homosexuality.
Click to expand...

how about someone who believes that one who believes in God is inferior on a personal and religious level?.......
 
Jarod said:
Here is something funny to me...

The Cons cheered the firing of Martin Bashir for saying something disgusting about Sarah Palin, now they defend this kook and bash A&E for suspending him after he makes a bigoted comment about an entire class of upright citizens.
Click to expand...

uh, except Bashir didn't get fired.....
 
Superfreak said:
So AGAIN... do you think he also meant that homosexual behavior leads to sleeping with many women too? Or are you just picking and choosing which ones you WANT to believe he 'meant'?

Yes, a fundamentalist does believe one sin will lead to another. That does not mean that any one sin will lead to any other particular sin. Just that it will lead to more sin.

YOU simply want to believe the worst so that you can belittle and mock him for his beliefs that you wish to prescribe to him. That says far more about your character than his.
Click to expand...


Lots of Fundamentalists believe Homosexuality is a CHOICE so yes, he might believe that homosexual behavior leads to promiscuity with women.

Everyone understands you're only defending this guy because it's what you do when Liberals get up in arms about the mean spirited things some Christians say.
 
Jarod said:
You are correct. I am being judgemental when I say that the way he sees Christianity is WRONG. I am okay with that. When he list things as sin's, he is being judgmental of homosexual people.
Click to expand...

Or he is listing what the book says and he is being judgmental only when he tells people what the result will be. Your problem is when and where his opinion comes in. The book says "this, this and this" are sins. That is not where the opinion comes in, the opinion comes in when he tells you where you are going...

"You are going to hell for that" <- judgment.

"Lying is a sin" <-Not a judgment.
 
Damocles said:
Not particularly. When he lists sins and calls them sins he isn't being judgmental, he's listing sins.

The portion where he is judgmental is where he is the prognosticator of the result of their actions.

I am being precise.
Click to expand...


For a guy who said just a bit ago that you didn't care, you sure are spending an inordinate amount of time in this thread.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
For a guy who said just a bit ago that you didn't care, you sure are spending an inordinate amount of time in this thread.
Click to expand...

Precision matters to me. It matters to me that I get any point across clearly, even if the subject matter of the discussion doesn't much appeal to me. It's probably a bit of OCD.

One is not judgmental when simply listing "sins", any more than simply listing stuff that is illegal makes you a judge.

Example: Reading the 10 commandments is not judgmental. Even if you don't say "The bible says" before you read the list.

Where one becomes judgmental is when one predicts the outcome.

Example: You are going to hell for that.
 
Jarod said:
If someone asks me what is sin, and I answer what I believe... that judging people for a way of life that does not harm others is sinful, I am judging. The difference is that I am judging people for a way of life that does harm others.
Click to expand...

you're also judging whether or not it harms others......
 
Damocles said:
Or he is listing what the book says and he is being judgmental only when he tells people what the result will be. Your problem is when and where his opinion comes in. The book says "this, this and this" are sins. That is not where the opinion comes in, the opinion comes in when he tells you where you are going...

"You are going to hell for that" <- judgment.

"Lying is a sin" <-Not a judgment.
Click to expand...

I would agree if he had said... "The book says..." That's not what happened. He had adopted what the book says as his own view and thus owns what he said as his own belief.
 
One cannot be a [fundamental] Christian and not judge. If, as a Christian I am to abstain from sin ( that is not sin willfully) then it logically follows that I must judge what is sin and what is not. What I use as the standard when making that judgment is what's important. Jesus did not say, "Don't judge"....period. He said to use "Righteous judgment" when you judge. So no societal standards, no worldly standards. Righteous judgment. And when identifying what is sinful what do you think a fundamentalist Christian would use as the standard?
 
Sin is a morally "bad" thing, things that are against the law are not necessRly morally bad.
 
I suspect that rednecks will act like rednecks and acting surprised and angry when they do is just silly nonsense.
 
leaningright said:
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...ts-about-homosexuality/?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fn

"Robertson also told GQ his family has lost its privacy since they were thrust into the limelight as the stars of the hit show, but it was well worth it because the series has given him a platform to spread his religious beliefs.

“For the sake of the Gospel, it was worth it… All you have to do is look at any society where there is no Jesus. I’ll give you four: Nazis, no Jesus. Look at their record. Uh, Shintos? They started this thing in Pearl Harbor. Any Jesus among them? None. Communists? None. Islamists? Zero. That’s 80 years of ideologies that have popped up where no Jesus was allowed among those four groups. Just look at the records as far as murder goes among those four groups.”

Still, he doesn’t expect his fame to last forever.

“Let’s face it, three, four, five years, we’re out of here. You know what I’m saying? It’s a TV show. This thing ain’t gonna last forever. No way.” "
Click to expand...

"...it was well worth it because the series has given him a platform to spread his religious beliefs."

I'm pretty sure this isn't what A&E had in mind when they created the show.
 
Superfreak said:
actually, his comments were not ON A&E... his comments were in an article for GQ. Yet A&E decided that he doesn't have a right to make comments about his beliefs and subsequently suspended him.
Click to expand...

Like it or not, it wouldn't be the first time someone was slapped by their employer for going public with an unpopular opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top