What?
A&E suspended Phil Robertson
- Thread starter Ishmael Pequod
- Start date
EXACTLY!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
There is no bait and switch... quit using terms unless you know what they mean.
1) The Ditzie Chicks and Robertson had a right to say what they did
2) Clear Channel and A&E had a right to respond the way they did <--- this is where you seem to think free speech ends
3) Individuals had the right to support whichever side they felt was correct. <---- but this too is free speech and it is why peoples opinions on the two cases vary by individual, but again, you are too ignorant to comprehend that.
So please, continue to make a fool of yourself, while also continuing to ignore the above.
In this thread Superfreak directly stated why he supported one while he didn't support the other, yet you still state he's trying to "hide" that he had a personal opinion.
Can you reconcile the direct statement with your imaginary "You're trying to hide that!"?
Can you simply admit that a simple and direct statement is in no way hiding something?
Woah, woah, woah, ... Reign it in there lawyer man. One was a political philosophy and one is a moral philosophy. The two are vastly different. At least to me.
I'm not privy to their contractual agreements nor do I understand why they made their decision.
Personally, I would not have suspended Phil Robertson.
You are correct, he did say that, then when I tried to discuss that direct statement with him he went back to saying well... I agree they both have a "right" to do what they did. He wont discuss the portion I called hypocritical without intentionally trying to reconfuse the issue.
Well; your observations are just as moronic as your political and economic views then.
Do not confuse my condescension of leftist female dunces like yourself who spam political forums with utter stupidity, with how I treat women. I treat you the way you deserve to be treated with your repugnant stupidity.
Is that what you think dimwit? How could I possibly be scared of air heads like you?
I married an extremely intelligent woman who has an MBA and a CPA and who runs the show around here; I am hardly in fear of her, but respect her intelligence. I won a family discussion with my two boys one day at the dinner table about which of us were the smartest.
I told my sons that I was the one who was obviously smarter. They both objected strongly and insisted that their mother was definitely smarter…until I told them that I got her, and she got me; who was smarter. Suffice it to say, we do not have that debate anymore and my wife has stopped insisting she is smarter. ;-)
First off, your sentence makes NO sense whatsoever.
But in the interest of pretending you have a clue; Homosexuality cannot be called “normal.” I know the leftist dimwits desperately seek to assert that; but God and nature proves that nothing could be further from the truth. All animals, fish and reptiles are placed here for one purpose; to procreate. To accomplish this, females are different from males and ONLY through the act of fertilization can this be accomplished. If homosexuality were the “norm”, a species would cease to exist.
So please spare me the tortured moronic argument that it is “normal.” Reality suggests that it is NOT.
Carry on; I am sure you will find some other moronic point to make in your continuing efforts to remove all doubt you’re a clueless dunce.
Not even Edward Snowden?
Ishmael Pequod
Banned
I agree with you he should not have been fired. They fired him because of pressure from the queers, not contract obligations.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
There are many differences in the two situations. But Garud doesn't care. One was asked a question about sin in an interview and as a fundamentalist Christian he answered according to his beliefs. The other spontaneously made a comment at an overseas concert about her dislike for Bush and that she was embarrassed he was from Texas. As you stated, one was political, the other a moral/religious comment.
But Garud is only in this for a 'gotcha' moment.
Which is why he continues to ignore the following...
1) The Ditzie Chicks and Robertson had a right to say what they did
2) Clear Channel and A&E had a right to respond the way they did
3) Individuals had the right to support whichever side they felt was correct.
He doesn't think #3 exists.
When you support free speech for one, and not for another... based on your personal ideology you are being hypocritical.
Example... I don't like what the duck guy said... I also don't like that A&E suspended him for saying it. Do you see, I support someone's right to say things I disagree with because that is the right thing to do. Because I understand the basic principal of AMERICAN FREEDOM. I wish more people could see that and do it.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Except that you keep ignoring my answer to your bullshit comment...
1) The Ditzie Chicks and Robertson had a right to say what they did
2) Clear Channel and A&E had a right to respond the way they did
3) Individuals had the right to support whichever side they felt was correct.
What part of number 3 do you not comprehend Garud?????
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Who has said they don't support free speech for any of the parties in the two situations Garud?
absolutely they have a right to support whichever side they want to support, but I am saying that as a freedom loving AMERICAN we should rise above our petty disputes about if we agree with them or not and support them for saying it. We should stand up against corporate interests punishing them (even though those corporate interests have a right to do it) for speaking their minds, even if we disagree with what they are saying.
Ishmael Pequod
Banned
I have no problem with the right to do what they did. My problem is that a few people can ruin it for everyone. Millions of people don't give a damn what he said.
No one did; but Jarod is a confused hyper partisan lefttard who is prone to fabricating immense strawmen that he then proceeds to tear down in a vacuum of reality, the truth or any facts.
Remember, you are arguing with an idiot who is only desperate to drag you down to his low level, then beat you with experience. You cannot win any argument with dunces; only end up in the never ending circle of stupidity.
YOU, you support Clear Channel's actions against the DC's for having spoken their minds. Yet, you don't support A&E's actions against the Duck guy for having spoken his mind.
Simply because you see the duck guy as on your team.