Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/cracker-barrel-pulling-duck-dynasty-items-off-shelves/t/story?id=21302746&ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

I wonder how many other reversals are in the wings?

Who really cares?

Honestly the only people I've seen making a big fuss about this are the kinds of people who think that it was a violation of the First Amendment.

Oh look reality TV is being outrageous. Nothing new here. Honestly I'm surprised that this is the first time a show about red necks actually mentioned homosexuality.

 LordofHats wrote:
Oh look reality TV is being outrageous. Nothing new here. Honestly I'm surprised that this is the first time a show about red necks actually mentioned homosexuality.

It didn't.

A GQ article did.

Sad part is that his statements really weren't that slanderous. Sure they weren't PC, but it's not like he called homosexuals the servants of satan or that it's their fault US troops die in Iraq or anything.

 LordofHats wrote:
Sad part is that his statements really weren't that slanderous. Sure they weren't PC, but it's not like he called homosexuals the servants of satan or that it's their fault US troops die in Iraq or anything.

The internet wants to freak out about a redneck duck call maker not being a GLAAD board member. Your rationality has no place here.

The funniest part is that the gay magazine which rallied the troops to march on A&E is the same magazine that nominated the Pope as their "person of the year." I don't think they appreciate the irony (or is it hypocrisy?).

Probably just selective memory. Duck guys opinions was pretty much the same one voiced by Francis from what I can tell. But Francis isn't on national TV, and given previous Popes opinions on the subject, Francis is easily taken as an improvement.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Who really cares?

Honestly the only people I've seen making a big fuss about this are the kinds of people who think that it was a violation of the First Amendment.

You, apparently, since you bothered to read the article and post an opinion.

What was the scandalous thing he said?

Basically that Homosexuality is illogical and he doesnt support it but still loves homosexuals and prays for their salvation.

When I first heard what duck dynasty was, I thought it was idiotic. I still think it is from seeing product on every shelf. This reinforces my opinion that I don't give a rats ass.

I do too, ITs like pawn stars and American Choppers, Watching people in their life getting in. What I hate is that Duck Dynasty os so preachy.

 whembly wrote:
What was the scandalous thing he said?

Here is a link to the GQ article.

The reason that it has become so "scandalous" is that he has comments such as this in there:

Phil On Growing Up in Pre-Civil-Rights-Era Louisiana
“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

As far as Phil is concerned, he was literally born again. Old Phil—the guy with the booze and the pills—died a long time ago, and New Phil sees no need to apologize for him: “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

As far as "being a hatemonger" goes, Phil isn't that bad but the controversy surrounding the statements is justifiable. I should also say that he seems like a perfectly nice guy, but with the views he espouses in the article are questionable.

The funny thing is that he was asked his opinions and he gave them. He was then jumped all over.
I have never seen the show, but he must not have out of the blue made comments like that before since it's been on a number of years.
To my understanding, the interview was a few months ago. If that's the case, why get worked up now?
One of the big comments I've heard going around is what do people expect to hear from a 60+ year old Duck hunter in the swamps of Louisiana when his opinion is asked on such issues?

Relapse wrote:

One of the big comments I've heard going around is what do people expect to hear from a 60+ year old Duck hunter in the swamps of Louisiana thinks when his opinion is asked on such issues?

Basically this. Hell, he's not as harsh on the issue as I would've expected. I obviously don't agree with his views, but I'm not even the littlest bit surprised that that is what he believes.

The interview might have been done months ago, but it was recently published(according to the GQ site I linked, it's the January 2014 issue). Remember that magazines do have a lead time.

That is why people are getting "worked up now".
And what's more, I think that a lot of the "outrage" is coming up now as a reaction to the movements to keep Robertson on A&E.
You have people like Palin and Cruz talking about how the removal of Robertson violates "freedom of speech" and how it's an "attack on Christians".

It's pretty much not the "gay is a sin" remark.

It's the whole "start with gays, no better than people who feth animals" slant of his statements.

It is ironing that people are mad that a person who is on a fake reality show about yuppies acting like rednecks can't be "real".

Where are the same people defending "I'm gonna get AIDS in Africa. kidding, I'm white!" lady and trying to keep her from getting fired because freedom of speech.

I explained this to my cousin, If you say something stupid, get ready for consequences. I cant say racist stuff at work and expect to get away with it. This is the same. You can say what you want and the government cant stop you. But your boss.....

Way to stay rational and not blow something out of proportion America.

Relapse wrote:
I wonder how many other reversals are in the wings?

I see what you did there!

 Kanluwen wrote:

You have people like Palin and Cruz talking about how the removal of Robertson violates "freedom of speech" and how it's an "attack on Christians".

Don't forget Bobby Jindal.

 Breotan wrote:
I don't think they appreciate the irony (or is it hypocrisy?).

Why can't it be both?

Social Justice Warriors usually fall victim to both.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Way to stay rational and not blow something out of proportion America.

Relapse wrote:
I wonder how many other reversals are in the wings?

I see what you did there!

I was wondering who'd catch that!

 Kanluwen wrote:
You have people like Palin and Cruz talking about how the removal of Robertson violates "freedom of speech" and how it's an "attack on Christians".

It's not as clear cut as that.

Mr. Redneck McBiggotedstien is perfectly free to say whatever the hell he wants. It is freedom of speech and he is entitled to that. What freedom of speech does not give him is the platform from which to say his views, meaning that while he has every right to say what he wants to, A&E is under no obligation to give him the opportunity to say those things on their show. He can say 'em on his own time.

 whembly wrote:
What was the scandalous thing he said?

He quoted Corinthians.

Both sides are acting stupid here.

It's not violating freedom of speech. If the government came in and removed him from the show for his views, yeah, that might be freedom of speech. But when you say something like that on a major TV network, you can't be surprised when they boot you off the show. I admire the guy for having the stones to say what he really thought in the interview, but he should have realized that there would probably be consequences to his actions.

The people getting freaked out need to realize there are still a lot of people like this. Having the interview is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. There's an interview one show did with a gay black man near where the Duck Dynasty guys live and he basically said "This is good, people need to see this interview. Many people down here still think like this, and it needs to be aired out in the open. We shouldn't just sweep it under the rug because we disagree." I live in the south and I can tell you that many people have no idea how entrenched ideas like what the Duck Dynasty guy has are. It's not so bad in the big cities, but any of the smaller towns have it pretty bad. Instead of hiding it because it's politically incorrect, people need to be exposed to it so they can realize what's going on.

But honestly, we're causing a major uproar over an old duck call maker with a TV show. Everything about this is stupid

I am not surprised at their reversal.

If you are gay and you somehow think that his remark equating gays to people who practice bestiality is aimed at you in particular, perhaps you have the problem.

Ok, having read Palins comments i ask. Why does she think all libberals are Elitist?

Arent we all supposed to be ignoring him and he will be going away on his own?

Im not going to live that lapse in judgement down am I? Also when will you learn im extremely inconsistent?