All TV is fake.

Why should one deviate from ones moral code to accommodate another?

Yet another incident for the liberals to show how too faced they are.

The liberals spout that they are an open tend and accept all views. Unless they disagree with them.

When you defend Phil Robertson, here's what you're defending.

@bobknight33, please take a course on critical thinking and independent thought. Your penchant for criticism and skepticism is very needed in any society, but your lack of education and prejudice completely invalidates anything you have to say.

That said, I agree with his initial statement for once. Yes, all TV is fake, and whoever made this stupid video is in desperate need for a reality check.

What's that? A "reality" show on TV is fake? Please die now.

*gay *nsfw

This video has been flagged as being Not Suitable For Work - declared nsfw by ant.

Adding video to channels (Gay) - requested by ant.

chingalera not-so-jokingly says,

"Soooooo, full of yourself lately? Loooove the mob-mentality-How's that workin' out for ya??"

So, duck dynasty is shit-So what? Reality television is for suckers.

Why is it that this guy gets hung by his toes. But when Alec Baldwin calls someone a "fucking cocksucking faggot" and a long list of other unrelated homophobic slurs, no one bats an eye.

All reality TV shows have been doctored to make for more interesting TV since its inception with The Real World, the so-called point of this whole video is mute. Anyone with half a brain cell knows this video isn't about Duck Dynasty being fake, or about the discrimination of opressed people.

Alec Baldwin is making millions doing far worse on a monthly basis. Remember when he called his 12 year old daughter and verbal and mentally abused her? Or when he called a reporter a fat queen. Or another incident where he threathens to shove his foot up someone's faggot ass. No one tries to ruin his career over any of the horrible disgusting things Alec has said or done, but this bearded redneck happens to quote bible scriptures. That's what all this fabricated hate is really all about.

Most of the 'outraged' people don't give a shit about gay people, they just want to see the religious wingnuts get taken down a peg so they can wave their fedora emblazoned atheism flag. They won't come right out and say it because it would make them selfish assholes riding the coat-tails of people who are actually being abused and discriminated against. No I'm not religious, but I can smell bullshit a mile away, and this whole thing reeks. Were's this assholes outrage when it comes to Alec? Ohh He dosen't really give a shit about gay rights, not a peep when he can't pin a christian to the wall; he just cares about religious people doing stupid things.

Don't subjegate the real issue with your atheism agenda, it makes you look disgusting and reprehensible. That attitude is exactly why no one takes our ideology seriously; You think your doing some greater good, but your means are selfish to the very core.

You -do- know that Baldwin got fired too...right? Let's talk about two faced and hypocritical. The difference is that liberals didn't get all up in arms and try to say the network was in the wrong, or that his firing was a conservative plot.

In fact, neither instance was about beliefs. They were both about a company's right to remove representatives from the products they sell, if they believe those representatives would damage their brand. True with both men (and Martin Bashir). Case closed.

But I really do enjoy the Christian need to feel persecuted. It's cheap entertainment, so thanks for the chuckles @highdileeho

The guy who made this video really failed to give a thoughtful analysis of the situation. Before I comment, I will clarify that I do not agree with the thought or spirit behind Phils comments. I think they were crude, and fundamentally wrong on a few different levels. I do agree with Phil, however, that homosexuality is a sin. However, so is stealing and lying and cheating on your taxes, and so I do not single out homosexuals for their sins in particular. To do so would be hypocrtical because I fall short of the glory of God daily and I need Jesus just as much as they do.

My comment is that this situation has little to do with Phil or Duck dynasty; it is simply acting as a vehicle for a lot of pent up outrage and angst against the media and the politically correct culture. It's an overreaction, basically, because conservatives in general and Christians in particular feel marginalized by the current cultural climate.

It's an interesting cultural milestone because while Chick-fil-a was popular, it was never in the spotlight of the media or very much in the national consciousness. As a money making and ratings juggernaut, Duck Dynasty is right on the main nerve of it all, and so its fans, typically conservatives and Christians, cannot be easily ignored. Greed has given them a voice because the threat of a boycott is seen as a clear and present danger to many different bank accounts.

So we see two forces now pitted against eachother; one is the real motive of the corporation, which is to milk duck dynasty for every dollar it can. The other is its obligation to appease the politically correct establishment by blacklisting all who have violated the new cultural norms. A&E had no choice in the matter; they clearly had to do something. But, it is all just a facade; they dearly wish they had 100 Phils with 100 hit shows instead of just 1.

So, it is interesting to me because greed is taking the air out of the politically correct atmosphere. Because of Duck Dynastys popularity, the right actually has a louder voice in the culture than the left on this issue. If Duck Dynasty was just an obscure show, Phil would be history. Yet, because it generates so much wealth for shareholders, Phil is pretty much invincible. It all comes back to the bottom line, an idol to which seemingly anything can ultimately be sacrificed, even the progressive agenda itself.

OMFG... the threads... First Bob calls liberals two faced, but Conservatives were upset at the Dixie Chicks when they spoke out against Bush and his wars. Many conservatives demanded the Dixie Chips sponsors drop them and had large CD burning events, all over the fact they spoke their mind and their beliefs. Now these same people are upset at A&E for suspending a guy (a rather worthless suspension since the upcoming season is already filmed and he's already in it, and it is making free publicity for a stupid show about rich people).

This isn't a free speech issue. He isn't in jail for espousing anti-gay and racist remarks. He was suspended for saying something that made his part time employer look bad. Food Network fired Paula Dean. There was a PR lady who was going to Africa on a business trip that got fired after she tweeted she hopes she doesn't get AIDS, but no problem since she's white. You represent your company, officially or not, and make them look bad, your employer can fire you. You can say what you want, but sometimes that speech has consequences. A&E created the Duck Dynasty image, he made their network look bad, they have the right to suspend him... suspend, they didn't even fully fire him. Were they really outraged they would have pulled the show or edited him out of the upcoming season, but they didn't do any of that. They made a publicity grabbing move to suspend him.

This video also highlights the one key point I've been saying the whole time. That Jesus Himself said it is impossible for a rich man to get into heaven, doesn't matter if they want to or do follow Him, they have their reward here, and won't have one in Heaven. So Phil goes off on how gays are "full of murder" and how they won't inherit the Kingdom of God, but ignores that part where Jesus Himself said that people like Phil won't go to Heaven.

Then high, blaming it on some Atheist agenda. The same thing would have happened regardless of what religion or lack there of he had. This has nothing to do with Atheist wanting to make Christians look bad, as there is plenty of outrage over what he said in many Christian circles... you do know most liberals are Christian as well. Yes, most Atheist tend to be liberal, but the largest voting block of Democrats and Greens are Christian. People who take the Bible as the literal word of God, and believe Jesus was serious when He said to help the needy and poor, that the rich won't go to Heaven, that blessed are the peacemaker and not the warmongering Republicans, that when you pray, to pray in secret and not make a show of it the way modern Conservatives do, that know the reason for the destruction of Sodom according to the Bible was that "she was a land of plenty and did nothing to help the needy and poor", basically full of modern Conservatives, that the thing with the Angels happened after the city was condemned to be destroyed and they were there to rescue Lot's family, before Lot pulled the father of the year by offering his young daughters (think Olson Twins) over the angelic warriors of God (think Conan the Barbarian and Rambo) with magical powers, rather than just a simple "no". Anyhow, plenty of Christians are upset at what Phil said, because it makes Christians look bad, he not only bashed gays, but thought blacks were fine under the old Jim Crow era laws, thought Nazis were Jesus free, though Jesus and the Bible was their main defense for all they did... He basically made the Conservative Christians look like they ignore the main teaching of Jesus which was to Love one another. Jesus hung out with the sinners and tax collectors and told them of the love of God, not how God is going to condemn them all to Hell. If Jesus was alive in modern day America, he'd be hanging out in San Francisco talking about the love of God, not fighting to deny them equal rights under the law.

And of course Shiny... The controversy with Chick-fil-a isn't so much what some stupid old rich man says, he also made it clear that was the position of the company as a whole. And that anti-gay money was going to organizations that actively campaign not only to make being gay illegal in the US, in other countries where it is gay and punishable by death, they campaign to keep the death penalty attached to it. That said, at least Siny agrees that A&E had no choice... though, based on past posts, I don't think Shiny sees that the whole modern day Conservative movement is driven by the greed factor, that modern Christian Conservatives are willing to toss out every government program to help the needy and the poor so that they can give tax breaks to the rich...

It's all a free publicity stunt. I'm sure A&E will cave in, or Phil will issue some semi apology, "like I still believe it is a sin, but I'm sorry I likened them to murderers and I'm sorry about offending any blacks, I was just noting my personal observations growing up" type thing and he'll continue to rake in millions, going against the very Jesus he claims to follow... and he'll be right back on.

i cannot express just how much this fake scandal tickles me.
my feeds have been blasted and coated for weeks since this all started with "i support phil" and "phil is a hero of the first amendment".

a fake controversy about a show i dont watch.
on a network i dont frequent.
based on words from an ignorant hillbilly.

but even at the outset of all this it had the flavor of fabrication,a planned and calculated cacophony of incendiary bullshit.

a product was being marketed.

and will ya lookie here.....
thats exactly what it was.

phil roberston was no salt-of-the earth,hard working hillbilly redneck whose family made it big in the duck calling business.

he is a savvy businessmen who plays a scripted role in a scripted "reality" show that appeals to a certain demographic.
he is an actor.
a product created to entertain the masses.
a created character where many of his loyal fans can relate because he looks just like them.
talks like them.
acts like them.

kinda like sarah palin but with a ZZtop beard.

the conservative christians have been duped.bamboozeled.
even this controversy has been a marketing creation in order to sell more T-shirts and posters.

and it has worked brilliantly.

This. This is what drives me nuts about "conservatives". Totally and utterly outraged, totally and utterly ignorant about the actual facts. Facts like, they FIRED him; but ya know fuckit, why let reality get in the way out your outrage.

Yo! http://i.imgur.com/HDbbEw7.jpg I'm fucking psyched!

Oh fuckin' AAAyyyyY!!
M O O G F E S T Beeeeothcheeees!!
\m/(>.<)\m/

In general saying stuff like "all this" or "all that" just makes you look like an idiot.

I thought shiny summed it up pretty well tbh.

Apart from the bit about needing Jesus obviously.

ps. Rich peeps tend to prefer the interpretation where the "eye of the needle" is a small gate in the city of Jerusalem, i.e. it's a tight fit and you'll have to leave your shit behind but it is possible. I'm not sure how they dodge the next bit though. Sometimes I feel sad about not being able to meet these people in the afterlife just so I could see their faces when St Peter turns them away. It might just be worth the damnation.

the last bit is very Christian of ya

Kraftwerk? I thought those guys died of old age decades ago!

Count me in!

Umm, it took yanks this long to work out DD was fake?

The only way to believe it wasn't fake was to not watch it...

Let's look at the scripture in a little more detail:

Mat 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

This scripture is at the tail end of a conversation Jesus had with a young rich man. The young man had inquired of the Lord how he could have eternal life. The answer Jesus gave was simple, "sell your possesions and follow me." In the rest of the scripture we see that the only requirements for salvation is a confession of Jesus as Lord and a belief that He was raised from the dead. So, why did the Lord give the additional requirement to the rich young man of selling all of his possessions? We see why in the next verse:

Matthew 19:22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

This man, even knowing that Jesus could instruct him on how to attain eternal life, could not follow after the Lord because he loved his wealth more than God. This is what Jesus said in Matthew 6:24

"No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.

His riches were the stumbling block preventing him from following the Lord, and that is why the Lord dealt with it there. The Lord knew He was a slave to his wealth and could not bear to be parted from it, even at the expense of his eternal life. This is a reason why the Lord warned us in Matthew 16:26

For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?

Which is to say, that if someone laid all the wealth of the world at your feet, and you traded your soul for it, you would have made an unprofitable deal. The wealth of this world is perishing and will pass away, and we along with it, but those who do the will abide with Him forever. So, let's look on to what Jesus said to His disciples after the young rich man parted:

Matthew 19:23-26 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?

But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

You'll notice that Jesus only said it was impossible for men, but with God all things are possible. The problem with the young rich man was not his wealth but his heart condition before God. He wanted the gift more than he wanted the giver of the gift. When Jesus put his loyalties to the test, the true condition of his heart was exposed. There is nothing inherently bad about money, but there is something inherently bad about putting it before God. That is the sin of idolatry, and that is what Jesus is condemning, not money itself. Take Joseph of Arimethea for example:

Matthew 27:57-60 When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also was a disciple of Jesus.
He went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate ordered it to be given to him.

And Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen shroud and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had cut in the rock. And he rolled a great stone to the entrance of the tomb and went away.

Joseph was a disciple of Jesus yet He did not require Joseph to sell all of his possessions. Indeed, if he had Joseph would not have been able to provide the tomb that Jesus was buried in, ultimately fulfilling the prophecy about Jesus in Isaiah 53:9.

So, to conclude, what God is most concerned about is the heart. If your love for your possesions is what is keeping you from the Lord, He may ultimately require you to sacrifice them. I think is especially difficult for the rich man to realize his need for salvation because he is so self-sufficient. He believes he is in control of his life because his money insulates him from many of the cares of this world. He does not realize that his very breath rests in the hands of the Lord. He may not confess, as Job did, that his riches are all blessings from on High, and at the disposal of the Almighty to do with them what He may.

Job 1:21 And he said, "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return. The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD."

There is some truth in what you've said. For one, the bible says that Christians are the light of the world. Our number one responsibility is not to change the culture, but to allow God to change us so that His light, the light of Jesus Christ will shine forth from our lives and touch those around us. It is the church who retreated from the culture in the preceding decades which has allowed these forces that shape our culture today to slowly encroach on it, and eventually take over. The influence of the church on the culture is minimal because Christians have not been shining their light. Instead, it has largely taken an adversarial position and been engaged in a protracted "culture war". The real business of the kingdom of God is not shaping our culture through legislation, but by showing agape love to all those who cross our path. Jesus said that our unity and love towards one another is the evidence that He was sent by the Father:

Joh 17:21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

Likewise, our lack of love and infighting is evidence to the world that the Father did not send Jesus. Unfortunately, those who are really living for Christ do not stand out as much as those who are not. Before I knew the Lord, I didn't have any positive examples of Christians in my life. I wasn't born into religion and didn't have much exposure to the church aside from what I saw on television. Now that I have seen what is going from the inside I can say that the vast majority of the positive things that Christians do is not reported on. In my town, the churches are all working together to serve the community, despite their differences. Many have been blessed and many lives have been transformed in wonderful ways, but you'll never hear about it unless it comes by word of mouth.

So, when you say Jesus hung out with sinners, this is essentially what the church should be doing, which is not to go a building every week and shout hallelujah, but to get out there and serve your community. To form relationships with people and to meet them where they are at and what their needs may be. Yet, you couldn't really say that Jesus "hung out" with sinners. Certainly He visited with sinners and ate meals with them, because He loved them. This really bothered the pharisees who asked Jesus one day why He did that. This is what He said:

Luke 5:30 And the Pharisees and their scribes grumbled at his disciples, saying, "Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?"
Luke 5:31 And Jesus answered them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.
Luke 5:32 I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance."

Jesus hung out with sinners because He loved them, and because He loved them He was calling them to repentance. Jesus did teach about hell and the fear of God, in fact Jesus said more about hell than every person in the bible combined. Most of what we know about hell was spoken by the Lord. It is the reality of hell that led Jesus to the cross:

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

Jesus did not come to condemn, but save. He shed His innocent blood for our crimes, so that we can be forgiven and have eternal life. This is the gospel of Jesus Christ, the good news for all who are held in the bondage of sin and facing eternal separation from God.

I would not advocate for that, RFlagg. I am not a republican either, although I am conservative on many issues, but not all of them. I am liberal when it comes to helping the poor, for instance. I find most Christians who have a heart for the Lord have a heart for people and are willing to donate their time and money to serve. Not all are like that, but not all know the Lord either. It was actually the church who provided the social safety net before the New Deal. Even today, you will scarecly find a place in the world where a church hasn't built hospitals, food banks, homeless shelters and various helps and organizations to serve people. That isn't what is reported on, however..

And Shiny's making a semi rational post without quoting the Bible? Truly it is the end times.

I'm just depressed because I found out today that my aunt supports this guy.

Part of me just cannot bring myself to care what any reality show personality says. For all I know the whole thing is a fake to drum up ratings. How many people are going to watch the show now because of this. All these cries of boycott ever do is entice more people to pay attention to the target of the boycott.

Assuming this guy actually believes what he said, it's always fun to watch the right fake outrage and play the victim as they are so experienced at doing, and completely misunderstand freedom of speech and freedom of religion

So too then it goes for all those who upvoted this video.

Two things in all this stand out as really worrisome to me. First off, the hateful quote was almost a paraphrasing of the bible. And not the old testament parts that Christianity will dismiss as being supplanted/fulfilled by the coming of Christ, but the new testament. First Timothy 9 and 10 are:

We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine...

It's not hating on gays or comparing them to murderers, it is just listing off a laundry list of behaviors deemed sinful and thus contrary to God's will. Even getting drunk and swearing count, so it's no more hateful against gays than it's hateful against any other non believers choices and lifestyles.

I am worried by our society as a majority looking upon that and either classing it as hatred, or worse still, using it to justify their hatred.

My next beef is the entire liberal side of the country that state like the guy in the video, freedom of speech doesn't mean A&E isn't also free to fire the guy for what he says. I don't disagree with that though. My problem is that if that same hillbilly came out and spoke about his abiding support for same-sex marriage and then A&E exercised their 'freedom' to fire him for his speech, those same Liberals would be up in arms at the injustice. That rankles me something fierce.