• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Phil Robertson and freedom to have an opinion

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Feb 6, 2007
16,439
1
81
sheep mentality right here.

so much spinning.

so much projecting.

so much hate.
I don't hate Phil Robertson; before this thread, I didn't even know who he was. And I don't hate bigots for their bigotry. I don't have to spin his words to show that he has a deep disgust for gays and gay behavior. I think he legitimately means well in terms of how religion has helped him personally and how he thinks he can help others, I just think he's misguided.

I also think this being a controversy has blown completely out of proportion; you have the right to say what you want in this country without the government stopping you, but that doesn't prevent you from criticism from other people, nor does it prevent your employer from firing you. Are people rushing to defend this because they're concerned their own bigotry is going out of fashion?
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
Hahaha, that's awesome. This explains how you're so adept at doublethink. The courts, experts, etc are only useful insofar as they tell you what you already want to hear. They are authorities if they agree with you and they are forces keeping people from thinking for themselves if they don't.
Because it isn't like courts ever disagree with each other :rolleyes:

Take for instance segregation. At one time "separate but equal" was completely legal. Then later it wasn't. If everyone just accepted the opinion of the court how would this be possible?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
69,480
17,858
136
Because it isn't like courts ever disagree with each other :rolleyes:

Take for instance segregation. At one time "separate but equal" was completely legal. Then later it wasn't. If everyone just accepted the opinion of the court how would this be possible?
Accepting the court's rulings as current law does not preclude challenging them in court, as I previously encouraged our good bigoted friend to do. Until that ruling is changed, it's the law.

Do you know how the US legal system works? The last couple of threads have seriously called that into question.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,390
3,177
126
Hahaha, that's awesome. This explains how you're so adept at doublethink. The courts, experts, etc are only useful insofar as they tell you what you already want to hear. They are authorities if they agree with you and they are forces keeping people from thinking for themselves if they don't.
He is absolutely certain that the good he sees is the only real one there is. He thinks that if that certainty were lost the world would be overcome by evil. His certainty is the only thing in his altered reality that can save us from that. He is committed to being good. It would be a wonderful thing if in addition he could also think. All he can do is grab you by the collar, bang you against the wall over and over while screaming, "I'm right, I'm right, I'm right!!!" till the end of time. Poor thing. All that dedication wasted on an altered reality.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,299
1,201
126
Accepting the court's rulings as current law does not preclude challenging them in court, as I previously encouraged our good bigoted friend to do. Until that ruling is changed, it's the law.

Do you know how the US legal system works? The last couple of threads have seriously called that into question.
Yea, it sometimes appears that he puts random gibberish together and then acts like he has made a point. He is not nearly as bad as Incorruptible though.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,390
3,177
126
Yea, it sometimes appears that he puts random gibberish together and then acts like he has made a point. He is not nearly as bad as Incorruptible though.
It's my hope they can provide an insight to other potentially defective brains the fate that awaits them just down that path of delusional thinking. There have got to be differences amongst conservatives on the degree they're immune to shame. I mean, just how brain dead can people be? Surely these basket cases are exceptional.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,304
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
It's my hope they can provide an insight to other potentially defective brains the fate that awaits them just down that path of delusional thinking. There have got to be differences amongst conservatives on the degree they're immune to shame. I mean, just how brain dead can people be? Surely these basket cases are exceptional.
Yep, god forbid they end up like you. Complete, utter denial and ignoring the advice of medical counsel.
 

Daverino

Platinum Member
Mar 15, 2007
2,004
1
0
Accepting the court's rulings as current law does not preclude challenging them in court, as I previously encouraged our good bigoted friend to do. Until that ruling is changed, it's the law.

Do you know how the US legal system works? The last couple of threads have seriously called that into question.
For fuck's sake, no he doesn't.

He doesn't understand what a public accommodation is.
He doesn't understand what 'at will employment' is.
He doesn't understand the appeals process.
He doesn't understand the legislative process.
He doesn't understand the First Amendment of the Constitution.
He doesn't understand the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
He doesn't understand the concept of 'Equal protection under the law.'
He thinks there has never been legalized discrimination against homosexuals.
He doesn't understand 'Don't ask, don't tell' was.

And, for that matter, he doesn't understand Catholic doctrines of faith, even though he used them to support his specious argument that public homophobic opinions should be protected as a religious right. Just typing that in nearly made my brain seize up from the raw stupidity.

He is the Anandtech P/N embodiment of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,812
192
106
I don't hate Phil Robertson; before this thread, I didn't even know who he was. And I don't hate bigots for their bigotry. I don't have to spin his words to show that he has a deep disgust for gays and gay behavior. I think he legitimately means well in terms of how religion has helped him personally and how he thinks he can help others, I just think he's misguided.
Misguided in saying a woman is more attractive than a mans anus?

That is not misguided, that is being honest.


I also think this being a controversy has blown completely out of proportion; you have the right to say what you want in this country without the government stopping you, but that doesn't prevent you from criticism from other people, nor does it prevent your employer from firing you. Are people rushing to defend this because they're concerned their own bigotry is going out of fashion?
This goes back to mutual respect.

If Phil had made comments about liberals, welfare or food stamps it probably would not have made the news.

This whole situation is due to Phil offending a certain group that does not take well to criticism. If gays were able to take criticism about their lifestyle this whole situation would have turned out differently.

What Phil said was the blunt truth. And it pissed gay rights groups off.
 

Daverino

Platinum Member
Mar 15, 2007
2,004
1
0
If gays were able to take criticism about their lifestyle this whole situation would have turned out differently.

What Phil said was the blunt truth. And it pissed gay rights groups off.
So equating a man that loves another man or woman that loves another woman to "the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, ..., the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers" and stating "they won't inherit the kingdom of God. Don't deceive yourself. It's not right." is just criticism in your mind.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,439
1
81
This goes back to mutual respect.

This whole situation is due to Phil offending a certain group that does not take well to criticism. If gays were able to take criticism about their lifestyle this whole situation would have turned out differently.

What Phil said was the blunt truth. And it pissed gay rights groups off.
Why should gays have to take criticism of their lifestyle without offering a rebuttal? Why should anyone be forced into silence when someone compares them with drunks, terrorists, thieves and adulterers? By that logic, if I said all Christians were child molesters and you offered up a rebuttal, you're just not taking criticism because you don't have mutual respect. It's an absurd notion that voicing an opinion means you are free from any criticism of that opinion. Phil Robertson doesn't have a greater right to freedom of speech than the gays, does he?

As far as what he said being the blunt truth, that's just flat-out wrong. What he said was a matter of opinion, and just because it's an opinion you agree with, it doesn't make it a fact. We don't know whether or not God exists, let alone whether he equates homosexuality with bestiality; calling that "the blunt truth" is just silly. Ditto for the point about vaginas and anuses; you and I can agree that we prefer a vagina to an anus, but our opinion is not universal, so to say it's "just truth" is not accurate. What do you say when someone has a different opinion than you; "you're wrong?" Where's your mutual respect for their freedom of speech?
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,812
192
106
"the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, ..., the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers" and stating "they won't inherit the kingdom of God. Don't deceive yourself. It's not right."

is just criticism in your mind.
Yes, it is.

I have no right to judge another person for their lifestyle. But that does not mean I have to agree or even like that lifestyle.

From a Christian standpoint, which I try not to get religion mixed up with sex, it is not our place to judge another person. GOD has the final judgement.

Just because someone does not like or agree with something does not mean we want it abolished, as in taking gay rights away.
 

Daverino

Platinum Member
Mar 15, 2007
2,004
1
0
Yes, it is.

I have no right to judge another person for their lifestyle. But that does not mean I have to agree or even like that lifestyle.

From a Christian standpoint, which I try not to get religion mixed up with sex, it is not our place to judge another person. GOD has the final judgement.

Just because someone does not like or agree with something does not mean we want it abolished, as in taking gay rights away.
If it is OK for Phil Robertson to classify an entire group of people in derogatory terms (the quotation above is his) why is it NOT OK for that group to classify Phil Robertson in derogatory terms as well? Isn't what's good for the goose good for the gander?
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,812
192
106
If it is OK for Phil Robertson to classify an entire group of people in derogatory terms (the quotation above is his) why is it NOT OK for that group to classify Phil Robertson in derogatory terms as well? Isn't what's good for the goose good for the gander?
I see no problem with that.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Hahaha, that's awesome. This explains how you're so adept at doublethink. The courts, experts, etc are only useful insofar as they tell you what you already want to hear. They are authorities if they agree with you and they are forces keeping people from thinking for themselves if they don't.
I'm sorry that's your position.
 

WTSherman

Member
May 18, 2013
91
0
0
Unless they discriminate against a protected class.

Could A&E fire someone for getting gay married if this became publicly known?
Hey there is a tidal wave of political correctness where if you even hint at not agreeing with anything gay you are considered lower than dirt.

We have millions of left wing lawyers scheming a way to change human nature. If you give them enough leeway they will find a way of fitting a square peg into a round hole.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
I don't hate Phil Robertson; before this thread, I didn't even know who he was. And I don't hate bigots for their bigotry. I don't have to spin his words to show that he has a deep disgust for gays and gay behavior. I think he legitimately means well in terms of how religion has helped him personally and how he thinks he can help others, I just think he's misguided.

I also think this being a controversy has blown completely out of proportion; you have the right to say what you want in this country without the government stopping you, but that doesn't prevent you from criticism from other people, nor does it prevent your employer from firing you. Are people rushing to defend this because they're concerned their own bigotry is going out of fashion?
liking women vs men, now makes you a bigot. got it.
 

88keys

Golden Member
Aug 24, 2012
1,854
11
81
The constitution protects Robertson's right to free speech. Not his right to employment by A&E.

30 years ago if someone would have said something advocating homosexuality, and LGBT rights, that person would have been shunned in the same way.

Times are changing, and weak minded ideologically driven people will push censorship of things that they don't like. Just like when the religious right was trying to censor explicit lyrics, porn, violent video games, and Beavis and Butt-head. Now the shoe on the other foot because the religious rights has have fallen out of favor in the eyes of the public.

We seem to have a fascination with white trash in reality TV. The networks exploit them so we can laugh and make fun so we can feel better of ourselves. And then we get angry because we found out that a reality TV star is a real person with real opinons, and we don't like what those opinions are. Seriously, was anybody expecting anything different? Were we honestly expecting a sophisticated gentleman to articulate his intellectual views about homosexuality? No, we expected a hillbilly to act like a hillbilly, and that's what happened.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
The constitution protects Robertson's right to free speech. Not his right to employment by A&E.

30 years ago if someone would have said something advocating homosexuality, and LGBT rights, that person would have been shunned in the same way.

Times are changing, and weak minded ideologically driven people will push censorship of things that they don't like. Just like when the religious right was trying to censor explicit lyrics, porn, violent video games, and Beavis and Butt-head. Now the shoe on the other foot because the religious rights has have fallen out of favor in the eyes of the public.

We seem to have a fascination with white trash in reality TV. The networks exploit them so we can laugh and make fun so we can feel better of ourselves. And then we get angry because we found out that a reality TV star is a real person with real opinons, and we don't like what those opinions are. Seriously, was anybody expecting anything different? Were we honestly expecting a sophisticated gentleman to articulate his intellectual views about homosexuality? No, we expected a hillbilly to act like a hillbilly, and that's what happened.
got it gay bigots are what heterosexual bigots were decades ago. Its just ok to be gay and hate, and shut people up who don't agree with your POV.

all you people calling them hillbillies and rednecks, would you call gay people fags? Because your using hillbilly and rednecks in the same way you accuse people of using the word i love you.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
102,795
17,207
136
You mean the part where he says butt-sex is icky?

Saying butt-sex is icky now counts as homophobic too?:confused:
you keep saying this as if it somehow reflects what he said.

It doesn't. You are being daft, and trying to spin your way into yet another patented nahelem nonsensical analogy.

A nahelism.
 

WTSherman

Member
May 18, 2013
91
0
0
Its not that A&E doesn't have the right to dismiss the guy, its that his beliefs are not respected and treated as invalid because they aren't agreed with. People calling it hate speech and such, they do the same thing by calling any religious people the same thing.

Its not enough that I tolerate and even encourage people to live free with total liberty in private affairs, they wish to force me to accept what they do. I will not.

Why does your sexual preference have to involve me in any way? Who in the hell would be foolish enough to discriminate against gays these days? I'm not going around protesting the gay lifestyle, why do I have to have it crammed down my throat constantly? This should not be something we have to hear about constantly.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,390
3,177
126
Yep, god forbid they end up like you. Complete, utter denial and ignoring the advice of medical counsel.
Or you believing the crap you make up. Never had medical counsel or been prescribed psychoactive drugs but you continue to say it because there's something wrong with your character. No personal integrity, I guess.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,948
1,636
126
Its not that A&E doesn't have the right to dismiss the guy, its that his beliefs are not respected and treated as invalid because they aren't agreed with. People calling it hate speech and such, they do the same thing by calling any religious people the same thing.

Its not enough that I tolerate and even encourage people to live free with total liberty in private affairs, they wish to force me to accept what they do. I will not.

Why does your sexual preference have to involve me in any way? Who in the hell would be foolish enough to discriminate against gays these days? I'm not going around protesting the gay lifestyle, why do I have to have it crammed down my throat constantly? This should not be something we have to hear about constantly.
No one was hearing about anything until phil robertson made his comments to GQ. They didn't ask him about gay people, he volunteered that stuff.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,304
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
Or you believing the crap you make up. Never had medical counsel or been prescribed psychoactive drugs but you continue to say it because there's something wrong with your character. No personal integrity, I guess.
Don't make me go find the thread where you admitted to stop seeing your doctor and ignoring his advice. Or was that all a big lie? If it was the later that's the worse brain defect by far. Specially when you spew all this crap about being truthful.
 

88keys

Golden Member
Aug 24, 2012
1,854
11
81
got it gay bigots are what heterosexual bigots were decades ago. Its just ok to be gay and hate, and shut people up who don't agree with your POV.

all you people calling them hillbillies and rednecks, would you call gay people fags? Because your using hillbilly and rednecks in the same way you accuse people of using the word i love you.
You completely missed the point, and made a strawman. :)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY