Had my Phil of dumb conservatives

Simple as this, regardless if you agree with the Duck Dynasty Don or not…..if he is canceled, fired, boycotted, whatever….

IT IS NOT A FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUE!!!!

You embarrass me.

 

Advertisements

19 thoughts on “Had my Phil of dumb conservatives

  1. In the legal sense, no it isn’t. But as a matter of griping points of view into the background within the context of a biased media, it is. I’m irritated by “freedom of speech” coming up here, too, because it’s only a legal concept and conservatives need to know that freedom and consequence-free equality are not the same thing. But the boundaries are fuzzy because “freedom of speech,” like any valued idea in a culture, is not a matter of raw legalism. The idea has also taken on life when it comes to the way people are supposed to view communication,. in the way they appreciate honesty, and in the way they understand rational discussion.

    The biggest mistake Phil made was saying homosexuality “ain’t logical,” as if the validity of the action can be resolved by philosophers and academic types. That’s not what he meant: “logical”, to most people, is about as much about rationality as the word “awesome” is about literally inspiring awe or “radical” is about mathematics or politics when used colloquially. These words are just general positives now, no differentiation between reason and subjective preference. But he used that word, and I think that’s what set off the left. Reason is their domain, as far as they’re concerned. Now everyone wants to have a “discussion” with Phil about this, as if they’re just going to correct him on a logical error and not beat the tar out of his worldview.

  2. If an anti gay employer fired an employee for publishing pro gay opinions, it would be a freedom of speech issue, and the fired employee could sue and win his job back, plus damages. This would be politically incorrect. People get used to hearing PC and forget what it means. Political means a faction wants to harness the power of the government to forcibly achieve their goals. There is no doubt that any private act that suppresses PC speech is a violation of the freedom of speech, to be corrected under threat of government force.

    “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” – Voltaire

    Personally, I think the government should neither support or restrict gay behavior, and I think individuals ought to act civil with gays, but may choose not to associate with them if they don’t want to. Nevertheless, when a Christian says he believes it is wrong to have gay sex, he should be free to say what he thinks without fear of losing his job, at least until the anti gay employer is free to fire pro-gay employees. Yes, it is a free speech issue.

  3. Lol. You hurt your enemies and help your friends. That’s how the left does it. We should do the same. It works. If he’d been fired for approving of gays, it would legally be a free speech issue and the courts would see it that way.

    If people can’t express our views without being fired, that’s a free speech issue, in a very real and important way. If GLAAD can have you summarily fired on a whim, you don’t live in a free country in any useful way. I don’t want to live in fear.

    You’re on the other side.

  4. It may be a hypocrisy matter. And yes, some may say freedom of speech is a conversational term, but this is marginalizing conservatives and/or Christians. I hear the call in shows in the mid south where I live and its one after another speaking at the most basic level of discourse on any issue. This is why there is a perception that to be a leftist is to be more intelligent, in general. The perception lures the young, it lured me 30 plus years ago when I was in college.

    I was discussing this with my wife, who is intelligent and can discuss these things on many levels. A Parliamentary system solves some of this. I am not saying this to begin to debate the overall good or bad of any system. I mean simply that when folks fracture off into tiny irrelevant parties that represent their one issue, it dilutes the ignorant and apathetic vote’s power. Our country is not rules by the ignorant and apathetic, but the leadership is determined by the ignorant and apathetic. they exist on both sides and I submit that, while not Phil himself, Phil lathered up the right’s ignorant demographic slice.

  5. Parliamentary systems obviously don’t solve these problems; as we have seen, the special interests just cooperate and play games to get what they want. If parliaments prevented anything, this country, with the bicameral sweat necessary to get things passed in our system, would be incorruptible.

    This isn’t a problem of the system. It’s a problem of the culture, which the system reflects. It’s a problem of there not being a unified perspective on where lines are drawn, because the necessity of criticism, like any other prerogative people have, always comes down to circumstance and the lines can never be consistent. There’s a time to be critical, and a time to shut up. Since we have little in common culturally, we have no way to figure it out anymore.

    Jennifer Lawrence can be hailed for saying that it should be illegal to call people fat, and she sounds like a sweet person because she doesn’t want anyone’s feelings to be hurt by something that seems like a mean-spirited personal attack, even when someone really needs to be told that they’re getting fat. That’s what the left cares about, and it looks more consistent because they understand freedom as meaning “without fear of consequence” for the vulnerable classes. The right cares more about traditional ways of understanding morality, more systematized behavioral controls. The right’s way is better. You can’t build a world without negative feedback and expect it to work.

  6. Pat Buchanan said it back in 1992, and it’s just as true today. We’re in a culture war. That, more than freedom, or money, is what matters the most.

  7. (And yes, I’m not American, but it’s the same thing up here, too, and throughout the West, for that matter. Even Russia is dealing with this. Go Putin!)

  8. I know that parliamentary systems don’t solve anything. Certainly they do not prevent anything, and yes, its about the population and the level of ignorance. Theodore Dalrymple is better at capturing that dynamic in writing than anyone else Ive read.

  9. Just because it hasn’t been said. More than the cultural war, it’s the spiritual war that’s taking place. Not against flesh and blood, of course, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world, and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms (Ephesians 6:12).
    If we had pastors that were bold and
    un-afraid to preach the TRUTH like Phil Robertson, we wouldn’t be this far down the road of decline as we are.

  10. Very true, Greg C; the cultural war is a subset of the larger spiritual war of which we are involved, and being merely a temporal war, is a trifle, in comparison.

    Nevertheless, the two are linked, and because we live through it, it’s important.

  11. You either have the right to say what your opinions are when someone asks you of them, free of condemnation, or you don’t. This is a freedom of speech issue. If you blatantly ask a Christian person what they think of homosexuality and they respond honestly, as Phil actually did; and then condemn them for that, what are you doing if not shutting down free speech?

  12. And please, here in lies the greatest means for you Christians to actually score a win against the left. If they can fire Phil for saying what amounts to Christian beliefs, then so can you fire people and not associate with people who are gay, leftist or don’t believe in Christianity. Suddenly the entire edifice that is modern day society in America could be broken…

    Think about it.

  13. I thought the whole point of DD was that there are still backwoods hillbilly paleo-american types (w/lot of guns!) who think “like that”.

    The whole show is meant to paint conservatives of virtually any stripe into the neanderthal corner, people who are distinct from the rest of the free-floating world of celebrity.

    Were they actually naive enough to think they were being granted admittance, rather than just being used?

    Maybe there’ll be a lawsuit and we’ll become privy to what’s in the A&E/DD contract regarding what they can and cannot say/do in their off time. It’s not like DD were Trojan horsing their way onto tee-vee and A$E didn’t know what they were getting.

    But, yea, the Attitude Police are annoying, and they’re everywhere. This whole flap reeks of another engineered setup where we have a faux national debate/discussion on what currently constitutes correct/incorrect thinking on symbolically important but otherwise rather trivial concerns nobody has any intention of actually doing anything about, another occasion for hand-wringing.

  14. This is a matter of shaming leftists by holding them to their own standards. Firing Robertson is the equivalent of the infamous ’50s Hollywood Blacklist. It’s worth pointing out to your leftist friend on facebook who says that free speech has consequences that they’re *defending* the Hollywood Blacklist.

  15. Martin:
    I think you’re exactly right. The whole purpose of this ‘reality’ show was really to hold up conservatives (or people with conservative values) as a bunch of backwoods rednecks: ‘See you don’t want to be associated with THAT, now do you?’ And as soon as one says something predictably politically incorrect, the firestorm of fake media outrage erupts: “See these guys aren’t really funny—they are positively dangerous!”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s