Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seems to me that the problem is not free speech or the consequences of it but the over-sensitivity of some people, specifically on the left. If you all consider him so moronic (or similar terms of your own choice), the why lend him the credibility or even care what he says?
The opinions of many shall be tolerated, by the same token take a realty tv start, shouldn't we see these people for who they truly are. It is called true TV for gosh sakes, don't want to see how they people really are, don't watch the show.
I haven't, but you're missing a point: A&E aren't obliged to broadcast the show at all. Duckguy is an entertainer who took on a job. Imagae control is part of that job, and if he can't handle that, reality TV is not for him.
I'm not sure I'd argue that by suspending Robertson A&E is exercising it's speech rights. It seems to me a bit of a stretch to consider disciplinary actions between employers and employees as symbolic speech. I think it's more accurate to say that A&E is exercising it's right of property. A&E owns property - namely the A&E network and the show Duck Dynasty. If A&E deems Robertson's speech and actions harmful to its property, it has every right to protect it's property by disciplining Robertson in anyway it deems appropriate*
*(Another consideration is that this is probably not an at-will type of employment situation. I would imagine Robertson and A&E have an employment contract, so you'd have to look to the contract to see what it says is allowable or not allowable.)
I'm pretty sure that they're lawyered up enough to know their rights to suspend him.
What i'm trying to figure out is if they're gonna outright fire him, or just shut him down for a season or so.
What bigotry and hate did he express, other then to prefer women to men?
Or is it just considered hate to repeat what the bible views as sinful behavior? He said sexually promiscuous people and drunks were sinners too, does he hate them, especially since he admitted he engaged in those things in the past too?
The private lives of others are not his business, period. When he starts using his public pulpit to promote hatred against others who's sexuality does not match his own he's just being hateful and sticking his nose in what is none of his business.
Moreover he's really not practicing religion as such, he's using religion politically. Once a religion goes into politics it's no longer religion, but just another political party, and in this case one concerned with politicizing the private lives and sexuality of others for socially hateful and controlling purposes.
It's called "living with the consequences of one's actions", and it used to be a conservative value. Used to.
[MOD CUT/off topic]
Public lynching like these by heavily funded groups, which seek to destroy anyone with an opposing view or opinion is not freedom, the are an anathema to freedom of expression.
The private lives of others are not his business, period. When he starts using his public pulpit to promote hatred against others who's sexuality does not match his own he's just being hateful and sticking his nose in what is none of his business.
Moreover he's really not practicing religion as such, he's using religion politically. Once a religion goes into politics it's no longer religion, but just another political party, and in this case one concerned with politicizing the private lives and sexuality of others for socially hateful and controlling purposes.
He did not express hatred. Speaking a lie over and over does not make it true.
Seems to me that the problem is not free speech or the consequences of it but the over-sensitivity of some people, specifically on the left. If you all consider him so moronic (or similar terms of your own choice), the why lend him the credibility or even care what he says?
Who lends him credibility? Bigots abound, that's not news.
The people deciding to lend him a voice is A&E, and they only do it because they think their advertisers would like their products associated with Duckguy. Then Duckguy goes and says something stupid, leaving A&E to do damage control.
His product is his image. He devalued his product. It really is that simple.
I'm pretty sure that they're lawyered up enough to know their rights to suspend him.
What i'm trying to figure out is if they're gonna outright fire him, or just shut him down for a season or so.
Neither, they are going to milk this controversy for all it's worth. A&E knew his views on things before going into this deal. Well, maybe not his REALLY abhorrent views on the Jim Crow era, but they knew his strong evangelical outlook on life. The people out there who agree with his bigoted and distasteful statements are going to buy all of the DD merchandise they can carry out of Wal-Mart and sit through hours of the show in some futile effort to stick it to those evil PC libs at A&E. And those evil PC libs will laugh all the way to the bank.
Don't think that the A&E marketing department didn't learn from Chik-fil-A. They're going to use the bigotry of their viewers to make a fortune before the flash in the pan brand dies out on it's on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
