Duck Suspension: Freedom of Speech?!?!

In a recent issue of GQ magazine(http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson), Duck Dynasty Phil Robertson discusses an array of topics but the one that landed him a suspension dealt with his answer to the question: What, in your mind, is sinful?

Phil Robertson responded, "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." It is this response that gets the air time, especially on Progressive media outlets, but Mr. Robertson didn't stop there as he referenced the Bible. Specifically he paraphrased Corinthians when he quipped, "Don't be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offends, the greedy, the drunkyards, the slanderers, the swindlers - they won't inherit the kingdom of God. Don't deceive yourself. It's not right."

GLAAD spokesperson Wilson Cruz offered a response by stating, "Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil's lie about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe. He clearly knows nothing about gay people or the majority of Louisianans - and Americans - who support legal recognition for loving and committed gay and lesbian couples. Phil's decision to push vile and extreme stereotypes is a stain on A&E and his sponsors who now need to reexamine their ties to someone with such a public disdain for LGBT people and families."

Wow! Mr. Robertson is pushing "vile and extreme stereotypes" - where? In his response to the question about what is sinful - where does he push a stereotype? Perhaps its when GQ quotes Phil's thought on "modern immorality" as - "It seems like, to me, a vagina - as a man - would be more desirable than a man's anus. That's just me. I'm just thinking: There's more there! She's got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I'm saying? But hey, sin: It's not logical, my man. It's just not logical." While I don't go as far as Mr. Robertson goes to consider two men, or more, engaging in anal sex as a sin; I do understand where Mr. Robertson may come to that conclusion based on his religious beliefs. Again though I ask Wilson Cruz - where did Phil Robertson push a stereotype?

All this being said, the rub on this situation is that Phil Robertson's freedom of speech and/or religion has been violated. I am sorry to say folks there has been no government clamp down on Phil Robertson and as far as I know he is still a free man and not in jail. Question that Progressives won't answer is: What if a member of the LGBT community was suspended from a show for stating their religious view on sin?

Personally I never saw the appeal of Duck Dynasty - perhaps I am not redneck enough - nor do I watch A&E all that much to begin with. I think Brandon Ambrosino (http://ideas.time.com/2013/12/19/the-duck-dynasty-fiasco-says-more-about-our-bigotry-than-phils/) sums it up well at the end of his article when he writes: "GK Chesterton said that bigotry is "an incapacity to conceive seriously the alternative to a proposition." If he is right - and he usually is - then I wonder if the Duck Dynasty fiasco says more about our bigotry than Phil's." By "our" Brandon refers to the LGBT community as he is gay.

Progressives and Conservatives need to learn that bigotry, racism, sexism, etc...flows both ways. While Phil Robertson doesn't talk for all Christians, he does for an unknown number. Obviously Christians don't interpret the Bible all the same or we wouldn't have Catholics, Orthodox, Baptist, Presbyterians, Anglicans, Episcopal s, Methodists, Protestants, Lutherans, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, etc. The final point to digest - Earlier this year a major retailer got into a PR mess in Minnesota because some cashiers refused to check out pork because it was against their religion - Imagine if that retailer fired them!

Ben Carson illustrates the fallacy of marriage debate perfectly

Recently Andrea Mitchel hosted Dr. Ben Carson on her show Andrea Mitchel Reports. Andrea Mitchel quizzed Dr. Carson on his view of marriage. Unfortunately for Andrea Mitchel and MSNBC the line of questioning did little to rattle Dr. Carson's conviction on the definition of marriage. It was actually Andrea Mitchel that appeared to be flustered as her follow up questions were terrible. I bring this up as Dr. Carson lays out a great argument on the definition of marriage. Dr. Carson even hints to the abuse by the Federal government in restricting people the freedom of assembly via utilizing marriage as a vessel to transfer assets and death benefits among other aspects. In fact the Federal government has 1,100 laws on the books that abuse marriage in similar fashion. As an aside, this exchange illustrates the fallacy in the thought process of Progressives have in regards to marriage equality as marriage is not a Civil Right. Marriage, as Dr. Carson puts it, is rooted in God and the Bible not society. Take a look for yourself at the interview.

 http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/29/ben-carson-takes-on-msnbcs-andrea-mitchell-on-the-definition-of-marriage/

 Hopefully people will start to realize that marriage should be left to God, and other Dogma, and demand that Government remove itself from this sacred rite.