Cracker Barrel removing Duck Dynasty merchandise

Are you referring to pulling the merchandise or reinstating it?

 

Pulling it in the first place. Robertson's comments were entirely in character, as unsurprising and therefore inoffensive as if he'd pointed out that the sun rises in the morning and some of his best friends are colored. It's part of his charm. This entire overreaction makes me wonder what some people are thinking. Fer cryin' out loud, people, this is a show about rednecks. What do you expect?

 

well the place is called 'cracker' for godsake.

 

The moderators have requested that we don't call homosexuals queers or fairies.

So please don't call them rednecks.

That's flamebaiting.

 

I love CB. Not because of this, but because their the only regularly good chain restaurant that put real maple syrup on the table instead of that Aunt Jemima's corn syrup crap waffle house, Ihop, and Denny's all use.

 

Really?

 

this post is incorrect now, really should be removed.

 

No they don't. There are ranges in the norm.

It's a simple matter of correct English and grammer.

It is fact and proper descriptive.

ROFL or yes we are, always have been, which is why we are here and will be only if we urge and support and sanction heterosexuality. Tell me what is they purpose of sex?

- - - Updated - - -

Good point why is it proper discourage to use demeaning labels for a variety of minority groups but OK to use them for white people?

 

I travel and usually hit one during the week because of the variety of fresh veggies and "homecooked" items and consistent quality. Sure wish they swerved beer though

 

Of course there are. So what?

Hardly! Terminology that is clearly intended to be derogatory, and to be understood as derogatory, is used for a purpose beyond strictly correct grammatical usage.

Not the way you used it. If I were to call you an idiot, I might be technically correct on the merits, but my grammar would be interpreted to be insulting and demeaning.

No, you are not correct. MOST people are heterosexual. Those whose orientation is not heterosexual are still fertile. The proximate purpose of sex is to satisfy a physical drive. Breeding is a side-effect. Nobody is saying we should not support heterosexuality. The proposal is that ALL sexuality should be supported, except if it does clear harm to anyone.

 

Most people engage in heterosexual behavior as is the norm of our heterosexual species, when we can start producing homosexually let me know.

ROFL of geez where did you learn this nonsense, the purpose of the urge to have sex is to encourage breeding not the other way around. Were sex not necessary for procreation then there would be no sex drive. Natural made it pleasurable inorder to get us to do it.

Not only that we should encourage and support and sanction it as it is vital to the continuation of our species.

There is no need or purpose or benefit to support and encourage homosexuality in fact it can harm the future of our species so it should at the least not be encourage and supported and certainly not sanctioned.

 

RACISTS!!!!

 

Homosexual behavior is the norm for homosexuals. Not for the species as a whole. There is no normal behavior for the entire species. Reproduction isn't a sex drive, it's a sex by-product. Most of the time, it doesn't happen even with heterosexuals.

??? That's what I said. Nature made it a drive, we act accordingly, we enjoy it. There are, believe it or not, women worldwide who do not know how they got pregnant, because the pregnancy is so far removed in time from the sex act. And I agree that evolution doesn't care whether or not any species understands the biological result of their sex drive. If reproduction were to be magically halted, this last generation of every species would still engage in sex just as much.

And we do. No problem there.

But when asked for the harm, all anyone ever gets is the assertion that there is "harm", unspecified. I personally think we should be tolerant of things that do not affect us, and I also think (this being Christmas and all) that we should make life as pleasant and rewarding and fulfilling as possible for everyone, even those of different orientation. There is no NEED to be charitable, but people still are for some reason.

 

It is and yes there are quite normal behaviors.

The drive is to engage in sex it is not the sex itself, what is the purpose of sex? If sex wasn't needed there would be no drive for it.

Yep that is why society created the institution of marriage.

It lowers the procreation rate and the spreading of the gene pool.

And tolerating does not mean encouraging and supporting and sanctioning.

 

Shhhh, you and I both know the posters here are only hollering about the word redneck because they are desperately trying to find an equivalent word to be outraged about.....

[sarcasm]They are mad because those pesky minorities have labels attached to them and they want to share in the fun....[/sarcasm]