What makes this Duck Dynasty fallout different than the Dixie Chicks?

What public? The public support gay marriage by a large majority. Only fox news bots and tea party extremists made a stink about Phil.

 

well it's the same mentality that we should cast out those that we do not agree with.... sadly the suspension of the Duck Dynasty cast member is being accepted as being part of a "liberal" agenda... as if it's not a liberal principle to defend your enemies

it's not so much a matter of free speech so much it is a matter of social tolerance, we should not make it a political principle to bully other peoples' beliefs into meeting our personal approval.

 

so we should only tolerate popular speech/beliefs?

 

ummm were right and phil not so much. Republicans are in such bad shape they have to grasp at anything even if it resorts to fake outrage.

 

Phil is back on the #1 reality TV show. You rarely even hear about the Dixie Chicks any more.

 

Okay still the dixie Chicks were right and Phil is nothing more than a reality tv star that grew a beard.

 

And? At their peak the Dixie Chicks were far more culturally relevant than Duck Dynasty. I don't even like country music I knew about them. Duck Dynasty? Never heard of it before this scandal.

 

"Right"???? They both are right in that they both correctly stated their opinions. Still, one of the differences is that the Dixie Chicks have slipped into oblivion while Phil is back on one of the top TV shows. That's because the opposition to the Dixie chicks was opposition of their fans while the opposition to Phil was a creation of GLAAD and the media.

 

The right did not threaten their lives although I am sure they recieved some death threats. In fact death threats are common when one is a celebrity and somebody someplace does not like your lifestyle or something about it. Barbara Streisand has recieved them ( for her politics not her gawdawful singing. go figure ) Ted Nugent has recieved death threats cause he hunts and kills animals. Micheal Moore claims to have had death threats and so has Sarah Palin. I would be much more shocked to learn Robertson has not recieved any death threats than if he has.

I have said this on other threads and will say it again it is not a first amendment issue or a censorship issue. Maines and the Dixie chunks were criticized and targeted by people who did not like what they said and refused to buy or play their CD's or go to their concerts. Robertson was briefly under siege ( no longer ) by his employers. and that is the only difference.

Both parties said something which angered others and others turned against them. This is why it is not a free speech issue everyone has the freedom of speech but tht does not mean others will like or approve of what you say. Others also have the right to react negatively to what you say as long as they are not initiating force against you.

I hate reality TV and have never watched even a minute of DD or Duck Commander. The only thing I know about it is that it gets huge ratings and they all hunt and have beards.

I can't stand country music either and never cared for the Dixie Chicks.

Robertson obviously won his little battle because A&E values the ratings and $$ his show brings and so to hell with anyone who does not like what he said. I personally do not care about what he said as he is not important and cannot harm me or anyone else with his words.

I feel the same way about Maines and her scandal. She only stated an opinion about bush. The one thing about her case which did get my attention was the way she ( and many others ) screamed censorship or prattled on about her courage. When the Dixie Chicks went to some awards show people like Joan Baz were falling all over each other to praise them for their " courage ". It took no courage to state they were ashamed of the president especially since they said this in england in front of a crowd which obviously agreed. Ultimately it took no courage to withstand the criticism at home since as I understand it they actually sold more recordings and got wealthier as the result of this controversy. ( the same is true for Robertson probably but no one is praising his courage that I can see ). It was even dumber for the D Chicks to scream censorship when Natalie Maines was on the cover of virtually every magaine in every supermarket for months talking about her feelings and about Bush etc. She got her voice heard nationwide and still whined about censorship. Yes the same does apply to Robertson who was never censored.

In the end both cases have a lot in common and only go to show that people on both sides of politics can be small minded. No one has a monopoly on intelligent thinking in these instances and both sides are hypocritical.

 

Then why does gay mariage go down like ajax everytime you have to vote for it? Most recently in Virginia?

 

"Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates"... Benjamin Franklin. Natalie Maines was professionally and emotionally destroyed for doing precisely what Benjamin Franklin said that she should do as a conscientious patriot, and Phil was stating his religious beliefs. Both were exercising their right to free speech and neither should have been exiled for it. We have got to learn to defend people who come under fire for availing themselves of their constitutional rights, rights and liberties are like muscles that must be exercised regularly or they will become weakened. As the saying goes "If you don't use it, you'll lose it"! We as a nation owe a HUGE apology to Natalie, ‎Emily Robison, and ‎Martie Maguire for what WE allowed to be done to them because at the end of the day they are Americans and they deserved our support but we turned our backs on them! Here's what we lost!... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pojL_35QlSI

 

An even better video... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaXcuB8WhKc

 

Well, since you've now found what was "lost", what are you still whinning about?

 

You have reflected reality, I must say.

Yet, it is also true that the social backlash from what Robertson communicated, has not come completely to fruition at this point. That is, what kind of message has Robertson and those who support him, communicated about the type of people he depicts or represents? Has he helped the cause of such (Southern/religious people or set them back more than we know?) Robertson, A&E and Cracker Barrel may benefit for awhile, but I think the effects of what Robertson communicated are much more far-reaching, IMO.

There are some people like me, who have watched A&E, eaten at Cracker Barrel and viewed Duck Dynasty. This Robertson-bigotry-expressed, was enough to send me elsewhere where it concerns each.

 

I suspect for every one viewer sent elsewhere, 10 have watched Duck Dynasty for the first time. I watched my first episode last week.

 

The controversy may have helped some in the short term; but I doubt it will be significantly beneficial to all involved/represented... in the long run.

We'll see.

 

LOL! I think that I'll just allow that statement to stand on it's own merits!

 

It wasnt a statement, and was instead a question, you felt compelled to respond to without answering.

- - - Updated - - -

You mean it wont benefit the gays.

 

I meant what I said. And it's not merely about "gays".

 

I looked up what he said to be sure I was responding correctly.

"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," he's quoted as saying.

When asked what he thought was sinful, Robertson replied: "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."

But homosexuals aren't alone, Robertson said. "Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers -- they won't inherit the kingdom of God. Don't deceive yourself. It's not right."​

While I don't agree with Robertson, I do understand that many fundamentalist Christians and Muslims do agree with him about sin. He did not say he hated those people, he expressed what he though was sinful in responding to a question. Lots of people believe homosexual acts are sinful. As much as I dislike the notion, he had a right to say it, and I believe A&E was wrong to suspend him for expressing his opinion.

 

I don't.

 

Interesting, I went to look for the comment you left out by just googling a sentence from the comments you did include. 10 different sources all had the comments you included, but not the comment I was looking for. Went back to the original article to find it.

“We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”
Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson#ixzz2ozKhP1ao

Guess that one didnt fit with the image the media was trying to create.

 

Well The Dixie Chicks had death threats. Radio stations sponsored events to smash their CDs. It was was an organized effort against them.

 

http://toprightnews.com/?p=377

- - - Updated - - -

That's whatcha call a convenient omission.

 

Only if you had the ability to see the irony in your own post