Jump to content



Photo

Duck Dynasty Star Banned Indefinitely for Anti-Gay Comments

duck dynasty phil robertson gay glaad a&e lgbt

  • Please log in to reply
375 replies to this topic

#1 bradsday

bradsday

    Neowinian

  • 369 posts
  • Joined: 26-November 05
  • Location: Bangkok, Thailand (American Abroad)
  • OS: Windows 8/7/Vista/XP - OSX 10.7 Lion
  • Phone: BlackBerry 9700

Posted 19 December 2013 - 06:43

Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson has been taken off the A&E hit series "indefinitely," following anti-gay comments he made in a GQ interview published Wednesday.

 

“We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series 'Duck Dynasty,' a network statement issued late Wednesday said. "His personal views in no way reflect those of A+E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely.”

 

A&E took action against Robertson after GLAAD condemned the "Duck Commander's" quotes.

"Everything is blurred in what's right and wrong," he complained. "Sin becomes fine." The Louisiana-based entrepreneur clarified: "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." 

 

The devout Christian then paraphrased a biblical passage: "Don't be deceived. 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." 

 

In a statement, GLAAD said: “Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil’s lies 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 public disdain for LGBT people and families.”

 

The show will continue filming without him. 

 

http://www.today.com...ents-2D11773442




#2 Aheer.R.S.

Aheer.R.S.

    I cannot Teach Him, the Boy has no Patience!

  • 11,886 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 10

Posted 19 December 2013 - 06:47

Just shows, no actor is immune enough to say stuff like this and get away with it

regardless of what one's belief is, the studio played it safe



#3 ians18

ians18

    Where Unprofessional Commenting Looks Better.

  • 1,566 posts
  • Joined: 17-May 12
  • Location: On The Blue Marble
  • OS: Windows 10 Technical Preview Build 9879, Windows 8.1 August update, OSX Yoesmite
  • Phone: Microsoft Lumia 521 on T-mo w/ WP 8.1 Update (Dev) & "Lumia Cyan" Firmware

Posted 19 December 2013 - 06:49

A&E and GLAAD are violating the guy's first amendment right. GLAAD is also personally attacking him and his family by questioning his beliefs in an official statement. Sure, his views may not represent the entire network, but those who support promote those who are gay do not represent Phil Roberston.



#4 ians18

ians18

    Where Unprofessional Commenting Looks Better.

  • 1,566 posts
  • Joined: 17-May 12
  • Location: On The Blue Marble
  • OS: Windows 10 Technical Preview Build 9879, Windows 8.1 August update, OSX Yoesmite
  • Phone: Microsoft Lumia 521 on T-mo w/ WP 8.1 Update (Dev) & "Lumia Cyan" Firmware

Posted 19 December 2013 - 06:50

Just shows, no actor is immune enough to say stuff like this and get away with it

regardless of what one's belief is, the studio played it safe

Sure, but if he said "I support gays" they wouldn't suspend his filming.



#5 Liana

Liana

    Tech Girl

  • 651 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 08
  • Location: Colorado, United States

Posted 19 December 2013 - 06:52

A&E and GLAAD are violating the guy's first amendment right. GLAAD is also personally attacking him and his family by questioning his beliefs in an official statement. Sure, his views may not represent the entire network, but those who support promote those who are gay do not represent Phil Roberston.

How are they violating his first amendment rights? 



#6 Aheer.R.S.

Aheer.R.S.

    I cannot Teach Him, the Boy has no Patience!

  • 11,886 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 10

Posted 19 December 2013 - 06:54

Sure, but if he said "I support gays" they wouldn't suspend his filming.

Actually, my post was about small time actor arrogance, I've seen many acting like spoiled brats, whereas, the big names, the ones like the late Elizabeth Taylor, or Tom Cruise, (just to name 2) who have earned the right to act diva-esq show great humility and diplomacy when speaking to interviewers. You also must realise that the show is aired in other countries, UK had freedom of speech rights too, just hate speech, isn't



#7 compl3x

compl3x

    Space coyote

  • 8,799 posts
  • Joined: 06-December 09
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S4

Posted 19 December 2013 - 06:58

How are they violating his first amendment rights? 

 

I too was wondering this.



#8 compl3x

compl3x

    Space coyote

  • 8,799 posts
  • Joined: 06-December 09
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S4

Posted 19 December 2013 - 06:59

Sure, but if he said "I support gays" they wouldn't suspend his filming.

 

If he worked for a conservative broadcaster and he advocated gay marriage or something they might suspend him too.



#9 ians18

ians18

    Where Unprofessional Commenting Looks Better.

  • 1,566 posts
  • Joined: 17-May 12
  • Location: On The Blue Marble
  • OS: Windows 10 Technical Preview Build 9879, Windows 8.1 August update, OSX Yoesmite
  • Phone: Microsoft Lumia 521 on T-mo w/ WP 8.1 Update (Dev) & "Lumia Cyan" Firmware

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:06

If he worked for a conservative broadcaster and he advocated gay marriage or something they might suspend him too.

Which would also be a violation of his freedom of speech as well. Many have come out as gay, but are they fired/suspended from their career? Nope.

 

 

 

He is voicing his opinion on homo marriage.



#10 +snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

    Electrical & Computer Engineer

  • 1,563 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 05
  • OS: Win/Lin/Bsd/Osx
  • Phone: dumb phone

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:07

Sure, but if he said "I support gays" they wouldn't suspend his filming.

 

Depends on the viewership. You don't want to alienate your base. Networks will always stay inline with their viewership (or rather whoever they think their viewership is -- since the two may not be the same).

 

How are they violating his first amendment rights? 

 

They aren't. The poster is misinterpreting first amendment rights to mean you can say whatever you want [anywhere] without any repercussions.



#11 Liana

Liana

    Tech Girl

  • 651 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 08
  • Location: Colorado, United States

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:08

They have put his career on halt for talking in an interview, is that not discrimination against Christians?

 

It's a business decision.

Which would also be a violation of his freedom of speech as well. Many have come out as gay, but are they fired/suspended from their career? Nope.

Every.Single.Day.



#12 KingCracker

KingCracker

    I am your huckleberry.

  • 4,291 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 12
  • Location: Knoxville,TN

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:14

Sucks for him.

#13 COKid

COKid

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,107 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 10
  • Location: Loveland, CO

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:18

I have no problem with free speech, unless it involves cutting other people down.

 

Oh, and I never "chose" to be hetero. We are who we are, so why all the hate? Is that what your god teaches you? Funny, here I thought gods loved everyone. Perhaps they do, but it seems their followers haven't gotten the memo.



#14 OP bradsday

bradsday

    Neowinian

  • 369 posts
  • Joined: 26-November 05
  • Location: Bangkok, Thailand (American Abroad)
  • OS: Windows 8/7/Vista/XP - OSX 10.7 Lion
  • Phone: BlackBerry 9700

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:18

I think this is a foolish knee-jerk reaction from A&E.  You would have to watch the show to understand.  This is a reality show that centers around Phil Robertson as the moral and religious patriarch of his large family; they end every program with him saying grace around the dining table.  He is a Christian ultra-conservative; that is basically the premise of the show.  And actually, many would argue that his back-to-fundamentals Christian conservativism is exactly what has made the show such a wild success - that is, the most successful reality show in history with a per episode audience of around 14 million.

 

This article is also a bit misleading.  It jams together quotes to make it appear that it was all said together in one cohesive anti-gay slander; it simply was not. I would advise anyone to go read the full GQ article to gain the actual context.  He provided his personal opinion and paraphrased a Bible verse to support his position.  He never asked anyone to agree with him, nor did he condemn or judge anyone who does not.

 

A&E shot themselves in the foot with this poorly thought out decision.  Duck Dynasty will begrudgingly ride out the rest of their contract before moving onto another network.  In the end, A&E will have lost the greatest, highest grossing reality show in the history of television.



#15 seta-san

seta-san

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,506 posts
  • Joined: 17-February 05

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:30

Depends on the viewership. You don't want to alienate your base. Networks will always stay inline with their viewership (or rather whoever they think their viewership is -- since the two may not be the same).

 

 

They aren't. The poster is misinterpreting first amendment rights to mean you can say whatever you want without any repercussions.

 

the show centers around a bunch of rednecks with too much money and not enough brains and ends in a prayer at the dinner table; who do you think the viewership is? HINT: It's not the gays.