• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Duck Dynasty's Phil: Black People were happy pre-civil rights era, pre-welfare, etc..

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dio said:
What people don't get is that this is basically completely manufactured controversy.

This is the Duck Dynasty family circa 2000:

Nm93Sah.jpg


Then:
UIIm8zs.jpg


Now:
fsba8XR.jpg


It's like wrestling, except far more people believe these people aren't acting.

For some reason, people actually think this is a camera crew following around some random rednecks. These guys are anything but, and if you think they're not completely aware of their impact on the media by saying this shit...
Click to expand...

Can I shed a little perspective here? I'm from North Louisiana, I used to work in Monroe, my dad shot some footage for their hunting videos, and I've know some minor people on Duck Dynasty, but I haven't met any of the Robertsons in person.

They really are rich rednecks. And they had beards before Duck Dynasty even if they shaved them off in the summer (many men do this, including yours truly). They started making their Duck Commander hunting videos in the late 80s, and they had beards then. I did read in an interview that Willie said that now the beard and camo thing is a part of their image.

Rednecks come in all shapes and sizes. Sometimes they shave, sometimes they grow beards. Sometimes they can wear golfing clothes, and sometimes they can dress up for family photos.

Of course they play it up for the show. It's a show. It's manufactured scenarios in which they play characters of themselves.
 
The Technomancer said:
No, the thing that's going on with "tolerance" is that all of the people who were left behind when the culture started realizing that there are actually people who are not straight white Christians started realizing that they could still espouse their narrow-minded, bigoted, hurtful views by saying "but you hippie liberals care so much about tolerance why aren't you tolerating our right to be hurtful!"
Click to expand...

UCLA earlier this year had a whole lecture with Q&A on this very subject that you are not seeing the full picture, but only part of it:

Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion - Ravi Zacharias at UCLA

We encounter an incredible diversity of cultures, lifestyles, and faiths. Unfortunately our conflicting identities and beliefs often exclude others. Is there truth to real acceptance and inclusion? Join in discussion with renowned international speaker and Christian philosopher Ravi Zacharias. Extended Q&A following the dialogue with Dr. Zacharias and Michael Ramsden, speaker and Director at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University.
Click to expand...
 
NinjaMouse said:
I don't dispute the prevalence of this attitude in the South, but I'll tell you, I've spent nearly 10 years living in NYC and I certainly see just as much of this bigotry here as I did growing up in the South. Get out of Manhattan and the landscape and attitudes change quite a bit. I've been privy to conversations here that would be considered jaw-dropping by most.
Click to expand...
I believe you. Examples?

Also, it's wrong no matter what part of the country it happens in. I know people from New England who are plenty racist and homophobic.

When comes to Phil's opinions, I disagree with him, but I certainly don't fault him for it. He's a product of the 50s and 60s in the deep south. If you ask me, I feel like he gave much more reasonable response than most of his generation you'd get from that area. Also, let's be honest, none of that surprises anyone.
Click to expand...
Bigotry should not be tolerated because the person perpetuating it is old. That's a terrible excuse. There are also people his age who used to hold his ignorant views, but changed them because they realized they were wrong in the face of evidence, life experience, and basic human empathy.

I must have missed the part where he suggested any violence or mistreatment. He was open about the fact that he disagrees with it, he believes in God making any sort of final judgement, and took it no further. I've certainly see things about peoples' lives that I personally disagree with, and that's where it stops. I live my life according to my standards, and I'd say the Robertsons are living according to theirs.
Click to expand...
As I've said several times in this thread, the attitude and views of people like that is the furthest thing from innocuous. By saying things like this, he's legitimizing the harmful views of a certain segment of the population, which filters up into politics, allows bigots to be elected, and results in discriminatory action/inaction by public officials and government.

This "live and let live" attitude doesn't work for situations like this. It wouldn't have worked in the 1950s for someone advocating second class citizenship for blacks, and it shouldn't work now for those who demean and perpetuate stereotypes against LGBT people.
 
Link said:
I saw a commercial for Duck Dynasty Chia Pets the other day.
Click to expand...

Their stuff is every where. It's insane and I've never seen anything like it. I've seen everything from Wii-motes to band aids to duct tape with their faces on it. They're like a redneck boy band or something. It seems like there was a bit of a stir recently when they had a Duck Dynasty branded wine or something despite them supposedly being anti-alcohol. I guess that blew over.
 
http://www.uproxx.com/tv/2013/12/ph...-gay-people-ruthless-full-murder-2010-speech/

"Women with women, men with men, they committed indecent acts with one another, and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions,” Robertson said in the 2010 speech. “They’re full of murder, envy, strife, hatred. They are insolent, arrogant, God-haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil. That’s what you have 235 years, roughly, after your forefathers founded the country.”
Click to expand...

Huh
 
NinjaMouse said:
I don't dispute the prevalence of this attitude in the South, but I'll tell you, I've spent nearly 10 years living in NYC and I certainly see just as much of this bigotry here as I did growing up in the South. Get out of Manhattan and the landscape and attitudes change quite a bit. I've been privy to conversations here that would be considered jaw-dropping by most.

When comes to Phil's opinions, I disagree with him, but I certainly don't fault him for it. He's a product of the 50s and 60s in the deep south. If you ask me, I feel like he gave much more reasonable response than most of his generation you'd get from that area. Also, let's be honest, none of that surprises anyone. I must have missed the part where he suggested any violence or mistreatment. He was open about the fact that he disagrees with it, he believes in God making any sort of final judgement, and took it no further. I've certainly see things about peoples' lives that I personally disagree with, and that's where it stops. I live my life according to my standards, and I'd say the Robertsons are living according to theirs.
Click to expand...

Agree with you on this.

Especially with people now inflating what he actually said as acts of hatred or inciting violence. I read it and while I still think it's a shitty attitude, he doesn't come off as even mean at all. He comes off as a decent enough guy, and this is coming from a flaming liberal like myself.
 
Speaking of Facebook feeds, I did find a good quote from someone who commented on the issue.

"I equate the firing like this - I have the right to bears arms, but if I bring a gun into work, I'll get my ass fired while the gun is confiscated."
 
NobleXenon said:
Speaking of Facebook feeds, I did find a good quote from someone who commented on the issue.

"I equate the firing like this - I have the right to bears arms, but if I bring a gun into work, I'll get my ass fired while the gun is confiscated."
Click to expand...

that's a pretty good quote
 
bengraven said:
Agree with you on this.

Especially with people now inflating what he actually said as acts of hatred or inciting violence. I read it and while I still think it's a shitty attitude, he doesn't come off as even mean at all. He comes off as a decent enough guy, and this is coming from a flaming liberal like myself.
Click to expand...

when you call an entire group of people "sinners" and basically condemn them as being less than human you are indirectly inciting violence. It's the kind of backwards thinking that people who DO commit violence use to justify the way they treat gays and other minorities. Someone who has a platform, even a stupid reality show like in this case, should be more responsible with it and with what they say.
 
The idiots that have whipped themselves up in a frenzy over his suspension from work are simply amazing. I am pretty sure America is getting dumber every day. Maybe 1000 years after I am gone things will be better.
 
KingGondo said:
I believe you. Examples?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't have any specific stories, but it ranges from casual use of racial/homophobic slurs, conversations about how to stamp out crime, the best way to "clean up" neighborhoods, etc. I'll let you draw your own conclusions, but it's amazing how bigoted people can be.

KingGondo said:
Bigotry should not be tolerated because the person perpetuating it is old. That's a terrible excuse. There are also people his age who used to hold his ignorant views, but changed them because they realized they were wrong in the face of evidence, life experience, and basic human empathy.
Click to expand...

Sure, but the takeaways there are the fact that his mind probably HAS changed over the years. Unless you're suggesting that his religious views are ignorant, but he's stated that religion is what dictates his life. He's consistent in those particular teachings. He even stated that he can't logically process the homosexual lifestyle...and I'm sure there's lots of straight people would make THAT particular statement, just without quoting the Bible in the process. The truth of the matter is, I'm not going to talk anyone into being "ok" with this, nor would I really want to, but I certainly think it's reasonable to ask for the same understanding they expect others to have. Remember, forced tolerance is a very effective way of keeping hate alive, which is why there need to be constructive means used to teach others a better way. In my opinion, AE shouldn't have pulled him from the show, because they should have known the family would walk with him. They should have let the viewers decide if they were outraged enough to boycott the show, but that's certainly my opinion. Maybe Rodeo Girls will work out for them...it certainly looks like a better message is being sent there, right?
 
Tamanon said:
So going by Romans which you say he's quoting, then he's saying that gay people deserve to die?
Click to expand...

Good question. Paul is grouping all humanity in the context of those verses. He is showing that all humanity is guilty before God for breaking his commands (not loving Him and others) and the fruits of their sins if they choose to live life without him.

Paul puts in the clutch and changes gears as he paints the canvas black in order that the gem of the Gospel might stand out against the dark backdrop of human depravity. God will not allow people to continue in sin any more than a physician would say to a person with cancer, “Well, I don’t want to carve into you or cause you any discomfort, so I won’t do anything about it.” No, just as a doctor knows there must be surgery, so, too, the wrath of God will deal surgically and powerfully with humanity whenever people fail to embrace Jesus Christ and refuse to allow His blood to remove the cancer of their iniquity.
Click to expand...
 
NinjaMouse said:
Sure, but the takeaways there are the fact that his mind probably HAS changed over the years. Unless you're suggesting that his religious views are ignorant, but he's stated that religion is what dictates his life. He's consistent in those particular teachings. He even stated that he can't logically process the homosexual lifestyle...and I'm sure there's lots of straight people would make THAT particular statement, just without quoting the Bible in the process. The truth of the matter is, I'm not going to talk anyone into being "ok" with this, nor would I really want to, but I certainly think it's reasonable to ask for the same understanding they expect others to have. Remember, forced tolerance is a very effective way of keeping hate alive, which is why there need to be constructive means used to teach others a better way. In my opinion, AE shouldn't have pulled him from the show, because they should have known the family would walk with him. They should have let the viewers decide if they were outraged enough to boycott the show, but that's certainly my opinion. Maybe Rodeo Girls will work out for them...it certainly looks like a better message is being sent there, right?
Click to expand...
Maybe his mind has changed. It's entirely possible he was openly racist earlier in his life and was openly abusive to gay people to their faces.

I'm just making the point that the standard "he's a product of his times" argument is weak.

Game Analyst said:
Good question. Paul is grouping all humanity in the context of those verses. He is showing that all humanity is guilty before God for breaking his commands (not loving Him and others) and the fruits of their sins if they choose to live life without him.
Click to expand...
You and Dunk#7 always come in with the blanket statements about "everybody being sinners" and avoid the real topic of conversation.

We're not going to make any progress, since you a) believe homosexuality is wrong, period, and b) your source is an ancient, "infallible" text and it's hard to argue against that if you believe in it--because you admitting that the Bible is wrong in one particular case is tantamount to admitting that God might be wrong.
 
PopeReal said:
The idiots that have whipped themselves up in a frenzy over his suspension from work are simply amazing. I am pretty sure America is getting dumber every day. Maybe 1000 years after I am gone things will be better.
Click to expand...

There are parts of America that refuse to adapt to modern times and beliefs, that much is true. But there are other parts that are exactly the opposite, many of today's younger generations are not so close minded as people like Phil are, quite the opposite. The times they are a changin, and you need only look at the political shifts of the past decade or so to see the evidence. The Republican party, who used to consist mostly of very religious people who think much like Phil, it is shrinking in both power and population. It's why the Republicans are resorting to things like gerrymandering and such, and still losing power and elections. It's why the party is divided and fighting amongst itself for a direction on how to best proceed.

No, it will take much less than 1000 years for this outdated way of thinking to go away. It's already on it's way out, some just can't see the writing on the wall, that's all.
 
Game Analyst said:
I think the following quote from an Oxford Philosopher nails what is really going on in our country regarding tolerance:

"This is the new America of tolerance, another vacuous word defined by relativists whose only absolutes are the denial of any other reality except their own."
Click to expand...

Where this applies most is the many religious folk who expect everyone in America (and much of the world) to live and abide by religious law, even if those people aren't followers of a/that religion. It's the primary reason there's such an uphill battle to legalize gay marriage here as well; too many religious folk want gays living in their reality, whether we believe in it or not.

Expecting non-believers to abide by religious rule of law is not tolerance but it is quite arrogant.
 
PopeReal said:
The idiots that have whipped themselves up in a frenzy over his suspension from work are simply amazing. I am pretty sure America is getting dumber every day. Maybe 1000 years after I am gone things will be better.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm shocked how passionate some of his fans are about this. I don't think they quite understand what's happening. Like he's getting shipped off to Guantanamo Bay or something :lol

An old rich dude isn't going to be on his reality show. He'll survive. He's going to be okay.
 
Fjordson said:
Yeah, I'm shocked how passionate some of his fans are about this. I don't think they quite understand what's happening. Like he's getting shipped off to Guantanamo Bay or something :lol

An old rich dude isn't going to be on his reality show. He'll survive. He's going to be okay.
Click to expand...

45% of Americans believe homosexuality is a sin. They see this as an assault on christian america.
 
Fjordson said:
Yeah, I'm shocked how passionate some of his fans are about this.
Click to expand...

You don't understand. The liberals have taken their jobs, their tax dollars, and now their reality television personality hunting heroes. This affects them directly, and if they don't speak up now, when will they ever?
 
I think my biggest problem with defenders of this, or any "freedom of religion" argument, is that what they really mean is "freedom of Christianity." The second it's about any other religion (like the YMCA girls' swim class), these same people are screaming bloody murder. That's not how it works, despite what they may think about this being a Christian nation. It isn't. Separation of church and state is even in the same amendment they're arguing for.
 
creationtheory said:
45% of Americans believe homosexuality is a sin. They see this as an assault on christian america.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of people, men in particular, hate homosexuality and gay sex because they think it's gross and feminizes men. For them it has little to do with God, though that's a convenient cover. You can see it in Phil's comment about how the vagina has more to offer.

Jesus could come back tomorrow and say, "The gays are cool, y'all" and a substantial minority of people would still hate and try to marginalize homosexuality, at least among men.
 
A lot of the people I've encountered that are outraged over this are usually the first people to yell about letting the free market decide.

Well, A&E took action to protect it's advertising interests. This is not an issue of free speech, intolerance or religious discrimination. This is simply PR. Thank you capitalism.
 
Game Analyst said:
Good question. Paul is grouping all humanity in the context of those verses. He is showing that all humanity is guilty before God for breaking his commands (not loving Him and others) and the fruits of their sins if they choose to live life without him.
Click to expand...

Interesting how you completely ignore the question in order to vomit more buffoonery.
 
Catchpenny said:
I think a lot of people, men in particular, hate homosexuality and gay sex because they think it's gross and feminizes men. For them it has little to do with God, though that's a convenient cover. You can see it in Phil's comment about how the vagina has more to offer.

Jesus could come back tomorrow and say, "The gays are cool, y'all" and a substantial minority of people would still hate and try to marginalize homosexuality, at least among men.
Click to expand...

It's cool that the bible only says homosexuality is a sin and doesn't have anything to say about gender roles....
 
NobleXenon said:
Speaking of Facebook feeds, I did find a good quote from someone who commented on the issue.

"I equate the firing like this - I have the right to bears arms, but if I bring a gun into work, I'll get my ass fired while the gun is confiscated."
Click to expand...

Amazing people that carry around the constitution in their pocket don't know the 1st amendment protects you from government censorship, not being fired for saying stupid shit at your job.
 
And this thread has come full circle. It really blows my mind that people think their intolerant views should be tolerated just because they are religious in nature.
 
HeisenbergLannister said:
Am I the only one that thinks this was manufactured for him to have a break or something, maybe he needs a major surgery and doesn't want the cameras around, and then when he can return, A&E can pop a huge rating.

I'm sure I'm not the first one to bring up this possibility.
Click to expand...

Actually you are the first. And your post is amazing if true lol.
 
People are saying that he is ignorant. Ignorant is defined as lacking knowledge or the knowing of a particular subject. So why is he ignorant exactly? They are his views of the bible and what he has learned. Who is to say that my views or your view is the correct one. What if we are ignorant and he is right? The point is... nobody knows. Everybody has thier own set of beliefs. The truth is.. none of us really know what the right view is. We just think we do, or we want to believe that we do.
 
remist said:
And this thread has come full circle. It really blows my mind that people think their intolerant views should be tolerated just because they are religious in nature.
Click to expand...
Hey man, we should be tolerant of their intolerance.

MrPressStart said:
People are saying that he is ignorant. Ignorant is defined as lacking knowledge or the knowing of a particular subject. So why is he ignorant exactly? They are his views of the bible and what he has learned. Who is to say that my views or your view is the correct one. What if we are ignorant and he is right? The point is... nobody knows. Everybody has thier own set of beliefs. The truth is.. none of us really know what the right view is. We just think we do, or we want to believe that we do.
Click to expand...
I didn't realize the bible stated that black people were happier before the Civil Rights Movement. Which book was that in again?
 
MrPressStart said:
People are saying that he is ignorant. Ignorant is defined as lacking knowledge or the knowing of a particular subject. So why is he ignorant exactly? They are his views of the bible and what he has learned. Who is to say that my views or your view is the correct one. What if we are ignorant and he is right? The point is... nobody knows. Everybody has thier own set of beliefs. The truth is.. none of us really know what the right view is. We just think we do, or we want to believe that we do.
Click to expand...

Basically, you're saying it's A-OK when The Taliban says women are half-brained, you know, because it's the only thing they know. Who's to say our views are the correct one, and not theirs? Afterall, everybody has their own set of beliefs.

SMH.
 
creationtheory said:
It's cool that the bible only says homosexuality is a sin and doesn't have anything to say about gender roles....
Click to expand...
What he is saying is that other strait Christians are able to look past it and largely ignore most sins in the bible beyond the obvious big ones but others get hung up on the relatively little mentioned "homosexuality sin". Compared to others that are relatively acceptable today but that the bible was a lot more clear on how awful it thought they were like adultery, divorce etc...

It's clear that for most there is an ulterior motive for the hate and the bible is a smokescreen to hide behind
 
MrPressStart said:
People are saying that he is ignorant. Ignorant is defined as lacking knowledge or the knowing of a particular subject. So why is he ignorant exactly? They are his views of the bible and what he has learned. Who is to say that my views or your view is the correct one. What if we are ignorant and he is right? The point is... nobody knows. Everybody has thier own set of beliefs. The truth is.. none of us really know what the right view is. We just think we do, or we want to believe that we do.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying he's ignorant I'm saying he's a bigot. Morals are relative but I still think everyone should agree that every person is born into the same moral standing. Homosexuals are born homosexuals and they are not going to hell for it.
 
MrPressStart said:
People are saying that he is ignorant. Ignorant is defined as lacking knowledge or the knowing of a particular subject. So why is he ignorant exactly? They are his views of the bible and what he has learned. Who is to say that my views or your view is the correct one. What if we are ignorant and he is right? The point is... nobody knows. Everybody has thier own set of beliefs. The truth is.. none of us really know what the right view is. We just think we do, or we want to believe that we do.
Click to expand...

This kind of moral relativism can excuse almost any action. The vast majority of people understand that the kind of views Phil is espousing have resulted in real human suffering for millions of people. Most people understand why views that result in unnecessary human suffering are ignorant and immoral.
 
Savitar said:
The scary thing is whoever made this was serious.
Click to expand...
That is debatable.

Whether or not this dude actually believes that doesn't seem certain to me. I mean, sure, he may be that big a moron, but I think it is probably more likely that this is a troll that he knows will get him talked about and endear him to his idiot constituents.
 
Savitar said:
The scary thing is whoever made this was serious.
Click to expand...

Some people really do operate under the delusion that Christians are an oppressed minority, despite the fact that this hasn't been true in the west for over 1700 years. Wake up and smell the hegemony.
 
remist said:
And this thread has come full circle. It really blows my mind that people think their intolerant views should be tolerated just because they are religious in nature.
Click to expand...


So, you are intolerant of those you consider intolerant. And they are intolerant because they don't agree with you. Naturally, you don't agree with that. Or their intolerance.
 
Bodacious said:
So, you are intolerant of those you consider intolerant. And they are intolerant because they don't agree with you. Naturally, you don't agree with that. Or their intolerance.
Click to expand...

Woah. Writing this down so I can pwn the folks in my 8th grade debate class.
 
Bodacious said:
So, you are intolerant of those you consider intolerant. And they are intolerant because they don't agree with you. Naturally, you don't agree with that. Or their intolerance.
Click to expand...
You are going to have to clarify this post. Obviously you are trying to make some kind of joke, but all I'm getting is white noise.
 
MrPressStart said:
People are saying that he is ignorant. Ignorant is defined as lacking knowledge or the knowing of a particular subject. So why is he ignorant exactly? They are his views of the bible and what he has learned. Who is to say that my views or your view is the correct one. What if we are ignorant and he is right? The point is... nobody knows. Everybody has thier own set of beliefs. The truth is.. none of us really know what the right view is. We just think we do, or we want to believe that we do.
Click to expand...

Here's where you're very, very wrong: somebody is right. There's a very simple standard that can be used in this instance to determine who is ignorant, and who isn't:

Is either (a) the espoused viewpoint, or (b) its detractors, inflicting unwarranted suffering on any non-aggravating party?​

Espoused viewpoint: Conservatives arguing homosexuals are evil sinners
Detractors: Homosexuals are normal human beings not causing suffering to anyone

The espoused viewpoint does not clear the aforementioned standard because an entire group of people is being cast in an extremely negative light that dehumanizes them and promotes a viewpoint that encourages tangible discrimination and violence. Homosexuals caused no aggravation against conservatives to warrant this vitriol.

On the other hand, the detractors clear this standard because they are not causing tangible harm to anyone. If a man blows another man, no one is suffering because of this action.

The hallmark of any decently run modern society is its ability to negate and ignore abhorrent opinions cloaked behind the veil of "religious beliefs". If we cannot practice the aforementioned standard, we're doing something critically wrong.

The entire notion of liberals being "intolerant of those they consider intolerant" is a logical fallacy of the highest order that any rational individual could see through.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Best 40K Primarch Pre-Heresy
13
598
Trogdor1123 replied
Be happy you were born in our time
2 3
108
2K
jason10mm replied
Happy fathers day
19
321
Oberstein replied
Happy Killdozer Day!
12
415
intbal replied
Happy Mothers Day
19
457
Joramun replied
Top Bottom