Quantcast

Comments about ‘'Duck Dynasty': Robertson family members ready to 'move on'’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Jan. 1 2014 2:01 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Avenue
Vernal, UT

Glad Phil is back on the show.

UTSU
Logan, UT

I hope Phil Robertson will learn from this incident that it is not OK to say blacks were happier back in the time of segregation.

Lillith70
SLC, UT

LOL, that comment about being asleep or watching Fox News ought to bite if you are a PC liberal proglydite.(Progressive and out of touch about the new reality--The sheeple are milling in discontent)

" He was either asleep or watching Fox News."

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

I hope to never hear from this guy again. His comments were so trashy and vulgar. Completely drew away the spirit. You may have the right to say anything you want but that doesn't mean all of society must accept or agree with you. I get tired of folks like Duck and Rush who say any trashy thing and then make you feel guilty about it because we have morals and don't agree with hateful, trashy, or vulgar speech.

Bob A. Bohey
Marlborough, MA

@The Real Maverick: Well said. Funny how Phil had so many supporters in this forum until he cracked wise about young girls. It's almost like Phil's supporters here are okay with him as long as he keeps his remarks to minorities and folks in the LGBT community. it really says soi much more about his supporters than it does about him.

KJB1
Eugene, OR

Hutterite:

You can't expect the DN to mention that part. It doesn't fit in with the narrative they want to set.

patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

A victory for Christians - conservatives - freedom loving Americans. A defeat for progressives, atheists, and all PC liberals!!! Good way to start 2014!!

raybies
Layton, UT

I'm surprised anyone would care. It was a huge blowout, and ridiculous in the first place. Phil Robertson's whole shtick is to complain about the kids these days, and how the world's going to heck in a handbasket. The scandal was ridiculous, as if his views are suddenly shocking, when that's really the reason he was hired to do the show in the first place? And why is homophobia worse than racism, because they claimed to know about his racist viewpoint for some time, but it wasn't til the anti-gay-marriage comments were made that this blew up into a "scandal".

It's a weird era we live in.

patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

re:raybies

Define racism? Tell me what Phil said that was racist. Anytime an American stands up for Christian values in any way the looney left label's it racism. What a farce. Obviously you also find the New Testament racist as well and written by a bunch of ...what did call it ...'homophobes"? What exactly is a "homophobe anyway?? Do you know or do you just like using the word? Yes the Apostle Paul was a racist and a homophobe in your leftist view. Correct? I will state something else the Apostle Paul stated ...."I am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ for it is the power of salvation for all...".

J-TX
Allen, TX

Here's a little primer on freedom:

Phil is free to say just about anything he wants, and to express his opinions.

A&E is free to hire or fire whomever they want, to espouse a PC agenda or not.

We are all free to ignore Phil, support him, watch his show, boycott it, buy Duck Dynasty merchandise, or shoot our TVs when he comes on (taking proper precautions, of course.)

Bottom line, Dollars are more important to A&E than their so-called 'principles'.
When the Robinsons were willing to walk, A&E backed down. So much for their 'moral fortitude'. Money talks, and that other stuff walks, apparently in the A&E world.

patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

re:The Real Maverick

Phil quoted the Apostle Paul in the book of Corinthians. Did you know that? Do you care? I suspect you also find the New Testament "vulgar" as well. Like a true liberal - the things of God are foolishness to the natural man.

patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

Interesting that sales of Duck Dynasty T-shirts have sky rocketed since Phil's interview. Hmmm...sounds like the lefties lost this one.

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

@patriot
"Anytime an American stands up for Christian values in any way the looney left label's it racism."

There is no Christian value that I know of that asserts black people were better off under segregation than they are today.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Maverick,
Are you a Rush Limbaugh listener? I doubt it. So the only way you would know what he said would be if MSNBC decided to take one of his comments and make a controversy out of it. Playing selected snippets makes people who live in their liberal echo-chamber think it represents everything he says.

To judge him... you would probably have to listen to more than just the snippets they decide to play to create controversy on MSNBC.

---

I don't listen to Limbaugh often (only on occasions when I need to drive somewhere during lunch) but from what I've heard... your skewed characterization of him as, "hateful, trashy, and vulgar", don't match what I've heard. It may match the occasional snippets you get rebroadcasted on MSNBC... but I wouldn't assume that what you get on MSNBC represents everything he's ever said.

Fox plays the same lame game when they just play selected snippets of what somebody said to create a controversy or rile up their listeners and give them something to talk about for a few weeks.

UTSU
Logan, UT

@patriot

Did you find any place in the Bible Apostle Paul would throw around very private body parts in a very explicit way? in a speech about faith? about Christian belief?

Would Jesus say things like Phil did? "I'm with the blacks because we were white trash"? In another word, if he were a decent white man, he wouldn't wind up with those people, and blacks were happy in a time like that?

His vulgar and racist remark does not glorify Christian faith, only remind people that although many Christians are good people, some, like Phil, are not decent.

KTC John
Wetumpka, AL

Phil admits that his manner of speech was coarse, but the principles were still there. Extemporaneous interviews do no always accomodate the desired refinement in words. I believe the following is what Phil may have been trying to say: There is an inherently procreative purpose for marriage, and the legal definition of marriage should be framed from a child-centered perspective. Marriage exists to channel potentially procreative sexual relationships into enduring, stable, parental unions for the sake of producing and rearing the next generation. A genderless concept of marriage focuesed exclusively on the attachment of the two parties is essentially unconcerned with procreation. Common sense tells us that God speaks to us through the natural design of our bodies---tactical revelation. He created the male body and the female body. Those who choose to act out their lesbian inclinations do so in obvious contradiction to the anatomical design of their physical bodies. It is biologically impossible for any two same gender-persons to carry out alone the replenishment of the species or to create a family unit, which by the way is older than any government or the laws establishing it.

UTSU
Logan, UT

"You got to marry these girls when they are 15 or 16. They'll pick your ducks". he can be heard saying in the video from 2009.

Basically Phil Robertson now says men should marry 15 yr old girls. So homosexuality is wrong but being a pedophile isn't.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

So A&E pretends to appease the radical homosexual lobby without really doing anything, sending the message that it you express your Bible-based belief that homosexual relations are sinful, you will be punished put not quite enough for you to bring your employer to court for violating your freedom of religion.

I still think A&E is in violation of the law that prevents most employers from discriminating based on religion.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

Robertson did not say African-Americans were "happier" under segregation, he said the African-Americans he knew seemed to be happy.

The situation of poor, sharecropping, whites in the south is complex. The reality of the 1890s reforms that denied most African-Americans the ability to vote in the south was that many poor southern whites were also disenfranchised. The south was never a binary society. During reconstruction the Republicans would not have won in Alabama and other states on African-American votes as well. There were southern whites who were willing to turn on the Democratic Party that had supported the slavocracy.

The south is more complex than liberals in SanFran, NYC and the east bench of Salt Lake City are willing to admit. The last thing we need is attacks on people for trying to open up about race. This country needs an open dialogue about race, and that starts with not attacking people who make personal observations about their impressions on their coworkers.

If Robertson had made an observation about the blacks his family employed the outrage might be justified, but when he speaks of people he worked alongside, his comments have a different meaning.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

If something that Robertson said was coherently racist, we would see attacks on him from the ACLU. Actually if it was even workably racist, we would see such attacks. I have read the passages in the GQ article, and while they may not fit my definition of good racial sensitivity, I am also such a strong proponent of inter-racial marriage that my liberal, Limbaugh-hating school counselor counseled me against it in 1999. The attempts to tag Phil Robertson a racist are not workable.

On the other hand, with a realistic assessment of poverty and crime, on the whole Afircan-Americans were in some ways better off in Michigan in 1960 before the fiar housing act than they are today. Of course, Michigan repealed its ban on interracial marriage before 1970, and had more African-Americans in congress in the mid-1960s than it does today. That is because we have Gary Peters, a non-resident district stealer of the Jim Matheson type. Notice how white liberals have worked of late to reduce the number of African-Americans in congress by strategetically running in races African-Americans would have won if only district residents ran.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments