Thursday, December 19, 2013

‘Duck Dynasty’: Phil Robertson FIRED for Anti-Gay Remarks




By Reginald Kaigler (DEMCAD)

I maybe the only man in America that hasn't seen the hit A&E reality television show "Duck Dynasty." But I really don't watch as much TV as I used to. Recently, one of its stars, Phil Robertson, was removed from the show after blasting an anti-gay rant in GQ magazine.


 “...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... 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...”
From GQ Magazine.

Needless to say, A&E released a statement rejecting Robertson's ignore rant. The man wantonly used his religion to justify his anti-gay rhetoric and I completely disagree with his message. I'm heterosexual, but I don't think any of us should be judging anyone based on their sexual orientation. If someone wants a dick up their ass, so be it. it's none of my business.

Now the question is should Robertson be fired for expressing an opinion that his employer fully rejects? A lot of people are calling this a violation of the second amendment. But it's clearly not. Robertson has the freedom to say whatever he wants, but the network reserves the right to fire him for whatever legal reason they want. And in this case, the network executives felt that he embarrassed them and hurt their brand.

If I were the head executive, would I have fired Robertson? If I were a corporate office manager, I would fire an employee for making a public statement like this.
However, in this case, they made a deal with him for a reality show. They knew what they were getting. They hired him so they could make money off of Roberston being himself. And now they're firing him for being himself. 

So in this context, no, I wouldn't fire him. The comment was more ignorant than hateful. He's a reflection of what is preached about throughout the bible.

“...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...”

 I'm not a Christian, but most Americans claim to be. So why is political correctness is such contrast with what's written in the bible?

The producers had to know that putting devoted Christians on the network would mean that at least some of them would share this viewpoint. And if so, why fire one for speaking out. Did the network hope that they would be politically correct, because of the large sum of cash they were making?

Probably so.

But it didn't happen. So why did they really fire him? Did they fire him because of what he said or because he actually said it publicly.

Although, I don't agree with his foolish comments, I definitely respect the fact that he wasn't willing to sell out. He spoke his mind and didn't seem to care if it was politically correct. And with this much money on the line, he may have been the only guy in America who was willing to do that.






1 comment:

  1. Well Reginald, you just took the same 'tolerant train' as the homo's rallying for old Duckboy's firing. Guess tolerant is ONLY when it's the liberal point of view, the other way around tolerant isn't 'due'.
    The dude said NOTHING ignorant, if you think the slippery-slope he mentioned isn't real or true,....you just watch the documentary 'The giftgivers' and see and hear from that group themselves how they more and more decent into discusting and foul behaviour.
    DuckMan voiced HIS opinion that a vagina to him was much more desirable then a mans asshole, I agree wholeheartedly. Secondly, he explainedhis findings from within his faith.
    Never once did he call for violance against gays nor did he said they needed to be exciled or anything needed to happen to them. Not once!
    GQ asked this dude a leading question KNOWING that this man wouldn't lie nor try to pussyfoot around his believes and that magazine selling outrage would make their cashregister go DingDingDing.
    About the whole firing thing Regi, they might look like dumbasses but you do know they have a longtime hunting business that last year alone made 40 million dollars for them and their employees dont you? So you see, them boys don't need that show, the show needs them.
    If ya don't stand for something, ya fall for anything.

    ReplyDelete