Quantcast
Family

Patriarch off 'Duck Dynasty' after gay comments

Comments

Return To Article
  • AZKID Mapleton, UT
    Dec. 18, 2013 9:47 p.m.

    Never watched the show, but I've heard it's popular. Here's to hoping that the silent majority who made it so will no longer be silent and get the "Duck Patriarch" back on the air.

    Those of us in the moral majority need to all start screaming louder than our very vocal adversaries.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    Dec. 18, 2013 9:53 p.m.

    I am a firm supporter of gay rights but placing this man on leave for being exactly the guy you knew he was and hired him to be seems silly. I disagree with him but I also disagree with putting him on leave.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Dec. 18, 2013 9:55 p.m.

    You knew this was going to happen sooner or later. Religious folks with a platform will always use it to condemn their fellow man eventually. They can't seem to help themselves. How sad.

  • ute alumni Rakuen, UT
    Dec. 18, 2013 10:02 p.m.

    I hope they leave a&e and go to another network. i'm sure their viewers will follow them anywhere they go. it's time to stand up to the pc bullies. libs love tolerance for everyone but themselves.

  • wYo8 Rock Springs, WY
    Dec. 18, 2013 10:05 p.m.

    if I can't watch duck dynasty no more a & e for me

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Dec. 18, 2013 10:44 p.m.

    Remember when A&E was touted as the private sector replacement for PBS? It's sure gone downhill since then.

  • U-tar Woodland Hills, UT
    Dec. 18, 2013 10:52 p.m.

    To the Scientist in Provo, no one is condemning anyone, God will do that. He has already made it clear what is evil and what is good. You have your choice to believe or not, just as we do, only problem is; it's always a double standard on your part when it comes to free speech. You folks just can't ever get that through your head.

  • achick47 Abilene, TX
    Dec. 18, 2013 10:54 p.m.

    FINISH TO MY FIRST PARAGRAPH:
    How many of them worry about my feelings when they call me names because I am Christian, colored or nude, able or disabled,old or young,smart or ignorant are just plain old wordy. on an off day they might make me cry and I will admit I tend to laugh at them and their whining. Oh well, it is what it is "keep quite be thought a fool open my mouth and prove it". Again Mother was right, well this fool is off to bed Merry Christmas and God Bless to all, Angel from Abilene Texas

  • Tumbleweed Centerville, UT
    Dec. 18, 2013 11:00 p.m.

    He simply stated his religious belief that homosexual sex is a sin (as stated clearly in the Bible); he didn't say gays should be treated any differently under the law.

    So there are gays who believe that those who call homosexual sex a sin are themselves sinners. Are the Networks prepared to kick gays off their shows for for stating such? If not, it's a double standard.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Dec. 18, 2013 11:04 p.m.

    While I disagree with him and appreciate A&E reaffirming their support of gay rights I do not think it was necessary to take him off the air for stating his religious beliefs. Compared to the vile lies and comments made about the lgbt community by others this hardly seems worth all the fuss.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Dec. 18, 2013 11:05 p.m.

    A & E is his employer. They thought that their employee's remarks reflected poorly upon their company, so they took action. Isn't that the "free market" that conservatives love to go on about?

    Corporations are people, my friend.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Dec. 18, 2013 11:35 p.m.

    The gay "activists" are all about demanding "tolerance" and "diversity" and freedom of expression (both verbal and their actions, even marriage) from the non-gay community.

    However, it is disgusting that the gay community refuses to apply the same standards to their own activities.

    As Orwell said, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal."

    It is about time that people truly stood up for freedom of expression for ALL Americans! You don't have to agree with what the Duck guy, Ellen DeGenres, the Pope, or some Atheist, or a rap singer says, but they have the right to say it. Even if it offends some people, including me. Anyone is free to disagree with them and argue against them. People are even free to put their money where their mouths are (hey, no pun intended there!) and support or boycott businesses. But, the strong-arm tactics used in this case are positively un-American restrictions on free speech.

    Honestly, I have never bothered to watch the Duck Dynasty, but will now. And I will support their sponsors.

  • yankees27 Heber, Utah
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:04 a.m.

    Ok, so maybe we that like DD, or like what they stand for, should get on AE and make our voices heard as loud as the others do. They won't listen, because everyone is afraid of the minority, whatever one is screaming the loudest at the moment. But it may make some of us feel better for trying.

  • Rational Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 1:05 a.m.

    They should all say it, get their show canceled, and start their own internet channel, like Glen Beck. They'd make more money, and say what they wanted.

  • Kathy. Iowa, Iowa
    Dec. 19, 2013 1:36 a.m.

    All he said was that he did not understand the attraction. He also said that he believed that some things are sin. He should be free to speak. He did not say anything negative about anyone.
    I don't understand the attraction to football but it is not hate speech. I just don't get it. Now soccer that is totally different. Now if you want to say you think I am crazy because I love soccer you are free to do so.

  • Johnny Moser Thayne, WY
    Dec. 19, 2013 1:46 a.m.

    Seems like a good opportunity for BYUtv to land a program that would make the network immediately relevant. Seems like Phil said it like BYU does only a little "saltier".

  • FDRfan Sugar City, ID
    Dec. 19, 2013 3:06 a.m.

    Guess who is in charge of the entertainment industry.

  • Max Charlotte, NC
    Dec. 19, 2013 5:13 a.m.

    It is hilarious that nobody had a problem with his comments about adulterers, idolaters, male prostitutes, drunkards, slanderers, or swindlers. Why aren't they up in arms?

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Dec. 19, 2013 5:56 a.m.

    Freedom of speech only applies to a small group of people in America. The rest must be shouted down, silenced or punished. Wake up America!

  • Ted Saint George, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:02 a.m.

    It's interesting how Progressive liberals can lie, make up stories, do illegal activities and then get praised for this by their peers and then be completely exonerated for anything they did or said.

    But then, if a conservative christian person says or does even the slightest speaking of their minds or does something they think is harmless, they get roasted, fired or banished from society. Can people with religious beliefs not speak their minds anymore? Are we to the point where only fanatic radical progressives are free to speak whatever they please and then others are forced to take this rhetoric as the truth. And then they are later held harmless because they made a public apology and said "oops, I'm sorry" Happens all too often. Christian conservatives don't have that luxury.

    The behavior of public stoning towards good people who made a slight miniscule goof with their words is getting out of control. History has shown that this flip-flopped turn of behavior and actions by progressive thinking societies and governments does not end up very well.

  • TimBehrend Auckland NZ, 00
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:13 a.m.

    @ute alumni. Aren't the PC bullies in this case the corporate owners of the program, money grubbing capitalists? Hardly a group one would suspect of being liberals.

    As a progressive i condemn this repressive action against an individual whose beliefs aren't shared by his employers. It's an act of discrimination carried out ignorantly in the name of anti-discrimination.

  • jskains Orem, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:15 a.m.

    It amazes me that the gay community has gotten so much power. Now they want to silence anyone that hints at disagreeing with them. What is ironic is the supposed victims have become the bullies. :/

  • The Dixie Kid Saint George, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:19 a.m.

    Way to go Phil. Stand up for what you believe in.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:29 a.m.

    Interesting, these guys aren't just actors. They walk the walk.

  • Jamescmeyer Midwest City, USA, OK
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:42 a.m.

    My primary concern with this is that none of the various people, famous and not-famous, who make equally disparaging or hateful comments about Christians or anyone else who -doesn't- support changing marriage, would ever have any kind of disapproval or suspension.

  • chiefbrady Draper, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:44 a.m.

    Whether you agree with Phil's comments or not, you should all be defending his right to say whatever he wants - especially in an interview with GQ. Otherwise, the day will come when something YOU say will be mocked, ridiculed and then outlawed. Stand up for free speech while it's still free!

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:48 a.m.

    What do you think would happen to someone who made fun of a religion ( other than Islam) on A & E? Nothing. This is why antidiscrimination statutes are a bad idea. They will be used by those on the left against those they do not like, but will provide no protection for those on the right. Express a religios view the left does not like - you will be punished. Engage in conduct most religiois peopke find objectionable - not only do you get a pass, but you can force the religiois person to violate their own beliefs and be involved. A & E, please suspsend every actor or actress who criticizes Judeo-Christian values. Yah, right.

  • CynicJim Taylorsville, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:57 a.m.

    I note that Phil never once condemned a person, only the sin.

  • evansrichdm west jordan , UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:59 a.m.

    Cant say I am surprised by this. Its that if you an any way disagree with the gays in this country they come after you any way they can. He was exersizing his 1st amendment right to express his views on the matter. Was anyone left without propery? Yes he was for expressing his view, which is what the bill of rights was to protect. So now if you express your views you could find yourself without a job. So much for the bill of right, it is dead, it is just something we give lip service too and tell military men and women that is what they are fighting for. All that blood scrificed an a man will lose his property for stating his own personal beliefs that does not harm anyone.

  • ChuckGG Gaithersburg, MD
    Dec. 19, 2013 7:04 a.m.

    To AZKID: The "moral majority" is neither moral or a majority.

    To ute alumni: I always am amazed with the statement: "libs love tolerance for everyone but themselves." I hear it all the time. The big difference is that we are "intolerant," if you will, against those who seek to change laws against us, have us fired from our jobs, and kicked out of our homes. We also are "intolerant" of priests who abuse children, Hitler, and axe murderers. If this clown on A&E were yammering on about Jews, blacks, or the Mormon church, calling them, "sinners, 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," he'd be off the air before someone could change the channel.

    The difference in a nutshell is this: I could not care less what you and your religious crowd does. Light incense, dance around a bonfire, do whatever you want. Just do me a favor and leave me out of it, stop dumping millions into campaigns against us, and leave the rest of us alone.

  • ute alumni Rakuen, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 7:10 a.m.

    kjb1
    it is apparent that the message most are stating is that they are encouraging ducksters to leave and do their thing elsewhere. unlike libs that want boycotts and legal action. notice that isn't being said. besides being an oregonian, LIB, it is interesting that even ducks turn on their own.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 7:38 a.m.

    While there can definitely be "hate speech" against gays, this was not an example of it. If you incite violence against them, call them vile names, or suggest they are sub-human then that crosses the line.

    Unfortunately, the GLBT community wants to brand all dissent against the gay lifestyle as "hate speech". If you suggest that homosexual behavior is a sin, don't want to change the marriage laws to suit them, or don't openly embrace their lifestyle as perfectly normal, then you must be a "hater".

    Welcome to the new PC police state. Very sad.

  • techpubs Sioux City, IA
    Dec. 19, 2013 7:45 a.m.

    So maybe the interviewer should be put on hiatus also for asking these types of personal questions on Phil's beliefs knowing that it would result in this type of response?
    And for the record. According to this article he didn't do anything other than answer the questions honestly about his own views.

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 7:46 a.m.

    The man used his first amendment right to free speech to express his moral views. I applaud him for having the courage to stand up for what's right.

    No one wants to hear that what they are doing is wrong. It's really uncomfortable. So, they attack the messenger. Their argument is not with Duck Dynasty. It is with God.

  • Normal Guy Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:01 a.m.

    GLAAD call this the 'vilest of hate speech'. For saying that homosexuality is a sin and then paraphrasing a scripture? Apparently, they think that they now completely own the conversation surrounding the morality of homosexuality.

    Anyone who watches the show knows that Phil is the last person that would ever mistreat anyone, regardless of their race, sexual orientations, religion. GLAAD has picked the wrong fight here.

    The rest of the family should refuse to be filmed until Phil is allowed back.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:07 a.m.

    Gosh I feel bad for him. Imagine the tyranny of the minority. This is why they can't have rights!

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:14 a.m.

    If there were a proposed constitutional amendment that said that no slur or slander against any minority group will be legal, and only slurs and slanders against the majority would be allowed, I wonder who would approve of it? In this PC dominated country we live in today, I suspect many would.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:14 a.m.

    @evansrichdm --

    "He was exersizing his 1st amendment right to express his views on the matter. "

    Yeah, but he was also acting as a representative of two brands -- the A&E brand, and the Duck Dynasty brand.

    I'm leaning towards the First Amendment side on this one, but IMHO it really depends on what sort of contractual agreements he signed with A&E. He may have agreed legally to restrict exactly this sort of political speech, or any speech which could case A&E in a bad light or harm the A&E brand. And if he did that, then A&E was acting within their rights to remove him.

    We don't know what agreements he made with them, so we can't say whether this was a justifiable action or not.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:28 a.m.

    Have any of you even seen the show? I can't understand why it is so popular. I gave up after two episodes. Regardless of this gentleman's views of homosexuality, it is just mindless television and an hour you'll never get back.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:30 a.m.

    There is a huge difference between free speech when you are on or off the payroll. Anything said while on tape is subject to the filter of who is paying you. What you say to your friends, neighbors, and the like.... that is completely different.

    If he was foolish enough to say something that his employer would not approve.... well... there you go

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:32 a.m.

    I an personally calling every advertiser on A&E and informing them of my boycott. Starting with Sears.I plan on returning some chrstimas gifts I have purchased there.It is time that free speech is defended. If you don't like what someone says don't listen to them or in this case watch them. Good for you Phil.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:34 a.m.

    @SCFan

    "If there were a proposed constitutional amendment that said that no slur or slander against any minority group will be legal, and only slurs and slanders against the majority would be allowed, I wonder who would approve of it? In this PC dominated country we live in today, I suspect many would."

    I wasn't aware that he was losing his freedom over this. I didn't know the PC police were going to haul him to jail. A&E is a private company and can do what they want with their programming. He has freedom of speech, and he gets to "suffer" through the consequences of that speech.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:34 a.m.

    I congratulate him for sticking up for what he believes and for good values and morals.

    Keep up the good work!

  • Hamfischer American Fork, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:41 a.m.

    No one violated his freedom of speech. He was able to say what he wanted. The magazine was free to publish that. There was no censorship. That doesn't mean that his comments don't have consequences.

  • Aloha Saint George Saint George, Utah
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:45 a.m.

    Did I hear 'Political Correctness'? Don't wanna hear that the 'King has no clothes'.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:54 a.m.

    CHS 85: "Have any of you even seen the show? I can't understand why it is so popular. I gave up after two episodes. ...it is just mindless television..."

    I can't believe such hate speech made it past the forum moderators. Such obvious anti-redneck bigotry must be squashed right now. You can't say stuff like that and hope to hold on to your job. Only haters do not embrace the redneck lifestyle. You are just lucky you didn't say something like "their beards are ugly". Otherwise, you would have really crossed the line.

  • SoCalChris Riverside, CA
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:55 a.m.

    He was asked by a reporter for a men's magazine what he thought was sinful, and he gave his honest answer. That's too much for the PC police.

  • ZorroPC Park City, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:57 a.m.

    UtahBlueDevil - check the facts, he did make the comment "off the payroll'

  • 2 bit Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:58 a.m.

    I don't know if I would characterize his comment as "ANTI-Gay". He just said in his opinion... it's a sin. He didn't say he hates gays or anything.

    He's not the only person in the world that thinks homosexual sex is sin. Many religious people believe that. His only mistake was... he dared to SAY it... when the liberal-press was listening.

    ---

    What I'm wondering is...
    Where's the TOLERANCE of other opinions?
    Where's the joy in DIVERSITY of opinions?

    Is diversity only acceptable when you want to diverge from normal sexual behavior? But if you admit a faith-based opinion... it's not to be tolerated???

    ---

    Many say, "Well he's on TV so he's held to a different standard". But how many reality show people and sit-com people in Hollywood (Charlie Sheen for example) have documented sex and drug binges... and we were told we need to be tolerant, they're just different?

    But have an opinion based in your faith... and all tolerance goes out the window.

    ----

    They pray at the end of every show. Surely this magazine KNEW what his opinion would be. It was a trap.

  • Fred Vader Oklahoma City, OK
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:00 a.m.

    This is not a 1st amendment issue, as A&E is not a government body. However, it is a Title VII issue. Title VII makes it illegal for an employer to take punitive action against an employee for his/her religious beliefs. Similar to the case where Ambercrombie fired two women for wearing a headscarf and claiming it didn't fit with the image of the company, A&E has "suspended" this man because his religious views do not fit with their image. The federal EEOC filed that lawsuit on their behalf. Ambercrombie was forced to settle with these women or be found in violation of Title VII, and the Fed courts in Louisiana would likewise find this action in violation of Title VII. Although I am not a proponent of lawsuits, this is one of those times it is needed to draw a line in the sand.

    I applaud those supporters of GLBT's who have already denounced A&E's behavior on these postings. I am waiting for a few of the regular pro-GLBT rights posters to do the same...as they have said numerous times that they would.

  • justinbl Portland, OR
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:03 a.m.

    Whatever happened to tolerance for different beliefs? This is a scary world we live in where only certain opinions have been deemed acceptable and anything outside of that is treated with contempt.

  • JBQ Saint Louis, MO
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    There are some serious "free speech" issues at work in our country. The "nature v nurture" controversy in psychology alludes to the fact that the causes and effects for homosexuality are still open to valid debate. Youth see the world altogether differently than adults. Mr. Robertson does not say at what age he "picked cotton". I lived in Shreveport for about a year in my early grade school days with my dad in the Air Force. The only thing that I remember is that my mother had a maid and was very proud of that fact as a poor Irish woman. The woman was always treated with respect. Society must be very careful to impugn the motives of children with the evils of society. As Deborah Kerr "said" in "King and I" (while Marni Nixon sang), "children must be carefully taught not to hate". The appeal is their flair for "off the cuff". This doesn't mean that they are right. In fact, I am offended by some of their words. However, we as a society need to be very careful. In the 40s, this was used as a pretext for complete control.

  • Whoa Nellie American Fork, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    From the article, "What's clear is that such hateful anti-gay comments are unacceptable to fans, viewers, and networks alike," said GLAAD spokesman Wilson Cruz. Robertson's removal "has sent a strong message that discrimination is neither a Christian nor an American value."

    There's no credibility in this GLAAD spokesman as Phil did not, and has not, discriminated against any specific group. His comments included seven other groups or categories of sins or sinners, so where is his discrimination? One thing for certain, Phil has much more relevance and peace than this GLAAD group will ever hope to have.

    May Faith, Family, and Firearms live forever!

    QUACK! QUACK! QUACK!

  • no fit in SG St.George, Utah
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:11 a.m.

    Money is the bottom line.
    Although these Robertsons look and act like a bunch of hillbillies, they should know better.
    They just may have cooked the goose who laid their golden egg,,,'er the duck.

  • Cougsndawgs West Point , UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:13 a.m.

    Freedom of speech like every other freedom we enjoy, doesn't mean there are no consequences or repercussions for exercising that freedom. I have the freedom to drink as much alcohol as I want, but I'm also liable for the consequences of my indulgence.

    I love DD, and admire their family values. I think A&E is being ridiculous by allowing themselves to be bullied by GLAAD (never thought I'd say that til now). However, that being said, A&E does have the right to hold their employees and representatives to a standard. I certainly can't say whatever I want at my job and expect to keep it. For every action there is a consequence, even if those actions are protected by my personal rights and freedoms...just as there is always a choice, there is always a consequence.

    My advice to the Robertsons would be to show A&E that there are consequences for their actions as well. Take your show to another network, because there are plenty of networks that would love to have the Robertsons and their DD brand. Consequences can cut both ways.

  • Baccus0902 Leesburg, VA
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:18 a.m.

    "Start with homosexual behavior and......," such as bestiality, he said.

    "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..... It's not right."

    "I myself am a product of the '60s" who indulged in sex and drugs until hitting bottom and accepting Jesus.., he said in a statement..... , Robertson said he "would never treat anyone with disrespect" because they are different."

    Let's see:
    He equated homosexuality with: greed, drunkenness, slandering, swindlers
    He condemned "male prostitution" I guess female prostitution would be O.K.
    In the '60's" while "he" was indulging what was his opinion about these matters?
    He became a "self proclaimed Christian" and now he has the power to judge.
    Yet! he makes the false disclaimer that he would never disrespect anyone because they are different.

    Is this guy for real or he is still "indulging" ?

    I agree with all the comments here defending his right to express his opinion. I also defend the right of A&E to take any action they feel is appropriate. If the action is illegal Phil can fight it.

  • Bored to the point of THIS! Ogden, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:22 a.m.

    This story is a great example of what's wrong with our country. We speak of "freedoms" but anytime someone expresses their opinion they are 'punished' for it.

    I believe the great philosopher Voltaire said, "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it".

    If people disagree with his view, then don't support his show. I don't believe in smoking, so how do I respond... I choose not to buy cigarettes. I think its bad to drink, so how do I respond... I choose not to drink.

    I realize the use of certain types of language and/or phrases are offensive. However, if a person expresses an opinion, without being crude or vulgar, that opinion should be respected regardless of whether or not you agree.

    This is why our government is disfunctional... there's no civility when it comes to ideas or thoughts.

  • Bleed Crimson Sandy, Utah
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:31 a.m.

    @ A Scientist

    "You knew this was going to happen sooner or later. Religious folks with a platform will always use it to condemn their fellow man eventually. They can't seem to help themselves. How sad"

    Same can be said about atheists and other nonreligious folks. They also have a platform that will be used to condemn their fellow man. They can't seem to help themselves either. How sad!

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:37 a.m.

    Robertson, quoted in article: "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." [emphasis added]

    Is it an accidental oversight or an intentional omission of female prostitutes? Perhaps in his mind female prostitution is OK. That would be convenient.

    While I disagree with what he said on so many different levels, his remarks don't strike me as rising to the firing level. I'm much more troubled by his comments on race. So he never noticed blacks being treated unfairly? Perhaps he wasn't looking. No blacks confided in him, a white man, complaining that they were being mistreated by white men? Not the least bit surprising.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:41 a.m.

    I love Duck Dynasty. I have several T-Shirts and will continue to wear them proudly. Phil actually quoted a scripture in Corinthians in the New Testament as part of his comments regarding homosexual sex so this isn't something he just made up. I am proud of Phil for stating his views and his faith without trying to be PC. It is interesting that scum buckets like Bill Maher can belch out all sorts of vulgar hate speech toward Christians with ZERO repercussions in the media ...just another disgusting double standard that is a sad reminder of where 21st cent society is today. Also it is interesting that gays are all for free speech and freedom of expression even the violent brutality toward those that disagree with their lifestyle as well as defacing of LDS temples during prop 8 in California (remember that?). When someone else expresses non-violent opinion against them the knee jerk reaction is to FIRE the person and sensor/silence him. Ugly ugly double standard and bald faced hypocrisy.

    DD will find a new home on another network and I will NOT tune into A AND E again.

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:46 a.m.

    I've never watched the show. I'm now a devoted fan...on whichever network will carry them. This clearly shows the bias the media has towards certain behaviors and against Christianity.

  • K Mchenry, IL
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:45 a.m.

    I don't think he will care. I am surprised the family will continue. I think they shouldn't tape anymore.

  • Whoa Nellie American Fork, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:47 a.m.

    Cougsndawgs,

    I agree with most of what you wrote except Phil was not on the job, or at his job when he made those comments. I do understand though, that his fame and public comments are what's different about his job and "employer" than yours or mine. We could say much worse things and our employers would likely never hear about it. In his case he is being singled out and punished for his beliefs which will come back to haunt A&E. They will end up the losers in this controversy. A&E is reminding me of the Dixie Chicks. Heard a hit from them in the past few years?

  • Hey It's Me Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:47 a.m.

    So if I disagree with watching Glee because of the things they are doing does that mean the network will remove the people I don't mean doing what their doing? OR do I turn to a different channel and watch something else. People who watch Duck Dynesty know these people have talked about no premarital sex ect. So they know they are religious etc. Reality TV is just that. You are filming people as they are. . . so why remove someone, just don't watch.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:53 a.m.

    The left can spew Christian, Conservative hate speech all day long - on TV, RADIO, MOVIES AND MAGAZINES. No problem and no repercussions. When someone on the right offers their opinion they get censored - silenced - FIRED. As a student of history you have to back to the 1930 and 1940's in Nazi Germany or anytime during the ugly reign of cold war Soviet Union when the general public FEARED to express any point of view except that which was approved by the Socialist state. The United States is fast becoming what it once fought against. Let freedom ring?? As long as no one on the left hears it.

  • Reuben D. Kaysville, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 9:57 a.m.

    The way the gay community shouts their views you would think, and I did at one time, that they represent 20% of the population. In fact they only represent a little less than 2% of the population. So why is everyone so afraid to say someting that might offend them. And why is A&E letting the minority controll the majority.

  • Sneaky Jimmy Bay Area, CA
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:13 a.m.

    @DN Sub 2 It really is disgusting, ironical and hypocritical is that the religious right continues to use GOD as an excuse to display their bigotry and hatred of their fellow man. The "religious right" continues to pitch and moan when anybody that doesn't fit their self defined vision of perfection wants to enjoy the same rights they have. They love to blame the "liberals" for all the ills of society yet cannot come up with any workable alternatives.

  • LiveLongAndProsper Eagle Mountain, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:17 a.m.

    I'm gay and I don't find Phil Robertson's remarks to be offensive. I disagree with A&E's decision to suspend Phil from the show. He has every right to say what he believes. I disagree with him and his statements show ignorance about what it means to be homosexual, but we are each entitled to our own beliefs. He is not advocating for laws to be passed that would violate the rights of gay people or promoting violence.

  • 2 bit Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:20 a.m.

    Hamfischer and Fred Vader,
    Who said this is a first amendment issue?

    I haven't read all the comments, but I've read a lot. And I haven't seen anybody saying his first amendment rights are being violated.

    Everybody knows it's not a first amendment issue when your employer or the public reacts to something you say.

    He could make his comments again today... there's nobody stopping him. If there was... there would be a first amendment issue. But nobody's saying that. So drop the strawman. I think they're just saying be more tolerant of someone that has/expresses an opinion you don't share.

    Nobody's saying his first amendment rights were violated. That's just absurd.

  • bubbawatson Tremonton, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:27 a.m.

    I am very grateful that there are a few people left in America who will go against the tide and stand up for what they believe, even when it goes against the current tide of popular opinion. In our current climate, it takes a great deal more courage to stand up for biblical.values than it does to say it's ok to be gay. Phil had to know there would be consequences for what he said, and yet he did it anyway. I applaud you,Phil, for your courage. I believe God will bless you for your stand and I hope Duck Dynasty thrives as a result of this!

  • Dave D Spring Creek, NV
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:33 a.m.

    Just so all the supporters are aware, he was not simply stating his religious beliefs. He said something the Deseret News will not even allow me to post which is both degrading of women and gay people. Take a look at the whole quote. it is terribly offensive in many ways.

    On an unrelated note, it appears that South Sudan is headed toward yet another civil conflict, meanwhile hundreds of millions more throughout the world do not have the basic necessities of life. So why do we make a big deal about a reality TV star's already-known homophobic views?

  • JimE Kaysville, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:36 a.m.

    And freedom of speech takes another hit from the intolerant left.

  • RockOn Spanish Fork, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:40 a.m.

    Probably 80% of the Bible and Koran believers who actually read the books don't have a problem with what he said, although they may squirm at hearing it said aloud. Apostle Paul certainly would have no problem and neither would Moses.

    Gay supporters do tend to be equally definitive in their declarations and demand you accept their orthodoxy or they'll scream at you.

    The question really isn't whether or not you believe one way or the other, but whether you can hold the beliefs and still be kind and compassionate to others.

    I don't find many people on either side of the argument who can mentally walk and chew gum on this issue.

  • riverofsun St.George, Utah
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:43 a.m.

    Anybody remember Paula Deen?
    And....what network is running her program these days?

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:49 a.m.

    @patriot --

    "The left can spew Christian, Conservative hate speech all day long - on TV, RADIO, MOVIES AND MAGAZINES. No problem and no repercussions."

    Baloney. For one obvious example, just look at the Dixie Chicks controversy that Whoa Nellie mentioned. They dared to criticize Bush publicly--and the group got completely trashed for it.

    Again -- in the Duck Dynasty case, IMHO it depends on the restrictions he may or may not have signed in his contract. A&E has every right to protect its image, and if there was language in the contract stating that this guy would refrain making from controversial comments or do anything to damage A&E's image, then they have every right to silence him.

    @Rueben D --

    " In fact they only represent a little less than 2% of the population."

    Actually, LGBT people make up roughly 5% of the population.

    More than 50% of the US population supports same-sex marriage.

    Meanwhile, LDS church members make up less than 2% of the US population.

    Do you really want to start basing your arguments on population size??

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    Dec. 19, 2013 11:11 a.m.

    @patriot:

    "As a student of history you have to back to the 1930 and 1940's in Nazi Germany or anytime during the ugly reign of cold war Soviet Union when the general public FEARED to express any point of view except that which was approved by the Socialist state."

    I agree. A couple of years back I called this neo-McCarthyism. It is becoming worse.

    History does not repeat itself, it rhymes. Which means we should be as equally scared of the Gay Right as we would be of anyone with a Swzstiak armband and a 1930's uniform.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 11:11 a.m.

    Can anybody comment on why only people on the Right need to be tolerant, and only people on the right need to embrace diversity of opinions (even opinions they don't agree with)?

    It seems the media only insists people with religious right-leaning opinions need to be to be reprimanded, and told to be tolerant, and insist they be glad for diversity of opinions (even opinions they don't agree with).

    Could the nonreligious left not use a little of this same advice?

    Don't people on the Left need to be tolerant of opinions they don't agree with? And embrace diversity of opinion?

  • Play Nice Herriman, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 11:18 a.m.

    This is just another instance where supporters of gay and lesbian lifestyles exhibit a lack of tolerance for the constitution of the United States. This is not America any longer. It is being coerced into accepting the standards of Sodom and Gomorrah. Shame on the A & E Network for this type of model.

  • Cougsndawgs West Point , UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 11:20 a.m.

    Contrarius is right. Whatever is written in the contract for the Robertsons in terms of how they represent A&E is what is in question. There are usually clauses in those contracts that support canceling the show or releasing someone under the contract for what the broadcasting company may deem as inflammatory or defamation-type comments that reflect poorly on the network. I can almost assure you there are clauses written for the Robertsons by their agent as well stating they can leave the network for issues they deem as inequitable or the presence of a "hostile" work environment, etc. Both sides are going to have these escape clauses, and if I were the Robertsons I would exercise that escape clause as of now. A&E probably owns the rights to the Duck Dynasty brand, but the Robertsons could simply change the brand name and move to another network...it's not like everyone doesn't know who they are. In the name of being able to state your religious beliefs without them being construed as "vile" and hostile, I would leave A&E and send a message that religious minded people aren't going to be bullied either.

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 11:21 a.m.

    The problem here is not what A & E did. I agree A & E has every right to suspend or fire him for making his statement. But those who do not want to employ transgender people should have the same right. What is so annoying is the hypocracy. Today the Des News is also running an article about the effort to enact statewide anti-discrimination laws to give additional protections to gays and transgender people. So if I (an overweight male) show up to work in a halter top and a miniskirt, my employer cannot fire me. However, if I express my religious or moral beliefs he can?

    The extent to which the gay advocacy groups have control of the media is amazing. It was immediately branded hate speech even thous he was merely stating his beliefs and he specifically said he would not treat anyone in a negative way. Any opinion other than that sanctioned by GLAAD or similar organizations must be stopped. Free speech is a 1st Amendment right - as long as you are supporting the left's agenda.

    I hope the legislature wakes up.

  • Darrel Eagle Mountain, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 11:23 a.m.

    This isn't a free speech issue. If you believe it be one, go tell your boss exactly what you think of him and see what happens.

    That being said, the man simply stated his belief. I believe (and this is only my opinion) that where he crossed the line was were he equated homosexuals to terrorists; or rather spoke of God condemning them in the same way. That is when A&E took issue.

  • jsteve Herriman, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 11:23 a.m.

    So if I understand correctly: Robertson expressed his views that homosexuality is a sin as well as his love for all of God's children, essentially, that he loves the sinner, not the sin. He did not take any action to discriminate against homosexuals or even suggest that such actions should be taken. A&E erroneously declares themselves to be the sole Christian authority, essentially declaring that not only is homosexuality not a sin, but that Robertson's comments are, (his views are not very Christlike). Robertson's viewpoint (no action) is discrimination, but A&E's actions are not. Why? Because it is the popular viewpoint. I don't understand the justification of hypocritical discrimination.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 11:35 a.m.

    re:Contrarius

    I know as a liberal you listen to and watch MSNBC - Ed Shultz??? I have never heard such down right vulgar, hateful, slanderous speech toward Conservatives and Christians in my life and this has been going on for 5 years now. Repercussions? Ed is still there last time I checked. Not even a slap on the wrist. Hollywood is full of daily trash talking against Christians and conservatives and all you hear is silence. Get my point?? The Dixie Chicks didn't get their record label pulled did they? Nope. People just decided not to listen to them anymore which is their right. Yes a corporation has the right to do whatever it wants but my point is corporations do NOTHING against Christian bashing but they sure start firing and threatening sponsors etc... every time someone expresses their opinion against homosexual sex. See the double standard?? It is sickening and it is obvious but it is all part the far left agenda - sensor and silence anyone with a different opinion.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 11:38 a.m.

    re:LiveLongAndProsper

    I applaud your courage to speak your mind and the fair minded manner that you expressed your opinion. Too bad those in the national media and others in the gay community don't do the same.

  • Tajemnica West Valley, Utah
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:00 p.m.

    Good for him. Good for the governors who commented as well. Free speech is a dying ideal. His remarks were not hateful. They were factual!

  • JLFuller Boise, ID
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:00 p.m.

    It seems that personal opinion is verboten in TV land if it is considered not politically correct. At least the good old DN allows expression of countervailing thought... sometimes... more or less. In this case the victim of the hard core and militant pro homosexual agenda movement told the truth. Unnatural sex seems stupid to him as it does to most folks. You can think it but you can't say it. I think we ought to boycott A&E until they get off their high horse.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:09 p.m.

    I don't care what gay or straight people do. It is none of my business. The guy that made the remarks about gay people has a right to say what he wants but I'm sure his contract with A & E has certain clauses in his contract that do not allow him to do certain things.

    As far as Christians getting bashed or hated on. I think that is laughable. Mitt Romneys religion was only a problem for Christians.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Chihuahua, 00
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:08 p.m.

    Another example of suppressing freedom of speech in this country. Think what you want about his comments, but it's unconstitutional to throw someone off the air for an opinion. Talk about word police.

  • Contrariusiests mid-state, TN
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:08 p.m.

    @RBB --

    "So if I (an overweight male) show up to work in a halter top and a miniskirt.... "

    Baloney. Dress codes have nothing to do with transgender rights.

    " It was immediately branded hate speech even thous he was merely stating his beliefs "

    What if a TV star compared Christians to terrorists?

    Question: What, in your mind, is sinful? "Start with Christian behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the Christian preachers, the Bishops, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.” "We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Mohammed—whether they’re Christians, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

    Now how would you feel?

    Oh, and amongst other wild accusations, he even blamed Shintoism for Pearl Harbor. Ummm. Really??

    @patriot --

    "I know as a liberal you listen to and watch MSNBC - Ed Shultz???"

    Guess again. I don't even have cable. ;-)

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:12 p.m.

    RE: Contrarius,More than 50% of the US population supports same-sex marriage.

    Perhaps but God is a majority: (1 Cor 6:9 NET )Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:17 p.m.

    Re: "Just look at the Dixie Chicks controversy. They dared to criticize Bush publicly--and the group got completely trashed for it".

    Bad comparison.

    For one... The chicks were trashed by their fans (not outsiders). Their fans turned against them when they exposed their venomous views about America and the President. Fans have a right to throw out their CDs when their idol's views offend them. But DD fans are not offended by this.

    A&E does have the right to suspend DD. But it's a totally different situation. A better comparison would be IF DD's fans turned on them and quit watching when they heard their views on gay marriage. DD fans do not expect him to support gay marriage.

    Dixie Chicks turned on their base (country music fans) and paid the price. DD made a mistake, but he was trapped by this magazine. They KNEW he would have to say what he said or go against their fans and everything they stand for. They pray as a family at the end of each show... did they think DD was going to actually come out in SUPPORT of gay marriage? The question was a trap.

  • lehiaggie Lehi, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:21 p.m.

    Isn't this a show about real people, so let them be who they are or do a different show. It seems hypocritical of A&E. Cancel the show and lose lots of money or let them be who they are.

  • Baccus0902 Leesburg, VA
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:23 p.m.

    1st I would like to congratulate all of you who have come to the defense of this gentleman Phil.

    Let's see what are you defending:
    - I put gays at the beginning of a"morphing " process that lead to bestiality,greed, drunkards, slanderers and swindlers.
    - He talks against "male prostitution", I guess female prostitution is O.K.
    - He talks about how in the 60"s he indulged in sex and drugs.
    _ He accepted Jesus as his Savior. Until then it was O.K. for him to indulge in sex and drugs. But now he knows the truth and he becomes a judge.

    Is this guy for real? He dares to say he doesn't disrespect anyone because he/she is different.
    I guess insulting LGBT people is not a form of disrespect.

    Has Phil the right to express his opinion. Obviously!!! 100% in agreement

    Has A&E the right to make a business decision based on what they considered is good for their profit and image as a network? Of course they do.

    Has the LGBT community the right to complain? of course and we do.

    Has Phil the right to fight A&E's decision? Of course.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:26 p.m.

    He would make the best tea party Presidential candidate.

  • NT SomewhereIn, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:28 p.m.

    Mark my words - DD and A&E know exactly what they are doing. Its a PR stunt plain and simple.

  • Bob A. Bohey Marlborough, MA
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:38 p.m.

    Just because something is clearly(or not so) stated in the bible does not make it so.

  • Contrariusiests mid-state, TN
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:49 p.m.

    @sharrona --

    "God is a majority"

    And this country is STILL not a theocracy.

    "(1 Cor 6:9 NET )"

    Yup, Paul again.

    Paul also supported slavery, thought women were inferior to men, taught that it was better to remain single than to marry, and said that nobody should ever get divorced -- even though Jesus himself said divorce should be allowed in cases of infidelity.

    Do you agree with *everything* Paul said?

    @2bits --

    "The chicks were trashed by their fans (not outsiders)."

    Ha. They were trashed by conservative TV commentators, boycotted, dumped by their sponsors, AND got death threats. One radio station even suspended its DJs because the DJs played Dixie Chicks songs.

    Even Merle Haggard said, "I don't even know the Dixie Chicks, but I find it an insult for all the men and women who fought and died in past wars when almost the majority of America jumped down their throats for voicing an opinion. It was like a verbal witch-hunt and lynching."

    And all that just for daring to disagree with the President.

    "The question was a trap."

    The question was "What, in your mind, is sinful?". There are MANY ways to answer that question without attacking people.

  • Dan Maloy Enid, OK
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:52 p.m.

    Welcome to America 2013: the land where everyone has rights. That is.....except the moral conservatives who founded and prospered about 99% of this country.

    Oh, America, how I weep for you.....

  • lket Bluffdale, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:53 p.m.

    why does anything these people say even matter to anyone?

  • jstring Canada, 00
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:55 p.m.

    Go Duck Dynasty Network!!!

  • A Guy With A Brain Enid, OK
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:58 p.m.

    @ KJB1 - Eugene, OR - "A & E is his employer. They thought that their employee's remarks reflected poorly upon their company, so they took action. Isn't that the "free market" that conservatives love to go on about?"

    Yep, it's a free market, all right.

    But, I'd bet you $100 that if it was a company run by a heterosexual CEO that fired a homosexual for saying something in support of homosexuality, you'd be beating a path to your nearest courthouse screaming "Lawsuit!", wouldn't you?

  • Aloha Saint George Saint George, Utah
    Dec. 19, 2013 12:58 p.m.

    I curious to see what these DD people decide to do. The gay movement has a lot of clout and right now are running over anyone that public disagrees with their agenda.

    Many people don't have enough resources to fight back. DD has deep pockets- I 'm anxious to see if DD will fight back and bring these people to their knees. Go DD!!!! There's reason they have a following- the number ONE show currently on TV.

  • Brad J West Jordan, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 1:14 p.m.

    It is amazing how the homosexual community wants everybody to have more tolerance/respect towards their way of life. But when people who don’t believe their way of life speak out about it because of their beliefs and their way of life they are the ones that don’t get respect for their beliefs. If you ask me the homosexual community has no tolerance/respect for anybody else. If you don’t believe in their way of life than you are against them. Pathetic.

  • Gram Cracker Price, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 1:39 p.m.

    Burn the flag or walk on it, but always be politically correct about other "sensitive" subjects.

  • Back Talk Federal Way, WA
    Dec. 19, 2013 2:00 p.m.

    Unfortunately, this just illustrates more of the gay agenda, to prevent anyone from expresssing any belief or opinion that is negative towards gays and Bi's.

    This man didnt express his views as part of the show so it is very disturbing that the cable channel would punish him for his view or belief.

    This is why additinal legal protections are needed for people to have freedom to express themselves in this way.

    I would think that this man could sue the cable company for religious descrimination. Will then next simply not hire christians so as to not run the risk of someone expressing a non politically correct statement?

  • riverofsun St.George, Utah
    Dec. 19, 2013 2:18 p.m.

    No one mentions what religious denomination these Louisiana TV stars belong.
    Isn't there a son who is a minister? Is he also on the show discussing his convictions?
    May they all be happy ever after with all of their gold in Hillbilly Heaven.

  • 1conservative WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 2:28 p.m.

    This won't end well for A and E.

    Phil Robertson for President!!

  • Spellman789 Syracuse, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 2:28 p.m.

    Homosexuality is a sin. There, I said it.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 2:37 p.m.

    Yet another example of hypocrisy from the left. Phil Robertson's comments were in no way discriminatory. He spoke his beliefs. That is the essence of free speech. To attack him is to attack all speech that a certain group does not agree with.

    The LGBT have said for years that a same sex marriage does not hurt anyone else. So how does a Christian man stating his beliefs hurt them? What is sad is that this clear double standard is ignored and even fostered by the media.

  • chicagoborn Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 2:44 p.m.

    It's funny how the same commentators that mention the "PC police" were probably up in arms over the "bigots" on the Utah football team with their "baptismal" video which should not have been a big deal in the first place. I guess if you make one small joke about religion and especially the LDS religion in Utah, you are automatically labeled a bigot. If you make a statement about how you would refuse service to someone if they are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender, you are labeled a hero. I am referring to the wedding photos business that denied service to a lesbian couple. I guess sensitivity only matters when it comes to religious beliefs but not anything else.

  • AFVet Lindon, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 3:04 p.m.

    In same interview he also said that black people were happier living in the pre civil rights Jim Crow south. I guess defending his homophobic comments is easier then defending his racist comments. I can never understand why conservatives pick the most ignorant people to idolize.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Dec. 19, 2013 3:05 p.m.

    People have the right to say what they want, in accordance with the first amendment.

    Companies have the right to fire people for what they say and do.
    People have a right to picket and boycott.

    That is the free market system.

    I can certainly understand those who disagree with the outcome, and are free to write/picket/boycott A&E.

    It happens all the time. Martin Bashir was run out for his comments about Sarah Palin.

    Is this different?

    Recourse? Boycott the Duck men show until they allow him back.

    That is the way our system is designed to work.

  • ebur Charlotte, NC
    Dec. 19, 2013 3:10 p.m.

    I am really happy for New Mexico!!!!! When you guys are going to do the same?
    I hope soon !!! I can't wait to marry my boyfriend for the eternity and take pics around the Temple's garden.
    I know you, Mormon/Uthans, will stop discriminating very soon. You are very nice and polite. Perhaps some oldies should die first, but the change and the revelation is coming!!!!
    Merry Christmas to everybody!!!!!

  • Contrariusiests mid-state, TN
    Dec. 19, 2013 3:12 p.m.

    @RedWings --

    "Yet another example of hypocrisy from the left."

    Two words: Dixie Chicks.

  • ebur Charlotte, NC
    Dec. 19, 2013 3:17 p.m.

    @Ted:
    "Can people with religious beliefs not speak their minds anymore?"
    No, they can't and they shouldn't. They have been speaking their minds out for more than 2000 years, and look where are we now? Still fighting for people's rights.......

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 4:49 p.m.

    Not accepting intolerance is NOT intolerance.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 4:52 p.m.

    There are still horrible people out there. A person's attraction have absolutely no negative affects on Phil or any of the bigoted people commenting on Phil.

  • Little Andy Tremonton, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:10 p.m.

    This is a double standard. He did not use a slur or anything just stated his opinion. Now the gays can say anything they want about straights and it is fine. It is just his opinion folks.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:29 p.m.

    A Guy With A Brain 12:58 p.m.

    You'd owe me $100. If a gay person said something as crass and obnoxious as Phil Robertson did while on company time then yes, I wouldn't be surprised of offended if that person were fired.

    Most of the posters here need to realize that when a celebrity grants an interview or goes on a talk show, it's not just to be famous and hang out. They're almost always there to promote a project and (inevitably) the studio or network that released it. It's a work obligation. Robertson was talking to a journalist in order to plug Duck Dynasty, therefore he was on the clock. If I spoke that way while I was at my job, I'm guessing that my boss wouldn't be too happy with me. If he was speaking privately to a friend and it was somehow overheard, then that may be different, but A & E was justified in doing what they did. As I said before, they're his employer.

    We may free speech, but doesn't mean it doesn't have consequences.

  • Hank Jr Draper, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:47 p.m.

    It's nice to know that Freedom of Speech is alive and well in America. (extreme sarcasm)

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 6:58 p.m.

    @KJB1

    So are you saying the religious and the conservative are no longer free to publically speak their views?

    Is that what the progressive left means by tolerance and diversity?

    It seems like a pretty narrow tent on the left.

    The right has never demanded a person be fired or silenced for their views, sounds like more tolerance and diversity there.

    The right has a truly bigger tent in fact and practice.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    Dec. 19, 2013 7:23 p.m.

    @the truth
    "The right has never demanded a person be fired or silenced for their views, sounds like more tolerance and diversity there."
    really so then "one million moms" and other conservative groups did not contact JcPenny and threaten to boycott them for have Ellen DeGeneers in there commercials and call for her removal less the a year ago? Here is the problem when you use easily refuted lies people kind of stop tanking you serious and that is what has hurt those that oppose gay marriage more then anything the media or liberals could ever do.

  • Fred Vader Oklahoma City, OK
    Dec. 19, 2013 7:40 p.m.

    Just curious...would those who are posting in favor of A&E's actions feel the same about "employer rights" if they go into work tomorrow and find that they have been terminated for their posts in favor of A&E on this article? Didn't think so.

    Similarly, are those who support GLBT rights now content if Utah continues to not pass non-discrimination laws so that GLBTs may be fired by their employers just for being GLBT? After all, employers can fire you for any reason right? Didn't think so.

  • Phranc SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:31 p.m.

    @fred vader

    "Just curious...would those who are posting in favor of A&E's actions feel the same about "employer rights" if they go into work tomorrow and find that they have been terminated for their posts in favor of A&E on this article? Didn't think so.""

    would it be reasonable to think that the anonymous comments made on their private time would reflect poorly on their employer? I understand what you are saying but the comparison really does not hold as he should have reasonably understood that his interview was directly tied to his work and would therefore reflect on his employer.

  • Baccus0902 Leesburg, VA
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:34 p.m.

    What a pathetic display of offended individuals!

    Every time the LGBT community fights for our rights we have been accused of "shoving our sexuality in you throats".

    We have grown up hearing that our nature is unnatural, that our love in ungodly, that our relationships are an aberration and a threat to humanity.

    Now we only ask is to obtain the same rights you have. We have been censored by our churches and even our families.

    You cry foul when you are accused of bigotry. Yet, when this gentleman Phil makes homosexuality a synonym of bestiality, greed and other epithets you come out once again defending your right to offend, insult and remain ignorant of a variant of life that you discriminate because you don't understand it and cannot accept it.

    The wheels of history keep on turning and you are choosing to remain behind. New Mexico just passed SSM. Other states and countries will follow. We don't need your personal approval. We will fight until the law of the land gives us and all other oppressed group the rights that you enjoy and yet you deny to us.

  • Californian#1@94131 San Francisco, CA
    Dec. 19, 2013 8:49 p.m.

    When was the last time a network canned anyone for making a statement categorizing supporters of traditional marriage as homophobic, bigoted neanderthals?

    Or are "disparaging" statements a naughty thing to be punished only when they fall on the wrong end of the political correctness scale?

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 19, 2013 10:10 p.m.

    Some of you are misinterpreting freedom of speech. The first Amendment protects from government infringement of speech. This wasn't the gov't, it was a company deciding that there was an issue.

  • Bob K porland, OR
    Dec. 20, 2013 1:10 a.m.

    DN refused my comment quoting what he ACTUALLY said, which was pretty much not only vile and disgustingly stated, but lacked any semblance of truth.

    Other sources show his complete diatribe of a few years ago, suggesting that the Gays performed the most vile acts, leading to incest, bestiality, and the ruin of innocent people's morals

    Still other sources quote him as saying that Southern Black People were happy before the Civil Rights Movement caused everyone so much trouble.

    I am very disappointed by comments like these:
    Ted
    Saint George, UT
    ...The behavior of public stoning towards good people who made a slight miniscule goof with their words is getting out of control...
    Kathy.
    Iowa, Iowa
    All he said was that he did not understand the attraction. He also said that he believed that some things are sin. He should be free to speak. He did not say anything negative about anyone.

    He DID say awful, terrible things

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Dec. 20, 2013 8:01 a.m.

    @Californian#1@94131 --

    "When was the last time a network canned anyone for making a statement categorizing supporters of traditional marriage as homophobic, bigoted neanderthals? "

    When was the last time you heard a TV star calling "supporters of traditional marriage" homophobic, bigoted neanderthals?

    Name one.

    I bet you can't.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    Dec. 20, 2013 9:03 a.m.

    Contrarius: "Two words: Dixie Chicks."

    Sorry - big difference. The Dixie Chicks were boycotted by individuals, radio stations, etc. They were not dropped from their label, etc. Personally, I totally disagreed with how they were treated. I even bought their last disc when it came out...

    The difference is that, when it comes to the LGBT, there is government and court sanctioned hypocrisy. Business owners are being attacked because they do not want to serve potential gay customers. It is not like a gay person cannot get those products elsewhere - they refuse to and use the courts as their personal bully to shut down those who try to follow Christian values and doctrine.

  • Contrariuser mid-state, TN
    Dec. 20, 2013 9:38 a.m.

    @RedWings --

    "Sorry - big difference."

    Nope.

    In addition to the media attacks and boycotts -- which, btw, we also often hear conservatives rail against (remember Orson Scott Card?) -- they were also dumped by their sponsors. Also, concert venues and/or radio stations refused to sell tickets or advertise their concerts.

    And all because they dared to criticize President Bush.

    "Business owners are being attacked because they do not want to serve potential gay customers."

    Businesses must comply with ALL the laws of the jurisdictions under which they operate. It's a very simple principle -- no hypocrisy involved.

    "It is not like a gay person cannot get those products elsewhere"

    And those black college kids at the lunch counter in Walgreens could have gone to eat somewhere else, too. Do you think they should have?

  • Fred Vader Oklahoma City, OK
    Dec. 20, 2013 9:48 a.m.

    Contrarius said:
    "When was the last time you heard a TV star calling "supporters of traditional marriage" homophobic, bigoted neanderthals? Name one. I bet you can't."

    How about Lisa Bloom, former CNN legal analyst, and current NBC Today legal analyst (and daughter of Gloria Allred), who once said of Prop 8 supporters: "Now, only lunatic-fringe bigots would support those laws."

    Does she count? So, there's one.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Dec. 20, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    I don't know where we, as a country, are going to end up regarding religious freedom and all that.

    But I have tried to be a Christian for my entire life, and I cannot find anywhere in scripture or the teachings of those I hold as prophets where it says it is God's will that I:

    - refuse service to those who believe differently than I believe

    - insist that all my employees believe and live the exact same "values" that I live

    - deny human dignity and respect to those who love differently than I do

    - mingle my religious beliefs and the influence of my Church with politics to ensure that my religious beliefs become enforceable law of the land at the expense of other's religious (or nonreligious) beliefs

    - focus on and obsess with one, particularly "icky sin" (rather than all the other sins) and treat those who engage in it as sub-human or second-class citizens by denying them fair housing, fair employment, equal service from legal businesses, and equality before the law in every way, shape and form.

    Why don't "values" business owners refuse service and employment to ALL sinners?

  • Fred Vader Oklahoma City, OK
    Dec. 20, 2013 9:57 a.m.

    Contrarius said:
    "When was the last time you heard a TV star calling "supporters of traditional marriage" homophobic, bigoted neanderthals? Name one. I bet you can't."

    What about Tom Hanks, who called Mormons "un-American" for supporting Prop 8? He used to be a star on TV in a role where he dressed as a lady, if I remember correctly. Does he count? So there's two...

    Need I go on?

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    Dec. 20, 2013 10:22 a.m.

    Contrarius: "When was the last time you heard a TV star calling "supporters of traditional marriage" homophobic, bigoted neanderthals?"

    How about Rosie O'Donnell?

  • Contrariuser mid-state, TN
    Dec. 20, 2013 10:23 a.m.

    @Fred Vader --

    "How about Lisa Bloom, former CNN legal analyst"

    Operative term: FORMER.

    The question was "When was the last time a network canned anyone for making a statement...".

    You can't can 'em if they don't make the statement at the time they are working for you.

    "What about Tom Hanks"

    Again -- FORMER TV star.

    You can't can 'em if they don't make the statement at the time they are working for you.

    Keep trying.

  • Fred Vaderer Oklahoma City, OK
    Dec. 20, 2013 10:51 a.m.

    Nice attempt to spin...apparently you didn't read what you wrote, or what I wrote...

    Lisa Bloom is "former CNN", but CURRENT "NBC Today"....i.e. she still works on TV...

    And I quoted you directly. Your question was not "when last canned" but "when last heard them say"

    I gave you two examples of TV stars who made the comments, and you said you bet not even 1 could be found. You lose. Just accept it.

  • Contrariuser mid-state, TN
    Dec. 20, 2013 11:10 a.m.

    @Fred --

    "Nice attempt to spin...apparently you didn't read what you wrote, or what I wrote..."

    Guess again. Lisa made that comment three years BEFORE NBC hired her.

    Again, ya can't fire somebody for something they said when they weren't even working for ya.

    Keep trying.

    "And I quoted you directly."

    And I was responding to the question "When was the last time a network canned anyone for making a statement...".

    Context is everything, Fred.

    Keep trying.

  • Fred Vaderer Oklahoma City, OK
    Dec. 20, 2013 1:54 p.m.

    Contrarius....typical, you are losing your own bet so you have to change the rules after I already won. Fine. How is this for "current"....this was just stated by CNN's Piers Morgan..,"Just as the 2nd Amendment shouldn't protect assault rifle devotees, so the 1st Amendment shouldn't protect vile bigots."

    "Current" TV star....and "current" statement.

    Vader 3....Contrarius 0

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Dec. 20, 2013 3:52 p.m.

    @Fred Vaderer --

    "...so you have to change the rules after I already won."

    Nope. The context was there before you ever entered the conversation.

    "....this was just stated by CNN's Piers Morgan..,"

    That's a good one.

    Even more directly, Morgan said in a tweet: "Phil Robertson is not a 'victim of political correctness'. He's a victim of his own repulsively racist, homophobic bigotry."

    (btw -- Personally, I don't think Robertson is a racist. If I recall correctly, one of his sons has biracial adopted kids.)

    This one is a good example for furthering the discussion.

    Now -- can you guess why Piers is not likely to get fired or suspended?

    Let's see....possibly because it's his job to state his various opinions and viewpoints?

    Did anyone expect Rush Limbaugh to get fired when he called a Georgetown University law student a slut and a prostitute? Nope. Giving opinions -- even obnoxious ones -- is part of his job.

    Both Morgan and Limbaugh are employed by news/opinion/current affairs organizations specifically for their outspoken opinions on current topics.

    In contrast, Robertson is employed by a non-news entertainment network because he's funny.

    See the difference?

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    Dec. 20, 2013 5:37 p.m.

    @Kalindra

    I have never heard of that boycott, and you have not given any and all of the facts and details and the context to draw analogies or conclusions.

    How can the left ever be taken seriously when they are constantly hiding the details and making up there own stories?

  • postaledith Freeland, WA
    Dec. 20, 2013 10:20 p.m.

    I applaud A&E for not allowing anti-gay and racial comments on Duck Dynasty and putting Phil Robertson on indefinite suspension. I have enjoyed programs on A&E for years and I respect and support their decision.

  • Bob K porland, OR
    Dec. 21, 2013 2:02 a.m.

    Folks, it's the Entertainment Business -- full of phonys and bad guys.

    The Duck Dynasty guys posed for family photos looking like Tommy Bahama ads, before they came up with the fake hillbilly act. Phil has a Masters Degree in Education.

    We have NO way of knowing whether they are Christians, or whether Phil just picked up on an act that would sell well, and went overboard with offensive comments he may not even believe in himself.

    Believing in these folks as real Christians and the same as you is like believing that Desi Arnaz and Lucille Ball lived in a little apartment in New York.