National Boycott Launched Against Duck Dynasty Censorship
Statement from Alex Jones: Technically, you can say this isn’t a violation of his First Amendment because it’s a TV show on A&E. But in the final equation, it is about a chilling effect across the board of free speech. It’s time for the whole family to leave the show, pursue a different network, or start their own network. If the family does not side with Phil Robertson and the First Amendment, they’re helping sell this country down the river while at the same time turning their back on their own kin.
ABOLISH THE ACT OF 1871
Fans of the immensely popular television show Duck Dynasty are moving to boycott American cable network A&E after its decision to fire star Phil Robertson for expressing his personal aversion to homosexuality – a move largely viewed as an assault on free speech.
Robertson’s suspension is made all the more controversial as his comments didn’t occur on the show, but rather in a GQ magazine interview to be published in print next month.
The duck call millionaire offended the LGBT community when, in his interview, he indicated he didn’t understand the “logic” behind homosexuality.
“It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus,” Robertson confessed to GQ’s Drew Magary. “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.”
Robertson drew further criticism for bringing religion into the equation when he listed off a host of groups who, according to a passage in the Bible, “won’t inherit the kingdom of God.”
“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there,” Robertson told GQ. “Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he said, adding a paraphrase of Corinthians 6:9: “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.”
A&E took umbrage with Robertson’s remarks and moved to punish him for expressing thoughts incorrectly misinterpreted as hate speech. In reality, Robertson’s remarks represented an exercise of his First Amendment right to free speech.
Robertson’s previous scuffle with A&E over their censorship of the word “Jesus,” also leads many to suspect his indefinite suspension was spurred not only by his personal, but his religious beliefs as well. Robertson claimed the network “inserted fake bleeps” during the family prayers “like someone had used profanity, but no one had used profanity.”
It’s obvious A&E has launched a blatant assault on free speech and religion.
Tens of thousands of outraged fans are already petitioning A&E to reconsider its move to fire Robertson.
Others have started a movement to boycott the network “Until Phil Robertson Is Put Back On Duck Dynasty.” A Facebook page dedicated to the boycott has received over half a million likes since being launched yesterday.
Though A&E is free to fire whoever it wants for whatever reason it likes, it is – like many others in the establishment – indoctrinating Americans by promoting an anti-family, anti-God agenda, while at the same time attempting to impose a chilling effect on free speech through censorship.
Fans of the show, and defenders of liberty alike, would do well to encourage the successful show to move to a different network – one that respects the rights enshrined in the Constitution.
Duck Dynasty: It’s Not About the First Amendment
Daniel D’Addario, writing for uber-liberal Salon, is correct. The Duck Dynasty imbroglio is not about the First Amendment. A&E has the right to suspend whatever actor or television show it deems appropriate for its business. “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one,” said A. J. Liebling, highlighting what should be common sense.
D’Addario takes Sarah Palin and other conservatives to task for citing the First Amendment in the debate over Phil Robertson’s comments about his sexual preference and religion published in Esquire magazine. Palin was certainly off base, but notice D’Addario does not touch on the real issue here — the left activist and corporate media sanctified homosexual agenda currently masquerading as the next human rights campaign.
For many Democrats and libs, rejection of homosexuality along religious lines, as expressed by Robertson, is a hate crime little different than the hate crime of Nazis shuffling Jews off to death camps. The absurdity of this is imperceptible to the average liberal. In order to make up for this supposed prejudice, liberals insist gays must be granted special rights by the government. Special government granted rights for one preferential group, of course, necessitates a diminishment of rights of another group.
After special rights are granted to a preferential group by government, the real First Amendment issue arises. People who express disapproval and on occasion contempt for homosexuality are suddenly transformed into hate criminals who don’t deserve the right to exercise the First Amendment.
Since the late 1960s, gay activists have demanded society not only accept their lifestyle unquestioningly, but provide affirmation. “We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives,” said homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi in 1987 before the National Press Club in Washington.
Acceptance of the gay lifestyle necessitates indoctrination. Soon after gay marriage was codified in Massachusetts, the government sanctified validity of homosexuality was merged into grade school curriculum. First grade teachers were instructed that they must “be aware of varied family structures, including… gay or lesbian parents,” and “children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household.” Books for children with names like “Heather Has Two Mommies” and “Gloria Goes to Gay Pride” included the gay ethic in public education regardless of often vociferous opposition by parents.
The gay agenda, largely designed and promoted by the global elite and the establishment intelligentsia, has worked on multiple levels to erode Christian-based morals, rollback legal statutes with religious foundation, and modify laws to legalize homosexual marriage, force business to hire openly gay people, and in general make negative opinions by individuals regarding homosexuality illegal.
Salon does not tread this territory because it enthusiastically supports the gay agenda, as does the rest of the so-called left. Instead it concentrates on erroneous comments made by Sarah Palin and others who are confused about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
For the left, special government-granted rights for homosexuals at the expense of heterosexuals is the next wave in the socialist transformation. It is an ideal tool wielded by progressive activists as they bludgeon the opposition in authoritarian fashion and continue an effort to turn political ideology they disagree with into criminal behavior.
Liberals Declare Duck Dynasty Christian Views “Hate Speech”
Political pundits are now flooding the airwaves to not just disagree with Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson but to also declare that he is engaging in “hate speech” – setting a precedent for a future chilling effect on non-establishment viewpoints.
This morning, a panel group on CNN declared that Robertson’s recent comments in GQ magazine was “dangerous hate speech.”
“He has every right to say what he feels about homosexuality and calling it a sin, but to tie it to something like bestiality, which isn’t even true, may be harmful because there are a lot of kids who are gay who are bullied because of comments like this,” CNN anchor Carol Costello said. “Isn’t that dangerous?”
“This man has attacked an entire group of people with horrific defamation,” Huffington Post contributor Michelangelo Signorile said. “There should be ramifications. There should be outrage.”
Robertson, who is a devout Christian, gave his opinion on homosexuality in the January 2014 edition of GQ magazine.
“It seems like, to me, a vagina – as a man – would be more desirable than a man’s anus,” he said. “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.”
Drew Magary of GQ also asked Robertson what he thought was sinful.
“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there,” he responded. “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 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.”
Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Robertson’s opinion, it’s seems pretty extreme for CNN and others to label it “dangerous” and violence inducing, especially considering that Robertson paraphrased the First Corinthians from the New Testament of the Bible.
Will CNN and other liberals also start blaming Christian churches for violent crimes as they do with gun manufacturers?
The point here isn’t about what Phil Robertson said or his Christian lifestyle; rather, it’s the mainstream response to his opinion that goes way beyond disagreeing with him.
They are using this to push an anti-free speech agenda designed to keep anyone from speaking out against viewpoints propagated by the establishment.