Phil removed from Duck Dynasty...

[Dustbuster]

Ran into a friend yesterday who is a publicist for some mainstream entities. I asked him if he was happy he didn't have to handle the duck gang. His response was:
Their merchandise has surpassed Taylor Swift and Hannah Montana alone without offending anyone.
The gay community has dealt with far worse and the people that matter don't care. It's part of being gay, putting up with straights.
The interview was reviewed,edited and done with a publicist present to make sure nothing went awry. This was a written piece not a live video feed with no delay, plenty of time to edit and groom the article.it wasn't a freak event.
Controversy gains attention, attention creates money in entertainment world. Even if it's not for the talent, someone will profit from the worst intentional or accidental blunder. After all,the only reason to vilify someone who has been good and profitable is to make room for something new.

makes sense to me..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2 of course it ate my spelling.

[East_TN_Patriot]

Then where is the outrage over the new TN Lottery Duck Dynasty game? Isn't gambling a sin also? Or are we just looking the other way on that one? :lol: Seriously, which Bible are we preaching from? The one that didn't say "gay" until the 1950s? Or the one where Jesus never addressed gay folks?

You have this exactly correct.  What far too many Christians misunderstand is what Christ seems to be referring to in regards to "sin".  You are correct.  Jesus never spoke about homosexuality.  He spoke about sin, forgiveness, and love.  As I read the New Testament, Jesus was referring to sin as any self-indulgent behavior that gets between you, your relationship with God, and your ability to love one another.  

What is amazing to me is the fact that the Jewish law contained in the Old Testament that Christians keep referencing as absolute truth is essentially the same legal code utilized by Sharia law that is criticized by Christians as being backward and barbaric.  

 

- Christians believe that Jewish/Mosaic law is divinely inspired and was passed to mankind through Moses:

- Muslims believe Sharia law is divinely inspired and passed to mankind through Muhammed.
- Mosaic and Sharia law govern virtually all aspects of social life, family life, and individual morality.  

- Both call for similar punishments of banishment, stoning, and hanging for violations of that law.  

- Both texts prohibit eating "unclean" foods, like pork.  Yes, all you God-fearing people insisting that Old Testament law is absolute are sinning by eating pork.  Need proof?  Here ya go:
 

 

 

“And the swine, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is unclean to you. Of their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch; they are unclean to you.” (Lev. 11:7–8)

 

Think about that next time you eat a Baconator and joke about how you'll roll your bullets in bacon grease before shooting Muslims.

The book of Leviticus also sanctions slavery, requires you to perform animal sacrifices, prohibits eating shellfish, outlaws wearing wool and linen garments, and mandates capital punishment by stoning for adultery of any kind (for women only, of course) and for using the Lord's name in vain.  In response to this, people will say that Jesus' birth, death, and resurrection changed things.  Yet a majority of Christians - at least in my perception - have held onto this one single verse about homosexuality and proclaim it to be absolute and unchanging truth.  

Here was my response to someone on Facebook regarding a question that is very similar to this point.  I cite New Testament scripture that specifically talks of two men in one bed and how one would be taken in the rapture while the other would not.  Christ commanded Christians to put away their swords.  Christ commanded us to love one another.  Is comparing someone's private love-life to having sex with animals what Christ would have done?

 

 

 

If Christ had seen Old Testament law as an absolute, I suspect he would have been quite specific about it. He made references to the Old Testament, but I am not aware of any specific statement indicating. One interesting statement he makes is in Luke chapter 17:

26 And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: 27 They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. 28 Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; 29 but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. 30 Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.

Notice nowhere in this reference to Sodom does he mention homosexuality, which most people believe is the reason God destroyed the city. Rather, Christ seems to be referring to the sin of self-serving behavior. Fast forward a couple of verses:

32 Remember Lot’s wife. 33 Whoever seeks to save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. 34 I tell you, in that night there will be two men in one bed: the one will be taken and the other will be left. 35 Two women will be grinding together: the one will be taken and the other left. 36 Two men will be in the field: the one will be taken and the other left.”

This is really interesting because Christ makes another reference to self-serving behavior. He also mentions that upon his return, there will be "two men in one bed" and "one will be taken and the other will be left". Is that a reference to homosexuality? I don't know, but if it is, it seems that Christ is saying one will be taken during the rapture, presumably due to his faith. 

Christ tended to speak about the sin of mankind as engaging in self-indulgent and self-serving behavior while failing to adhere to the commandment he gave to his followers: "I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." That he gave that commandment at the Last Supper, it says to me that even if it means giving your life, love one another. If Christ wanted us to believe that the Old Testament law was the only law, then why a new commandment?

Even the original sin committed by Adam and Eve was a sin of self-indulgence at the expense of obedience to the word of God.

Edited December 21, 2013 by East_TN_Patriot

[Mike.357]

My understanding is that they do not. Is Duck Commander associated with the TN lottery?

Jesus does not. Neither do I nor does anyone else here. Are you trying to make a point?

 

Duck Commander is wine. Comes in red, white and pink.  Has the family name on the camo label, it is their proprietary property..  I think it is made by Sutter or Berringer or some other mass producer.  People are buying it.

[daddyo]

You have this exactly correct.  What far too many Christians misunderstand is what Christ seems to be referring to in regards to "sin".  You are correct.  Jesus never spoke about homosexuality.  He spoke about sin, forgiveness, and love.  As I read the New Testament, Jesus was referring to sin as any self-indulgent behavior that gets between you, your relationship with God, and your ability to love one another.  

 

 

Sorry, that's a lazy argument. Jesus isn't on record about many things. However, He CLEARLY defined marriage as between a man and a woman. I think that pretty much settles it as far as Jesus is concerned.

 

He was about forgiveness, but only after there was repentance.

Edited December 21, 2013 by daddyo

[Links2k]

Maybe I'm a little touchy. Best I can tell, everybody in this group is trying to find their way through life with the aid of some friends. You tend to criticize members of that group, and I tend to be protective. No biggie. I love your ass (but not in an inappropriate way). :)

Mike I'm only attempting to get people to see that it appears to be a pity party going on. Almost everyday in some shape or form the threads contain something to the effect that America is being destroyed, the gays, war against Christians and danger, danger danger. It comes off to me as the same victim mentality that some around here rant about others having? The only exception is that these guys aren't looking for a handout. To me, something just doesn't feel right when I encounter a bunch of old men with doom and gloom on their minds all day.

Maybe I'm naive, but I can't see anything as a threat to the christian lifestyle. There is nothing stronger than the power of God. Those who want Jesus in their lives will choose him and those who don't won't. As for America, I think America will rebound and be just fine.

***Mike I respect you. There is nothing wrong with looking out for your friends.

[Glenn]

Clayton homes has Phil's face on some of their materials. Wonder what they will do?

[Links2k]

I am pretty sure he is a good guy.  I am just as sure he would be enjoyable to hang out with.  Always said I love to have a beer and ride four wheelers with King Geo.II too.
 
But Phil has an agenda like everyone else.  He knew what he was saying would draw a firestorm of publicity.   Dude is all about some marketing.   He had money before A&E and will have more down the road.  But it is always about the money. 
 
I do not buy anything relating to his views and only citing religious doctrine.   It is about publicity and money.

I don't believe that it's about money and publicity. I think that it's a case of a comfortable self made man believing that he can say whatever wants to say and not caring what anyone thinks about it. His mind is made up.

[Dustbuster]

Clayton homes has Phil's face on some of their materials. Wonder what they will do?

Put out a special edition that has camo on the exterior walls with pink shutters. When you push the doorbell button you'll hear the duck commander bell go quack quack quack.... to satisfy the masses. Heheheje


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2 of course it ate my spelling.

[Garufa]

And Cracker Barrel is out.

 

http://www.tmz.com/2013/12/21/duck-dynasty-cracker-barrel-phil-robertson-boycott/

 

We called a bunch of Cracker Barrel stores, and the managers told us the products that were removed were the ones that had Phil's face plastered on the packaging.  Almost to a person, the managers added, "We still offer a wide variety of Duck Commander products," and then we heard a click.

 

Cracker Barrel has some nerve to pass judgement considering their name.

[dralarms]

That's funny garufa.

[tnhawk]

"A&E has every right to run their network the way they want and I and every other consumer has the right to tell them to go to hell."

 

I had never watched this show and can't remember the last time I watched A&E.  This appears to be a planned event to gain more viewers, but I will not be among them.

Edited December 21, 2013 by tnhawk

[56FordGuy]

Sorry, that's a lazy argument. Jesus isn't on record about many things. However, He CLEARLY defined marriage as between a man and a woman. I think that pretty much settles it as far as Jesus is concerned.

 

He was about forgiveness, but only after there was repentance.

 

Or maybe Jesus didn't intend for faith to be as complicated as we humans have made it. Maybe it really is just that simple. 

 

I don't see where Jesus addressed marriage, either. Knowing contextually that many Biblical figured had multiple wives and even concubines, I don't see and clear definitions. This isn't about marriage though. It's about one man who gave his opinion, and one network that didn't care for that. 

[Guest TresOsos]

.
Maybe I'm naive, but I can't see anything as a threat to the christian lifestyle.

Then your naive or being  disingenuous, Christians, traditional values and morales are under assualt everyday.

It's even pretty evident here, moral relativism is the name of the game and demonization

and minimialization of those who believe in them is the tactic.

Edited December 21, 2013 by TresOsos

[mav]

Ya know...I can't believe how stupid some of these executives are.  This isn't the first time something controversial has been said by a public figure and businesses panicked and did something stupid.  Last year, Rush called that twit,who was complaining about the cost of condoms a slut.  A bunch of advertisers immediately dropped Rush.  Several days later, they received a backlash from the overwhelming majority that support Rush, and they were begging to get back on his show.

 

If I was running A&E, I would immediately fire that jackass who made the decision to cut Phil from the show.  That was an incredibly moronic business decision.  No matter how hard they try to perpetuate this myth that the vast majority of Americans openly support the homosexual lifestyle, it will fail because it is not grounded in reality.

[whitewolf001]

:popcorn:

[daddyo]

Or maybe Jesus didn't intend for faith to be as complicated as we humans have made it. Maybe it really is just that simple. 

 

I don't see where Jesus addressed marriage, either. Knowing contextually that many Biblical figured had multiple wives and even concubines, I don't see and clear definitions. This isn't about marriage though. It's about one man who gave his opinion, and one network that didn't care for that. 

 

Read Matthew 19:4. He didn't talk about two men or two women. He spoke of a man and a woman ONLY. If you can interpret it any other way, then I can't help you.

Edited December 21, 2013 by daddyo

[RED333]

The Bible is way to complicated for me.

I just try to fallow these.

 

I am the LORD thy God
Thou shalt have no other gods
No graven images or likenesses
Not take the LORD's name in vain
Remember the sabbath day
Honour thy father and thy mother
Thou shalt not kill
Thou shalt not commit adultery
Thou shalt not steal
Thou shalt not bear false witness
Thou shalt not covet

[LowBb]

"A&E has every right to run their network the way they want and I and every other consumer has the right to tell them to go to hell."
 
I had never watched this show and can't remember the last time I watched A&E.  This appears to be a planned event to gain more viewers, but I will not be among them.

I watch A&E sometimes. Totally planned. I mean, look. 19 pages on a gun site. Duck merchandise everywhere. Lots of people talking about it. Sometimes bad publicity is the best publicity.

[mav]

Looks like Cracker Barrel has bailed. I can't believe they made that decision. It is like they aren't watching the news and seeing the outrage against A& E. Oh well...Screw them. I never liked their food anyway.

[tnhawk]

Looks like Cracker Barrel has bailed. I can't believe they made that decision. It is like they aren't watching the news and seeing the outrage against A& E. Oh well...Screw them. I never liked their food anyway.

The last time I ate at cracker barrel I got very sick.  Might not have been their fault, but I see no reason to go there again.  Cracker barrel, starbucks or A&E can operate their business as they please, but I don't have to support them.  Their competition is happy, happy, happy to take my money.

Edited December 21, 2013 by tnhawk

[Guest dieselshadow]

Cracker Barrel? Meh.... I really don't need a meal of gravy covered in gravy with a side of gravy. I don't hold the same beliefs as Phil Robertson, but I'll defend his right to voice them any day. I also support A&E's right to make a dumb decision.

[East_TN_Patriot]

Sorry, that's a lazy argument. Jesus isn't on record about many things. However, He CLEARLY defined marriage as between a man and a woman. I think that pretty much settles it as far as Jesus is concerned.

 

He was about forgiveness, but only after there was repentance.

A lazy argument??? I've provided multiple explanations and verses to frame my argument.  What do you have?  A single verse from the Old Testament mixed in with the verses that say you can't eat bacon and oysters while wearing a linen shirt while you are selling your daughter at the slave market.  You'd rather just read a single verse of the Bible and use it as a stand-alone statement rather than read it within the context of the whole book?  You can't actually address the argument without an insult?  You 

Who's the lazy one here?  
 

[DaveTN]

Wow, I never would have thought Cracker Barrel would get involved in a religion/gay dispute.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Cracker Barrel? Meh.... I really don't need a meal of gravy covered in gravy with a side of gravy.

Stop it! Yer making me hongry!

[whitewolf001]

Stop it! Yer making me hongry!

I don't see how, their saw dust gravy is good for about one thing, greasing axle bearings. Now Hardee's has some fregin good gravy!