A&E is one of those stations that runs the same shows ad infinitum. It's nothing to do with the controversy and was probably scheduled weeks, if not months ago.
A&E Taking Heat For Suspending 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson
- Thread starter Shilliam Watner
- Start date
A&E is one of those stations that runs the same shows ad infinitum. It's nothing to do with the controversy and was probably scheduled weeks, if not months ago.
If you make a public ass of yourself and it can be shown to impact the company, I've never heard of it being illegal to be terminated.
If you are a TV star and are doing an interview for your TV show than you can, and maybe will, get fired legally.
9 pages while I was sleeping?
On this?
On this?
Just ask the little twerp from 2 and a half men not to mention charlie sheen (and I'm sure there have been others) what happens when you make comments that are perceived as damaging to your show and or the network it's on.
Nine pages? What do you have your settings on? From my perspective we're just starting page four.
Yeah, I need clarification on this as well, if I'm up to something that's basically bestiality I might as well cut out the middle woman and just go straight to having sex with a pig.
Though would sex with a male pig's anus be like, double bestiality? Or does it go all the way round infinity to be nice Godly heterosexual sex again?
Obviously the things he said were awful, but I think putting his show on hiatus is a severe overreaction.
People are entitled to their opinions, no matter how awful they are, so long as they aren't hurting anybody. And suggesting to take away his TV show for holding these opinions accomplishes nothing only to give new ammunition the imagined persecution of the far right.
@Shilliam Watner
A) Anti-Christian? That's pure unadulterated BS. You're not one of those 'Obama is a Kenyan Muslim' nuts are you? Obama is very Christian. He just, unlike previous Christian inhabitants of the White House, doesn't think freedom should only be accessible to people who agree with his religious beliefs.
B) You may disagree with homosexuality but any argument that they are somehow harming people by living in the manner of their choosing is also pure unadulterated BS. When they hold a gun to your head and force you to be gay, then I will happily join your side of the argument.
C) But yeah, political correctness is stupid, I agree with you on that. I say just let people like the Duck Dynasty guy have their silly opinions, because they are a fading minority and reacting this strongly against them just gives the Sarah Palins of the world more excuses to act all persecuted.
People are entitled to their opinions, no matter how awful they are, so long as they aren't hurting anybody. And suggesting to take away his TV show for holding these opinions accomplishes nothing only to give new ammunition the imagined persecution of the far right.
@Shilliam Watner
A) Anti-Christian? That's pure unadulterated BS. You're not one of those 'Obama is a Kenyan Muslim' nuts are you? Obama is very Christian. He just, unlike previous Christian inhabitants of the White House, doesn't think freedom should only be accessible to people who agree with his religious beliefs.
B) You may disagree with homosexuality but any argument that they are somehow harming people by living in the manner of their choosing is also pure unadulterated BS. When they hold a gun to your head and force you to be gay, then I will happily join your side of the argument.
C) But yeah, political correctness is stupid, I agree with you on that. I say just let people like the Duck Dynasty guy have their silly opinions, because they are a fading minority and reacting this strongly against them just gives the Sarah Palins of the world more excuses to act all persecuted.
The only question that matters is "does the comments hurt A&E's brand?" They don't care about what he said, they only care if he damaged the public perception of the network.
If he did, then they'll fire him. If he didn't then the show will go on like nothing happened. The suspension was just lip-service to people who care about certain issues.
Wasn't it just a suspension for him anyway, not the whole show?
Well now that's rather excessive. And not that it matters but... probably more Osama Bin Laden-esque.
Well now that's rather excessive. And not that it matters but... probably more Osama Bin Laden-esque.
No law needed. And he wasn't 'not at work' because he *never* would have been interviewed by GQ if not for his appearing on the show. Therefore, he was representing the show *and* A&E in that interview. Since his comments could negatively affect the image of the network, he's been suspended. Maybe they'll fire him. Maybe they'll cancel the show and maybe they'll wait for the foofooraw to die down and will continue to film as before.
As the saying goes, 'Stay Tuned...'
If Mary was modified to carry Christ, it's conceivable that post modification she may not have been specifically or entirely human anymore.
Therefore Joseph was a beastophile... Eventually.
Therefore Joseph was a beastophile... Eventually.
It's not a freedom of speech or religion issue, it's contract law. If he signed a contract that had a "morals clause" that prohibited behavior that would bring his employer into disrepute (which most television personality contracts have), the employer has every right to enforce that contract.
A&E's programming choices and quality started going off the rails long before Duck Dynasty was a gleam in any executive's eye. The days of Lovejoy, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, classic British sitcom reruns and Biography are long gone. If you want higher-quality A&E shows you pretty much have to subscribe to the Biography (Bio) Channel spinoff, and it's just not worth paying a lot more for a new package to get it.
I'm assuming in his defence that every other time he's had a rant like that on the show, that it's wound up on the cutting room floor. A lot of people on TV don't like to watch themselves (The reverse is also true) so maybe he thought that every other one of his homophobic rants had been digested by and approved of by the public, so there was no need to censor himself.
Last edited:
^
There's a running theory that much worse and more offensive than the GQ interview has been filmed for the show but left on the cutting room floor in order to protect the network's golden egg-laying duck at the height of its popularity. For every awkward moment that gets on the air in a reality show there must be many others that are even dumber and more embarrassing and and we only rarely if ever know about them.
Any racist or homophobic rants wouldn't make the final cut of any episode. A&E knows who and what they're dealing with and they haven't been stupid. Sloppy and pandering to the lowest common denominator, sure, but they're not stupid.
There's a running theory that much worse and more offensive than the GQ interview has been filmed for the show but left on the cutting room floor in order to protect the network's golden egg-laying duck at the height of its popularity. For every awkward moment that gets on the air in a reality show there must be many others that are even dumber and more embarrassing and and we only rarely if ever know about them.
Any racist or homophobic rants wouldn't make the final cut of any episode. A&E knows who and what they're dealing with and they haven't been stupid. Sloppy and pandering to the lowest common denominator, sure, but they're not stupid.
Just so we're clear this is about Christianity.
I haven't read the entire thread.
The entire topic to me comes down to this, we have constatutionally supported rights in this country, and one of them is to be able to believe in whatever religion we want, and the right of free speech to express our opinions based on that choice of religion we chose.
If someone expresses the views of the religion they believe in, this is not wrong, or illegal. It should be tolerated on all sides. Everyone has the right to express their views.
If someone disagrees with that view, that is fine. However, that someone that disagrees with that view has no right to censor, or take action of malice or cause harm to the other individual. Just because you disagree with something doesn't give you the right to take away the other person's rights.
If A&E are suspending him because they disagree with his statements, then that is wrong.
I don't care if it's a Christian saying this, or a Muslim, or a Buddhist. I'd feel the same way if a Buddhist provided their opinion based on their religion, and were shut down because someone or some network disagrees with their religious stance.
In this country, we have the right to believe what we want, and we have the right to express those views and express what our religion believes in.
You are free to disagree. But don't let that disagreement with a stance become the reason for retaliation. We are all entitled to our opinion, and to express that opinion. That is what this country was founded on, that is what makes it great.
Let's maintain the ability to express our views, even if someone else disagrees with it. We should all tolerate the fact that we can express our views on any topic.
It's all along the same lines as not saying "Christmas" anymore. Same thing, different stage. I'm not afraid to say Christmas, or wish someone a Merry Christmas. It is what I celebrate. You are welcome to wish me whatever holiday you celebrate too, and then we can both smile and have a good time with each other, I understand you celebrate something else, you understand I celebrate Christmas. Then we dance.
The entire topic to me comes down to this, we have constatutionally supported rights in this country, and one of them is to be able to believe in whatever religion we want, and the right of free speech to express our opinions based on that choice of religion we chose.
If someone expresses the views of the religion they believe in, this is not wrong, or illegal. It should be tolerated on all sides. Everyone has the right to express their views.
If someone disagrees with that view, that is fine. However, that someone that disagrees with that view has no right to censor, or take action of malice or cause harm to the other individual. Just because you disagree with something doesn't give you the right to take away the other person's rights.
If A&E are suspending him because they disagree with his statements, then that is wrong.
I don't care if it's a Christian saying this, or a Muslim, or a Buddhist. I'd feel the same way if a Buddhist provided their opinion based on their religion, and were shut down because someone or some network disagrees with their religious stance.
In this country, we have the right to believe what we want, and we have the right to express those views and express what our religion believes in.
You are free to disagree. But don't let that disagreement with a stance become the reason for retaliation. We are all entitled to our opinion, and to express that opinion. That is what this country was founded on, that is what makes it great.
Let's maintain the ability to express our views, even if someone else disagrees with it. We should all tolerate the fact that we can express our views on any topic.
It's all along the same lines as not saying "Christmas" anymore. Same thing, different stage. I'm not afraid to say Christmas, or wish someone a Merry Christmas. It is what I celebrate. You are welcome to wish me whatever holiday you celebrate too, and then we can both smile and have a good time with each other, I understand you celebrate something else, you understand I celebrate Christmas. Then we dance.