Uncategorized

A few notes on my previous post…

Phil Robertson

 

Hi you guys,

Before I make a few additional comments on this Duck Dynasty fiasco I wanted to say THANK YOU for all the traffic you all sent my way over the past few days. This has been such an incredible blessing, my followers are the best. ;)

After going through my comments I just have a few points to make that I see coming up a lot.
Here we go:

#1. Phil Robertson DID NOT say that being gay was the same as bestiality. He did NOT make a comparison between the two. Here is that exact quote from the interview, “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.”  When you make a comparison you are saying something is “LIKE” something else. He clearly did not state that here; he did not say ‘homosexual behavior is like bestiality.’ Notice the PERIOD that separates his sentences. That’s important.

So for those of you who are flipping out about this apparent comparison, your comment isn’t exactly relevant. I’m not just saying that because I like him, but because it’s common sense. Read the transcripts before you argue your point. Educating yourself is an important part of making an argument.

#2. Phil also did not make any racist remarks. He just didn’t. Again, go READ the interview transcripts. (Read them with your own two eyes, don’t just listen to the “he said, she said”). This is the exact quote from the interview: “I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field. … They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’ — not a word! Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”

Okay so let’s take this piece by piece. Simple.
-“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person.” Okay, so he never was an eye witness. That’s not racist.
-“Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers.” Okay, so the blacks worked on farms. That’s not racist.
-“I hoed cotton with them.” THEY WORKED TOGETHER. In UNITY.
-“I’m with the blacks, we’re white trash.” He refers to himself as “white trash.” Again, no racial slur against African Americans.
-“They’re singing and happy.” and “I never heard one of them say ‘These doggone white people!'” Here we have talk of happiness. Again, NOT racist.
-“Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.” Is this the racist part? Again, NO. He refers to them as happy and godly! He never said that African Americans as a whole had nothing to be angry about under Jim Crow laws. He simply said that the few of them that he was around were happy and never sang the blues.

#3. Final point. And this is my biggest one probably. I received A LOT of emails this past week. The one I will probably cherish the most however came from a man named Christopher, the subject read “As a member of the homosexual community, I want to apologize.” He had seen my blog, seen how horrible people were acting in the comments, and in turn felt the need to contact me personally to let me know that “we [homosexuals] aren’t all like that, I promise.” I told him that I wished others could discuss disagreements with kindness rather than hatred, if we could, we would get SO much farther.  If you only take one thing from this post make it this: just because you may not agree with what someone has to say, that doesn’t give you a good reason for name calling. In fact, if all you can do is throw insults, you shouldn’t even be commenting because you have no argument. We’re adults here.

So that’s all I have for now. I wasn’t even going to write this second part but I kept seeing these topics come up in my comments, so here we are. :) Thank you guys again for the traffic. Have a beautiful Sunday, friends.

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “A few notes on my previous post…

  1. Claire,
    Great follow-up clarification email. You are wise beyond your years. And a natural teacher. God bless! See you in church! (I’m teaching adult Sunday school this morning—North Kingstown, RI.)

  2. The whole bestiality thing was also taken out of context. If anyone would go ahead and read the interview they would see the question that was asked of Phil “What do you think is sinful?”. He then gave them a truthful answer “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.” The media along with gay rights groups have put their own spin on the quote when he was never comparing the two at all.

    1. Hi Ken,

      Yes it was VERY much taken out of context. What makes me even angrier is that is wasn’t just taken out of context by some of the people commenting on my post… but by well known, credible news sites. When I was researching for this clarification I came across so many “reliable” sources saying that he DID compare homosexuality to bestiality. As a former journalist, I was very disappointed. I know the people writing these stories know how to properly read and comprehend what they’re reading. At least I would hope they do…

      Thanks for reading!

  3. What I don’t understand is that they attacked you right off.. it seems as there is an agenda and if someone says anything that can be perceived or construed as negative they attack and get angry. These are the same people who do not believe in God. Whether Christian or any other form.

    1. Please see my reply below to help understand some of the hostility. If you target and hate on a group long enough, while living in the plush benefits of being “normal,” you’re bound to be reserved and casual, while your opponents are spring-loaded. Or, maybe it’s because gays don’t believe in God. Yet another fine example of the type of irrational and hateful sentiment Christians spray upon the gays simply because they are the flavor of the month sin group. If you sin, you must not believe in God. So, I presume you, too, don’t believe in God, eh?

      1. I am in no way supporting the unprofessional behavior of people. I am just saying there is a pretty darn good reason for it.

  4. Can I clarify something here?

    The question was: “What, in your mind is sinful?”

    To which the reply was, ““Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.””

    Because everyone made the argument that gay marriage would be the requisite to dog-man marriage, it’s easy to understand why people interpreted his statement as a comparison. I have no doubt in my mind that Phil accepts this logic debating gay marriage. But, I digress.

    In his mind, homosexual behavior is sinful, and it morphs out from there. I have no idea what “morphs out” means in the context of this sentence. It was a bad word choice. But as he said morph, the indication is that homosexual behavior is sinful, and then other sins follow. So, at the very least, he is pinning all sinful behavior as sexual, and he is indicating that homosexual behavior is the parent of sinful behavior. His words, not mine.

    And while I appreciate–and support–your interests in having an adult conversation, ergo making a gripe about rude homosexuals insulting people, I am a little disappointed that you missed the insults tossed out towards the gays in your posts as well. Christians have been the vocal majority in restricting gay rights–historically making it punishable by death–and are usually the ones committing hate crimes against gays. When was the last time you heard a story about a group of gay people picking up Christians at a church and then beating them to death?

    Gays have a right to be sensitive about this topic. They have a right to be mad and defensive. It took a long time for them to finally have a voice. You can’t expect them to be all candy-coated and happy, especially since we are still fighting a stupid battle that has no business in American politics (gay marriage).

    And as an addendum to my above ending sentiment, I want to offer the following: Let marriage be between one man and one woman under God in the Christian church. Then dissolve all 2nd+ marriages, all atheist marriages and the like, all Hindu/Buddhist/Jewish/Islamist marriages, as marriage is Christian, after all. And finally, dissolve all governmental benefits for being married and having kids. No more tax breaks, no more cheap health insurance. Stop taxing the gays for your rightful benefits they too can’t have.

    That’s why this is even an issue to begin with. Hate crimes against gays, and an underprivileged status as equal Americans. An issue the Christians created. We wouldn’t even be talking about it if it weren’t for that.

    Thank you.

    1. If getting rid of priveleges for married couples and instead tax cuts for those who simply take care of children regardless of their couple or not status were to occur, I would be all for it. Christians are supposed to be all for giving up their rights anyways. It’s the social class differences that are the only arguments I find valid. The whole ‘born that way’ I think it what the man meant when he used the word ‘morphed from there’. If we accept homosexuality whole heartedly only and only on the principle of being ‘born that way’ then the principle of ‘being born that way’ may become a powerful enough principle to justify other ways people are ‘born’. This lost of people are obviously very different from the couples that want to get married, but if being born a certain way was justification then the following are justified:

      Pedophiles
      Serial killers
      Whatever that word is for people who HAVE to steal
      Anything that is obviously morally corrupt but someone is born with the craving to do…

      Then again these days it would seem we are almost at the point that as long as receiving party finds it acceptable, and is a responsible adult able to make their own choices, then it’s good to go. Like physician suicide. So a serial killer just needs to find people who want to kill themselves and it might be justified by our society. Thankfully the responsible adult able to make decisions on their own behalf saves us from ever diving into accepting pedophiles for a very long time. But long story short, I went on a huge rabbit trail, I think the word ‘morph’ represented the slippery slope argument.

      1. First off, you have no rights to governmental benefits for marriage. There is nothing in the Bible that says so. So, you’re not giving up *your rights*, but letting go of superficial junk that you had no business (gay/straight/cattle-lover/whatever) getting for falling in love and copulating.

        Second off, gay marriage does not make all bad things okay. Please stop bringing this into the debate. That’s like saying in the 1500s “if we let King Henry get a divorce, we will then need to let people have orgies with sheep in a pentagram.” There is no comparison between gays and serial killers and child rapists. None. Stop it. Just stop.

        Third off, doctor assisted suicide does not streamline with serial killers. Different animals. Your point is rendered aborted. If someone with a terminal illness wants to die, they deserve that. If it weren’t for modern medicine, they might not have lived the X years they did, suffering the way they did, prolonging the inevitable. I find it funny how every Christian is in a hurry to get back home to God until their time has come. And not only do they want to live forever, but they think everyone else should, too.

        We agree on a few points here. Let’s keep it simple. Let the gays get married. Not in your church. Don’t call it marriage (as if Christians coined the term or the commitment). No one gets a penny or a break or a golden horse to ride on for finding their sexual partner for life. You can stand on a pedestal and talk about how sinful and hellbound homosexuals are all you want. I could find a Catholic to talk about how a Baptist is going to hell, too (and vice versa). But stop taking social rights away from people when social rights are not a part of the discussion.

        And stop comparing gays to sheep adulterers and Thai sex slavers. No comparison. One does not beget the other. Tolerating one does not lead to tolerating the other. No reasonable person would condone either in modern educated society.

        End rant.

I'd love to get your feedback!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s