By now I am sure that most of you have heard about Phil Robertson’s suspension from Duck Dynasty on A&E as a result of comments he made during an interview with GQ magazine. If you are like me your inbox has been hit with messages related to this story. If you are a facebook user then you are also aware that this is a very hot topic.
I happen to me in the relative minority of people in that I have never seen an episode of Duck Dynasty but that does not make me ignorant of its cultural impact. During our ventures into the malls for the Christmas season as well as with online shopping coupled with my Facebook friends, Duck Dynasty is something of a cultural phenomenon. The fact that I am not in the informed inner circle of Duck Dynasty fans is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
There are those who will say this is a social issue and we shouldn’t be involved in social issues. I disagree. This is not a social issue. This is a rights issue that is fundamental to the founding princip0les of our Nation. The disease of progressive liberalism is destroying this nation leaving many bewildered about truth, about liberty, about our freedoms.
By suspending Phil Robertson, A&E has made it clear that they reject Phil’s faith based position on homosexuality. That’s fine. A&E has a right to express their own feelings and as a business,restrict that message. Let’s be clear though, A&E is discriminating against Phil Robertson. The question then falls upon us….Will we continue to support A&E and the advertisers who make use of the channel who are discriminating against such faith based debate and discussion? To me, this is the core of this debate. This is why this is not a social issue but an issue about rights.
I would like to take this one bold step further. With all the pressure mounting against A&E, is an apology from A&E enough for you to look the other way if they remove the suspension and return Phil to the Duck Dynasty cast. There is a principle at issue here and it’s not really about Phil Robertson’s personal views on homosexuality. It is about his right to express those views or for that matter, the right of any other person to express views that I may find offensive. An expression of views that I do not agree with do not force me to accept those views or to give them any credence. My right to believe what I believe remains. If the views of Phil Robertson offended the gay community they can choose not to watch the program. It’s really that simple. However by taking a stand and choosing to discriminate against Phil Roberts A&E is choosing to be intolerant to one view in the name of tolerance of another. You can’t have it both ways.
A&E has programming that supports gay views and it becomes my call whether or not I choose to support such programming. You cross a distinct line however when you completely silence the voice of one group to advocate for another. You are then no longer an advocate of free speech but an advocate of Fascist control of thought using fear and intimidation in the name of political correctness. Make no mistake, it may be political but it is, in no way, correct. I make no apologies for that statement. I believe that A&E is exerting a force of Fascism in punishing Phil Robertson for his belief’s.
Each of us are accountable and responsible for our choices. This type of Fascism removes that control from us and places those controls in the hands of others. In short, the ones making the choices are attempting to control you. I refuse to allow A&E to control me or my belief’s through tactics of fear and intimidation.
Let’s also understand that this is not an isolated incident. It is not just an issue that is only impacting us on National level. Pennsylvania is moving into very dangerous areas of using “political correctness” as a tool to generate fear and intimidation in the expression of our religious views. Shrinking the size of our Legislative body limits our representative powers and puts more power in the hands of individuals who can use that power to to advance these controls over us.
I am personally deeply offended by the fact that my tax dollars are already being used to help support organizations actively engaged in the slaughter on children under the guise of supporting woman’s rights or that an organization like Planned Parenthood, born out of the racist eugenics mind of Margaret Sanger, is allowed to make use of federal and state tax generated monies taken from the citizens to support such a horrendous practice; In doing so they make me an unwilling participant in the murder of children and a denial of their right to life. While I may politically and religiously be opposed and offended by abortions, using taxes collected from me to fund the organizations committing these atrocities forces my hands into that blood and like it or not, the blood of 57 million aborted babies in the United States is on all our hands. For our tax dollars being sent oversees to fund abortion mills in other countries that number stands at 1.3 billion since1980. I think of Jefferson when I reflect on these numbers and hear his words ” can the liberties of a nation bethought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever . . . .”
Putting those controls in the hands of fewer people which will most likely fall into the hands of incumbents entrenched in the filth of the political machinery and corruption is not healthy for any of us and the informed status of the average voter offers me no real comfort that smaller government in size in any limits the powers of government when the government is already ignoring the constitutional rule of law that are in place.
Recently, in the name of tolerance, two bills have been introduced (HB300 and SB300). Governor Corbett has publicly announced his support of these bills. While the bills are identified as non-discriminatory bills, similar bills in other states have been used to advance agendas that most Pennsylvanians would find offensive. As Action of PA has pointed out: “These bills would also affect youth organizations. For instance, a scout camp could be forced to hire a summer camp counselor who is confused about his/her gender. The bill also would prohibit locker room discrimination. So, if a boy feels like he wants to use the girls’ locker room, this bill would allow for that.”
Frankly, this alleged non-discriminatory tolerance paves the way for predators like Jerry Sandusky to use faith-based or other institutions for their own personal desires and on the heels of such a scandal in Pennsylvania, the rush to push legislation that opens the doors for more predators like Sandusky without consideration of the protections that should be afforded to our children is a gross miscarriage of justice to our children and to society.
I am tired of continuing to allow the government to pass legislation they enables predators of children access to their prey or to fund organizations that participate in the denial or protected rights to our children. Without these predator enabling laws, Sandusky was allowed to continue preying upon young boys for almost a decade after the first charges were made against him and he was finally convicted. I can’t help but feel that HB and SB 300 will only make that situation worse. If these legislators feel that the predators should be protected, how can they also think they should be prosecuted when their actions are discovered or that you can place blame upon the institutions who, forced by such laws, must ignore preference and place our children in harm’s way. And I want this to be clear. I would not want an adult heterosexual male to supervise the girls in a way that gave them access to the private functions of the girls life any more then I would want an adult homosexual male to have the same access to boys. That’s not discrimination, that’s common sense.
I also have very grave concerns about a young boy who, for whatever reasons, is convinced he is a girl now having access to the girl’s locker room or bathroom in any school where my grandchildren currently attend all enabled by a law that not only enables such activity but would make it mandatory. Does this not also allow for a terrace who identifies themselves as transgender to become a phys ed teacher without any scrutiny that could result in transgender women supervising the boys locker room or transgender men supervising the girls?
Sexual abuse in the relationship between teachers and students is becoming far more commonplace in our public schools and that involves both homosexual and heterosexual contact. Its not isolated to the “Big City” schools but is taking place in rural schools as well. If we, as a society, are so open to accepting homosexuality, bisexuality, lesbianism and transgendered sexuality, it is not unreasonable to see the path this paves for polygamy, pedophilia and bestiality.
As we have seen several times in the past, these non-discrimination bills are often immediately seized upon by activists to discriminate against those with faith based and opposing views where they intentionally target and then attack a faith based business, organization or individual to use as a political tool forcing the denial of the owners of a business, operators of an organization or even individuals to express their faith principles in direct violation of the protections of the first amendment. In doing so they use a non-discriminatory policy to discriminate against the beliefs of another.
There is an open war on traditional Christian values and the protections of the first amendment where Congress shall make NO laws promoting or restricting religious expression are continually being ignored. By using the first amendment to restrict the voice of religious expression of Christians under the false interpretation of separation of Church and State, they promote the religious world views of some while denying the same protections to others in complete hypocrisy to the law and the very nature of “tolerance” itself.
I have very clear views concerning my faith principles and I would not force any other individual to submit to those views forcefully against their will. I expect the same from those holding opposing views. Another individual choosing to live a lifestyle alternative to my beliefs is not a threat to me until I am forced to become an unwilling participant or am legislatively punished for holding an opposing view.
Phil Robertson’s views were not a threat to any homosexual, lesbian, bisexual or transgender person. Those views were his religious views openly and freely expressed. The Duck Dynasty show airs on a network that also airs programming that advocates for alternative lifestyles. He may have offended the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community but his words did not stop any of them from pursuing that lifestyle nor did it punish them in any way. A&E’s actions however became an immediate punitive threat to Phil Robertson that extends as a threat to all who would embrace that view. It did not start with Phil Robertson, nor will it end with him as long as we continue to allow this erosion of our freedoms and liberties to continue.
This is no different that what happened with the faith based bakery who refused to make a cake for a gay couple. The bakery was deliberately targeted by gay activists but the decision not to bake the cake for the couple did not stop them, not did it prevent them in any way, from being homosexual. The homosexual community is free to go to another bakery but that’s not enough, they must force their views on others by making them comply. Forcing the bakery to make the cake through legislative powers did discriminate against the faith of the bakery. The rights of expression of the owners of that business are denied.
That legislative or judicial activity is not just about forcing the bakers to embrace views alien to to their faith, it is a clear message of fear and intimidation to others. It is also removing my ability to choose which business I will support based upon my own faith principles. That is control. That is Fascism.
The same thing is happening in our military where Chaplains are being punished for using the name of Jesus Christ or where members of the military are forbidden from sharing their faith. In such actions no other person is forced to accept the individuals premise or principles but in forcing those sharing their faith to be silent, the faith of that individual is silenced and there is a very real threat to their own religious expression. There is nothing tolerant about such actions.
You can express your concerns about this issue directly with A&E Network by calling them at 212-210-1400. You can also email them at firstname.lastname@example.org