RE: 646,000 likes on Facebook Page to boycott A&E until Phil Robertson is back on the air.

Randy Oldman wrote:

As a die-hard liberal, I fully support the campaign to get this idiot back on air.

He perfectly entitled to his opinion, unless it could potentially harm the safety or the rights of homosexuals.

It's not about harming the safety or rights of gays but harming the income of A&E.

I also support putting the idiot back on the air.

I would have thought there were a lot more stupid people on Facebook, the number is shockingly low.

doperjoe wrote:

the power of Dumbfukistan is not to be underestimated.

this is how 30% of the US thinks/feels, which in and of itself is disturbing. But this is what the inbred slackjaw morons want, so I say give it to them.

thejeff wrote:

Why are you so intolerant of conservatives? I find your views offensive, and I would like an apology.

People who are rallying around PR are intolerant. They are intolerant of anything that challenges their carefully crafted religious world.

Religion is poison. That is true in the US, Mecca, and Jerusalem.

I am intolerant of hate. A gay person never harmed Phil, nor did they harm his beliefs. So why does he feel the need to attack them? It is needlessly hostile, which is a direct result of religion.

There are plenty of secular conservatives in the world (including me). What I find appalling is how consumers of religion can be manipulated into hateful speech and actions in the name of, "consistency" with these ridiculous moral narratives.

L L wrote:

Randy Oldman wrote:

As a die-hard liberal, I fully support the campaign to get this idiot back on air.

He perfectly entitled to his opinion, unless it could potentially harm the safety or the rights of homosexuals.

It's not about harming the safety or rights of gays but harming the income of A&E.

I also support putting the idiot back on the air.

return him to the airwaves. let the viewers decide. the people who are outraged do not kill animals for fun as these people do, so there is no commercial risk.

There will eventually be 2 networks for 2 points of view.

one thing liberals are not...is liberal. GLAAD isn't upset at what Phil Robertson said, they're mad that a conservative Christian said it. Look at Alec Baldwin...he was tossing around gay slurs all over the place and it didn't bother GLAAD because it was a liberal doing it.

No, no, he said "fathead", remember? Haha

waltzin matilda wrote:

one thing liberals are not...is liberal. GLAAD isn't upset at what Phil Robertson said, they're mad that a conservative Christian said it. Look at Alec Baldwin...he was tossing around gay slurs all over the place and it didn't bother GLAAD because it was a liberal doing it.

Bangpop Go wrote:

Do I have this straight?

One of the minority guys on a loosely scripted TV show (designed to poke fun at his select minority) pokes fun at another group. The folks who produce the show don't like their character bashing minorities outside the scripted one and they stop him from doing it on their show. Now the folks who watch the show that bashes his minority won't watch the show until the character on the show gets allowed to bash his choice of minorities.

Yes?

POD

It makes me sad that someone could be so ignorant. He gives us real Christians a bad name.

A+E hired them..why cant they fire them? The business provider should be able to fire/hire whomever they chose...why is everyone making a big deal out of it? If he only bought Chevys but A+E was a Ford lover and decided to cut them off for that reason then no one would give 2 craps. Let A+E decide what they want to do with them and stop complaining

Wow Unbelievable wrote:

This is not a free speech issue. It's a human rights issue. The guy's a complete moron.

how is it a human rights issue? Are any gays being punished by Phil for banging each other up the butt like drunk monkeys? No. Is Phil being punished simply for stating his opinion on gayness? yes. But is it working? No - 1.5M likes now. Hahahahahahahaha!!

Querfeldein wrote:

too funny wrote:

A&E knows the Robertsons are Christian. They can't be surprised by his views. He thinks homosexuality (& various other sex acts) are a sin and immoral. So what?

Being a Christian is not a license for intolerance (and while I'm not a Christian, I am sure most Christians would be offended by the suggestion). Sure, you can say what you want, but if what you say offends me, do I have to give you a platform and pay you for it? I don't think so.

whi is being intolerant here? the dude who made some pretty mild comments about homos, or the network that threatened him because he dared voice a non-PC opinion?? Liberals only practice tolerance on those who agree with them...

Jeff Wigand wrote:

K5 wrote:

But the owners can say anything they like at any time.

They're under the same First Amendment restrictions as everyone else (assuming we're talking about those resident in America).

They can't make slanderous speech.

They can't knowingly incite danger to others with their speech.

They're restricted on what obscenities they can utter and publish.

You don't believe that do you? The owners say anything that want any time they want to. The law does not apply to them.

I recall a consultant during the time when HIV became widespread amongst the ‘gay’ community, stating that - If one make a playground of the human body’s main sewer pipe, one shouldn’t be surprised if there are grim consequences.

jeffrey d. boomhauer wrote:

whi is being intolerant here? the dude who made some pretty mild comments about homos, or the network that threatened him because he dared voice a non-PC opinion?? Liberals only practice tolerance on those who agree with them...

He compared gays to "the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers" and implied that being gay is the natural consequence of promiscuity, which many people found offensive and stereotypical. Of course you are welcome to your own opinion. Second, A&E did not threaten him with any sort of harm, they suspended him from appearances on a television show for making bigoted comments.

chewbacca wrote:

freespeech will prevail wrote:

Sponsors to A&E being flooded with calls telling them to drop their commercials!

These are the same people who think sarah palin is a genius.

and you're of the group that thought barry soetero was a genius, lol!

donatilo wrote:

It makes me sad that someone could be so ignorant. He gives us real Christians a bad name.

Since he was paraphrasing a passage from First Corinthians, I guess you think the Apostle Paul, "gives us real Christians a bad name" as well.

Wtfunny wrote:

I don't think this has anything to do with what he wore, on his sleeve or elsewhere. I don't care what his religion is .... He deserves to lose his job over those remarks he made, as did Martin Bashir, or Alec Baldwin, and dozens of other folks. Where were you conservatives calling for Martin Bashir to NOT lose his job?

This has nothing to do with free speech. Robertson is still a free man.

you're pretty fuc&ed if you can't tell the difference between publicly ranting someone should sh&t in someone's mouth and someone stating their opinion on sexual behavior..

Pretty sure Phil & his clan are the ones generating the revenue for A&E and their sponsors here - not the other way around. Nice try though

No Such Thing As Bad Publicity wrote:

I had never even heard of this show until I read about this controversy. Watching this show automatically makes you ineligible to comment on serious social issues. Turn off your TVS folks.

More shows that earn an auto disqual...

Naked and Afraid claims it is not 'exploitative' to film contestants nude but that it creates a 'pure survival experience'

'Bare Knuckle Babe' and former cheerleader, 19, becomes the first woman to win catfish noodling competition