A Duck by Any Other Name…

Once upon a time there was this ubergay character on the most popular reality TV show of all time named Bill Hobertson. This guy was the quintessential gay man. Such a gay man he was almost a caricature of the Gay Man.  On every single episode, Bill and his post-nuclear family were unapologetic about their worldview.  Bill’s children had two fathers and they were devout atheists. In fact, at the end of each show Bill led his family in a chant to the Flying Spaghetti Monster that they believe that you are born gay and that there is no God except for the one made of pasta, just to drive home their disdain and disrespect for any god at all. When they were not filming their wildly popular show Bill spoke at GLAAD events around the country and made appearances on floats in Gay Pride parades nationwide.

Then one day, Bill agrees to an interview with Gentleman’s Quarterly.  When asked, he reveals that he believes that Christians are moronic and further, that he thinks having sex with a woman is revolting, and from his perspective cannot understand why any guy would ever be into something other than gay sex.  But Bill is a lover of freedom and qualifies his belief statement with the fact that he respects that everyone has the right to make their own decisions and it is not for him to judge them. None of these revelations would have surprised anyone. Unless you live under a rock in an Amish community, it is crystal clear from his show, and all of its licensed merchandise and marketing, that Bill walks his talk.

Too much honesty from Bill causes the network to immediately suspend him from the show (though his family is likely still under contract and the next season is already taped so they are sure to benefit from the publicity frenzy that their knee jerk response has created.)  They say that Bill simply cannot hold those opinions and continue on their network. Apparently the network didn’t realize when Bill said he was G A Y he meant it.

OK  America.  For those of you who still have any intellectual honesty, answer me this. What would you call what is happening to Bill just now?

  1. Tolerance.
  2. Open-mindedness.
  3. Acceptance.
  4. None of the Above

If you are that American, the one willing to see the truth regardless of what sacred cow we are currently grilling up, you would call it what it is. Intolerance.  You would say that Bill is entitled to his opinion, and as a matter of fact that Bill’s right to express that opinion is called Freedom of Speech. Darn it.

You would call all of the people hating on Bill… bigots.

What is happening to Bill is not the “live and let live” mentality that we Americans pride ourselves on.  If that were the case when we heard Bill’s remarks we would have changed the channel,  passed on adding the GQ to our vast library, or possibly said “Boy howdy, Bill is Duck Dynasty Season 3very wrong and I’m going to sit on down with some delicious ice cream treats and write a blog post about why I disagree with him.”  But what Bill is experiencing, in the holy name of tolerance, is “think and speak the way we want you to think and speak otherwise we will seek to bring public and financial harm to you and if you don’t bow to us we will attempt to silence you.” The media would be outraged on Bill’s behalf.  They would have called those who were calling for him to recant “bullies.”

Phil Robertson is not gay.  He’s a Christian. Which apparently voids all the rules because it is clear that in this new era of “equal rights” some people are far more equal than others.

35 thoughts on “A Duck by Any Other Name…

  1. Such great information. And the “delegate” Obama is sending to Russia for the Olympics says the comments made by the actor were short-sighted. They were almost word for word the scripture from the bible itself. That implies God Himself is wrong, and not evolved in His thinking!

    How those who put their trust into their own understanding will pay on that final day. God help them…


    • Phil’s words perhaps mirrored Romans, but Romans was written to the church in Rome. I wonder if St Paul would have softened his wording in Romans if he was addressing all in sundry? I suspect he might have, not in order to be less honest, but to offer a greater amount of grace.

      • Interesting thought. Many times, the Apostles did tailor their writing styles and word selection to get their particular message across to the specific cultures they were addressing.

        However, no matter how this message was couched, the meaning is the same. The actions of same-sex couples is not acceptable to God.

        That may not be what the world wants to hear, but has always been what our Lord has told them.

        Thank you for your insights!

      • And that is really the issue here. It is not about free speech (by the way, free speech is not a right mentioned in the Bible). Phil had his say and is not being put in jail, he is just reaping the consequences of being entirely candid in a forum that is mixed. His right to free speech is not being infringed upon. It is unfortunate that instead of pointing out his own sins FIRST, he chose to focus on gays (especially male gays). Sometimes people who identify as Christians have a tendency to be judgmental; it is as if their rebirth gives them license to offend because they can seemingly back their position through scripture. We need to get away from the philosophy that if something is the truth it needs to be said as loudly, as obnoxiously, and as often as possible.

        Phil seems to be entirely uncomfortable with a male sticking his penis in an anus (his words, not mine), but I did not hear the same disgust for female homosexuals. I find the whole line of dialogue unsavory, especially for a Christian. There were people in our not so distant past who quoted scripture and verse to legitimize their contempt for African Americans. I know of very few Christians who can discuss the “truth” of homosexuality as they interpret the Bible and not come off sounding bigoted, and who do not either purposefully or unintentionally alienate people in need of knowing Christ as their savior.

        • Hi Cindy. Very very good to see you! Hope your Christmas was stupendous.

          You are right, this is not a freedom of speech issue. It’s just Exhibit A in how if you do not endorse the progressive sexual ethic of the day you will be targeted. There is an increasing cost to rejecting this new sexual ethic and everyone who embraces traditional sexual morality is well aware of it.

          Mr. Robertson was certainly coarser than I would have been. However, I have heard gay men state that they think that heterosexual sex is disgusting. Of course a statement like that from a gay man would produce only a shrug from an audience. I know that Robertson has been quite forthcoming (and condemning) about his own sexual sins, primarily of adultery and promiscuity, before he became a Christian. Also, I have found that no matter how I state that homosexuality (an equal among every other sexual sin) is not approved by God, or that I support man/woman marriage, some people are offended and consider me a bigot.

    • How awful to use your own logic and rational thought. What a disgrace! When you say God help them, it seems like that really excites you. You can’t wait to be proven right for buying into and following this stuff for however long. It’s not very Christian to be so spiteful and gleeful at someone else’s perceived upcoming misfortune, is it?

      • I have nothing but pity and prayer for anyone who hates and despises what the Lord has said! It’s not what the world wants to hear, but I am not about what this world thinks is right and good and tolerant, etc.

        I apologize if you do not care for my comment.

        Jefferson Paul

      • True Christians apologize when they feel they have offended another.

        I don’t believe we need to trade comments any longer…

        Thank you,
        Jefferson Paul

    • Just wondering….
      Jefferson, why would those who put their trust in their own understanding pay anymore than any of us who put our trust in our own understanding and interpretation of the bible do? And as far as sin goes, have we not all sinned and do we not sin every single day, no matter how good a Christian we think we are? How do you think we’re going to pay?

      When I was saved, my sins were forgiven. ALL OF MY SINS. When I screw up, God continues to forgive my sins, even when I err according to my own understanding. I don’t know why it would be any different for a gay or bi Christian, who struggles with the flesh. Jesus said if we believe, we are saved.

  2. I still wish Phil had been more polite about it, although I recognise that there are many who are much less polite about it than him. The fact that the Pope, while regarding homosexual behaviour as sinful, is still widely accepted by the world culture, suggests that the key is not whether a person regards homosexual behaviour as sinful, but whether they remain polite and respectful.

  3. In a recent talk with someone they defined “bigotry” as holding to beliefs that they think are wrong. (Not their exact words, but rather my induction.) I pointed out the dictionary definition of “bigotry” means to hold _any_ opinion obstinately; refusing to change their opinion, no matter the evidence. They disagreed with this – with the dictionary definition, not mine! – as is their right; but it’s another instance of redefining words. My point was that bigotry is unwillingness to change your belief – no matter what the belief is, even if it’s a belief based on equality for all people – but they asserted that bigotry applies to the belief itself. According to their definition, if I’m against same-sex marriage (for example) then I’m a bigot, no matter why I’m against it; even if I’m willing to change my beliefs. If I change my mind about it, I’m no longer a bigot: not because I was willing to change my mind, but because I now agree with them.

    The irony is that many of such people are also against certain aspects of equality and call them disgusting, just as would have been done a century ago about same sex marriage. One person I talked to thought same-sex marriage was ok, likewise polyamory, but thought objectophilia was disgusting. According to the alternative definition of bigotry, in the opinion of objectophiles, wouldn’t this person be a bigot? Yet they would be appalled to be called bigots, because they would still argue that we have to have some boundaries?

    • Troy! Amazingly I have had similar experiences! Where I explain my rational for why I support man/woman marriage, how I have engaged in honest discussion (demonstrating a willingness to not be “rigid” about my belief) and have given evidence that I love and serve those with whom I disagree. And despite all that, they still call me a bigot because I do not agree with them. It almost makes me want to… start a blog about it all. 😉

      Thanks for stopping by. I love your comments.

  4. AskMe- I was very confused about your post. I had to look up who that person even was and I had no idea what you were talking about. So what exactly are you trying to say? Are you mad that A&E suspended him? I think he totally should be allowed to say whatever he wants, and he should not be censored by law, but A&E also has the right to decide that his comments do not represent them well and it is not in-line with their values, and they can handle it how they see fit. It is their money afterall. Maybe one of those “family” Christian networks can pick up the show and then nobody will mind what he says. But we do have free speech- he practiced it. Nobody said there are no private consequences, like when athletes lose sponsors or something. But his comments did not offend or surprise most of his who disagree with him. He can say what he wants, he isn’t in public office or something. Aren’t these people known for being looney, God and country loving rednecks anyways? He’s a non-factor. I wish they would not have suspended him, but it is their right.

    • My newsfeed has been littered with stories about Mr. Robertson. Surprised you hadn’t heard of it till now. The point is that if Anderson Cooper (well-known CNN anchor who is also gay) was canned because he did an interview where he voiced his support for gay marriage, it would evoke outrage from nearly every newspaper and network. Would it not? There is duplicity in media that is made evident in this Robertson event. Unless you haven’t noticed, this seems to be the ONE topic on which it is absolutely taboo to have a dissenting view. (Save perhaps criticizing Islam.) A&E has the right to can Mr. Robertson, even though they likely knew his thoughts on the subject prior to the interview. They were happy to capitalize on him- until he came out and stated his opinions on homosexuality and then, certainly out of fear of the vocal extreme of the LGBT movement, they had to feign surprise and suspend him. But the point of the outcry, and certainly of the blog post above, is that the most vocal and radical extreme of the LGBT movement (who champions tolerance) as well as a bias media is ready to cry foul about anyone who might challenge their ubiquitous narrative that says “if you do not embrace all things LGBT you are an ignorant, bigoted, hater.”

      It’s clear that if the shoe was on the other foot (which it is whenever someone supports gay marriage or criticizes Christianity) the media sits back and twiddles it’s thumbs- or showers them with praises. It is rare to have someone, in this case Mr. Robertson, buck the politically correct monolith.

      • Absolutely, AskMe. I actually feel like most everyday ordinary people who support LGBT rights think this is dumb and he should not be ostracized for it. It’s silly for A&E to act like they didn’t know his opinions at the outset, like you said. And to let the rest of his family stay but not him, do they honestly think they don’t hold the exact same opinions!? But as I said, just know most of sensible people on the other side think this is unfair and lame. It’s also interesting that this interview was done like 2 months ago, from what I understand, and just came out right before the premiere. Something just smells fishy all around.

        But you are right- It is not permissible to criticize anything LGBT but frequently it is open season on Christians. There is a bias in the media – anyone who says otherwise is on crack or delusional. My Christian friend and I often discuss this in our field. We’re both finishing our doctorates in clinical psychology and we work at a college counseling center. The office is very progressive and while we love out clients having faith (we view it as another healthy, effective coping mechanism) we are totally insensitive that other therapists might actually be so dense as to actually believe In a religion. We assume everyone is the same way, which of course is not true. It’s been a trying year for her, and although we are all friendly, I’m glad it’s made me more sensitive and a better friend. She’s taught me a lot.

        But please just know, the non-crazy socially liberal people are not so black and white and do not want to silence dissent, just like the tolerant but firm Christans don’t want to either (at least I don’t think so). It’s hard because all most of my “kind” sees of your “kind” is sensationalized images and snippets of Christians acting totally crazy and severe in a hateful way, wanting to take away things that have been worked so hard for (and I mean wanting to take away treating LGBT folks with love and decency, not even gay marriage.) They act like acting on same-sex attraction and love is an elevated sin, while they casually blow off the million other sins in the Bible. So it goes for both sides, and it’s very unfortunate. Good thing we take the time to have dialogue to bring the sides to the table. It’s important for cat and dog people to be cordial at some point, after all. 🙂

        • Sarahdoggieblogger… I love you. I read your comments on my phone while standing in the checkout line at Trader Joes and I’ve been smiling ever since. Just hearing your recognize how slanted media is against Christians really moved me. Really. Thanks for your honesty. (Maybe the puppy picture has worked it magic?)

          You are right. I don’t think that most gay people or moderate liberals were the ones screaming for Robertson’s blood. It’s the super-vocal LGBT guard, typified by GLAAD, who seem to have everyone running scared. And you are right. Those of us who oppose gay marriage- oppose gay marriage. We do not oppose other people speaking out in support of gay marriage. We are not out to silence their voices but hopefully through thoughtful conversation (in those rare places where it exists) we can at least demonstrate that our opinions do not spring from a position of hatred or phobia.

          How on earth can you be getting a doctorate in psychology and be reading my blog? Have you had to keep it a secret from your superiors? If they knew you were listening to propaganda like this, they might have to subject you to reeducation… 😉 I’m glad your Christian friend has you. It sounds like you are an encouragement to her.

          I know that there are Christians out there who major on homosexuality and present it at “the big one.” They get a lot of press. But most of us are so painfully aware of our own shortcomings and desperation for Christ that we would be fools to elevate one sin over another. And most of us have people we love who are gay and we are tripping over ourselves to love them better. That’s a pretty fast way to bring balance to doctrine.

  5. Askme: Exactly! Part of The Debacle Surrounding Phil Robertson is the double-standard that a Christian who states homosexuality is a sin faces vicious backlash while an LGBT who publicly supports gay marriage is called “brave” and “a leader”. This double standard has been around for so long, though, that I’m admittedly somewhat hardened to it. To be clear, I think it’s the deliberate attempt by one group to silence another group through intimidation, bullying and threats and I am not afraid to say so, but it IS the status quo right now. What bothers me more is the media outlets who stir up controversy, polarize the public and encourage the hatred. It makes them money and that is far, FAR more important than anyone’s individuality or even the need for a melting pot society to observe certain respects and dignities that allow us to co-exist in a incredibly diverse and complex soup of sexual, political, religious, spiritual and ideological beliefs. A&E KNEW who Phil Robertson was, what he believed, how he spoke and what he looked like. And they banked on it. GQ KNEW what Phil Robertson’s response to the interview question was going to be before they even called him to schedule. And they knew that they were going to benefit HUGELY from using this man’s words against him. They knew they were kicking the hornet’s nest and that this would further divide a society with some pretty serious fractures, but so what? The CEO’s were going to RAKE in the money on this one! And A&E counted on raking in the money by switching sides once again and being the LBGT hero when they sacked Mr. Robertson. And so it goes on and on.

    Mad at Phil Robertson because he talks the talk AND walks the walk? Ok….that’s your prerogative. Be mad. But save some of that ire for those who rub their hands, anticipating a cash windfall, while they get the majority of the public to play right into those hands.

    • Preach, Tisha! Read your comments and was like “Yeah!” “Uh-huh!” “Sista said, RAKE”. Honestly, how about you just blog for me once in a while? I’ll sit back and eat bon-bons and you can just get cray-cray on the media.

      There is definitely some purposeful stirring going on. I laughed every time they referred to Zimmerman as a “white” man but they always refer to Obama as a “black” man- even though they are both half-white. It was such a blatant ploy to rile up readers and grab headlines. And just like you said, we play right into their hands…

  6. Reblogged this on TOTALTRUTH.NET and commented:
    Amazing at how a nation that prides itself as “tolerant” actually is quite hypocritical. Read this blog to entice an understanding of today’s criticial issue with a recent event of a show called “Duck Dynasty” being banned due to an outspoken Christian. Though I personally do not like the show, many Americans do. God forbid a Christian state his/her stance about homosexuality, yet a homosexual can say what he wants about Christianity and nothing be said.

  7. I agree with your posting here, Askme. We cannot and must not sink down to an intolerant, bigoted level because this isn’t the way that Jesus Christ behaved. We’re held to a higher standard. Mr. Robertson is certainly entitled to his freedom of speech and may we all have that same right to exercise our first amendment rights, always.

  8. It seems as if A&E has realized that yes, this _is_ a free speech issue. While very few people know the terms of the contract, what we _do_ know is that there is no valid contract that can abrogate your constitutional rights in private. Robertson did not express these particular religious opinions of his on the show or to other employees of the network; he expressed his beliefs on his own time.

    He broke no law and employers are prohibited – by law grounded in the First Amendment – from terminating their contractual obligations based on religious views. It’s quite likely that – despite the brownshirt tactics of GLAAD and other professional grievance mongers – A&E’s legal department informed the executives of the liability to which they had exposed themselves, and that the accounting and advertising departments informed them of the projected losses in revenue.

    All that aside, any claim that this is not a free speech issue must ignore the facts of this case in particular, and enables the growing and pernicious excuse of using proxies to squelch all but pre-approved speech. The redefinition of words like “hate,” “bigot,” and “tolerance” are used, bludgeon-like, to cow dissenting opinion. This tool of the bien pensants finds increasing approval in the corporate marketplace and the realm of law as to circumvent Constitutional protections. Thankfully these protections are still strong enough to prevent firings and discrimination based on race or religious background. But when terms like “hate speech” and “racism” are applied with such reckless abandon to those who hold unfashionable opinions, it gives private organizations the power we’ve tried keep out of the hands of the government.

  9.   If A Duck Calls Don’t Answer!
    If you don’t walk like a Duck, Talk like a Duck, Act like a Duck, Live like a Duck, and Think like a Duck…well then you ain’t a Duck, Honey! To be loved by Ducks you must be a Duck or else you can’t go to the Big Duck Dynasty in the sky. Please note only Ducks with Straight tails can get in. Divorced or Married Ducks that cheat are exempt of course and are always welcome but in this case bring your own Rubber Duck. White Ducks that sing the blues are preferred but please no beasty or butch Ducks allowed. For more information please consult with their leader a wise bearded Turducken named Phil-a-shet Robertson.
    Homophobes stop using the Bible and scripture to HATE. Adultery is immoral and widely accepted by Christians. Save marriage Protest Adultery and DIVORCE! I hate Bigots! Yes hate…strong word and I mean all of it!
    Sincerely R.S. in AL

  10. I am not gay. I am a born again Christian that has lost my religion. I worship God but I refuse to go to church with bigots. I am a sinner and who is not? I was ready to go back to church again and then all of this Duck Dynasty bigotry came up everywhere, on tv, on Facebook, at work! I live in the bible belt and these people are pure hate filled. There is no love. Most are liars. They condemn gays using the most hateful words but will tell you in a minute to love All as Jesus does. Most of these people speaking this hate forget that “I” know them personally. I know their racist ways, their adulterer ways. It’s sickening. I will stay home and pray as I have for years…alone..to my Loving God thru Jesus Christ. I will never rub shoulders with these so-called Christians. It’s the damnedest thing I have ever seen in my life. Sickening and so discouraging. Heaven is a tiny small place and they all believe they will be there and homosexuals will not. Ashamed to live in the south!

  11. CHRISTIANS! Please Read this… Did any of the Christians hear ALL of what Mr Duck said?? He spoke about “Adultery” I heard every So-Called Christian that I know jump on the gay rant bus but not one of these Christians Agreed with or EVEN mentioned Adultery! Not One! According to the bible Adultery is Immoral–Sex before marriage and a 2nd or 3rd marriage–Cheating–Open Marriage–Divorce–WHY isn’t this part of what he said important? Evidentially it is Not. Adultery is accepted by Christians! Divorce is accepted by Christians! How many 2nd marriages have been congratulated by the church? How many daughters and granddaughters have worn that undeserving symbolic white dress and been congratulated by the church? How many live in boyfriend & girlfriend have been congratulated by the church? Yeah, it’s acceptable and that part of scripture is not important anymore. Speaking of Adultery may offend Christians. Self Righteous Bigots. Sin is not measured. I thank My Loving God that I am Not a Bigot…thank you Jesus for who I am and for the eyes that I have and thank you Jesus for my heart. I pray every night for God to help me to stop hating Bigots.

  12. Interesting reading! Good points and passionate feelings. Just a few of my thoughts….sorry for the clinical list-making, but it’s hard for me to get my thoughts out coherently (well, as coherently as they are anyway) and the point by point approach sometimes helps. 🙂

    1. Adultery, ALL adultery, is immoral. This means any sexual activity outside of the marriage of one man and one woman. Jesus even went so far as to say don’t think sexually about any one other than your spouse or you are guilty of adultery. The admonition to speak out against any fornication to a similar degree as we speak out against homosexuality is fair and a good point.

    2. Not attending church because you don’t like the people that go there is like saying you’re not going to go to school because you don’t like teachers. You’re only hurting yourself and becoming more entrenched in your own form of bigotry (i.e. “ashamed” to live in the South because “most” people are liars and hate-filled”). You are also not making a difference, no matter how small, in the thinking of those you consider hate-filled. Hate can only grow when it isn’t challenged, even by a tiny voice. It rarely, if ever, fizzles out on its own. The point of going to Church is to heal yourself and others of wounds through the grace given wherever “two or three are gathered in my name”.

    3. Respectful disagreement, expressed without personal attack is NOT bigotry. Saying you believe another’s actions are wrong is NOT bigotry. I.E. I can view homosexuality as a disordered condition without being a bigot. My words, my love and my attitude will determine if I am a bigot, not other people’s discontent that I don’t wave a rainbow flag supporting an act I believe to be wrong.

    4. Saying “Thank God I don’t sin like you bigots do” REALLY isn’t helpful to any discussion. I understand feeling that way, I just don’t think it’s constructive to the agape love we all struggle to bear one another

Comments are closed.