Phil Robertson FIRED from A & E

[Just the facts]

Sure, "you and I" don't get to decide - but are you saying someone else does - and has? LOL the victimization of Christianity. Nothing makes me LOL more than to hear that.

Yes, God decided and just so there was no confusion, it was written down for us. If you choose not to believe it, that's up to you, but you won't be able to use the "no one told me" defense.

Anyhow, we already had this portion of the debate on another thread so no point in repeating all of that.

Back to topic, it appears that A&E is retracting their ban on Phil and now they are just crafting the strategy to announce it.

[OKVision4U]

You can go to the tiniest town in America and there'll be a very good chance that there will be no 7-11 store...no Wal Mart or McDonalds...no synagogue, mosque, or temple...but there'll most likely be a Christian church in town. There is no war on Christianity. However, there IS a war on the idiocy that believes Christians are persecuted across the board. When did this mentality of victimhood take over?

I don't know if there is a formal declaration against the Christians but there is a great deal of "push-back" in the public forum.

Persecution is not a new thing with our faith, it has been around for a couple of thousand years. In the same book (The Bible) that Phil was referencing states in Matt 5:10, the persecuted will have the kingdom of heaven.

[OKVision4U]

Anyone who has suggested his First Amendment rights have in any way been violated.

Let's see, Phil was Not at the "workplace" & "off hours", so all the corporate law does not apply. Phil was speaking about "his faith", not your faith / belief, but HIS personal faith / belief. That (seperates) this cconversation between Civil rights (as an individual) & Corporate Law.

[mkjeeves]

I don't know if there is a formal declaration against the Christians but there is a great deal of "push-back" in the public forum.

Persecution is not a new thing with our faith, it has been around for a couple of thousand years. In the same book (The Bible) that Phil was referencing states in Matt 5:10, the persecuted will have the kingdom of heaven.

On the other hand, there is a formal declaration against non-Christians in the Christian dogma, to convert them if nothing else. Claiming "push-back" as persecution ignores that 1000 pound gorilla in the room.

[Chadanth]

Let's see, Phil was Not at the "workplace" & "off hours", so all the corporate law does not apply. Phil was speaking about "his faith", not your faith / belief, but HIS personal faith / belief. That (seperates) this cconversation between Civil rights (as an individual) & Corporate Law.

We have no idea what is in his contract with A&E, but they will frequently include provisions on interviews and media appearances. Regardless A&E knew beforehand what his views were, as cited in articles offered previously. He spoke his mind, and there were consequences from his employer. Happens all the time.

[OKVision4U]

Yes I agree the world would be a better place without sin but I don't consider being gay a sin. There are lots of sins listed in the Bible like wearing mixed cloth or doing any labor on the Sabbath, did he come out against those?

To all NON Christians, you may not get it. Phil was talking (referencing / quoting) The Bible. The Word of God. Phil was speaking about (sin) for ALL men / women.

Non Christians can read The Living Word of God, but you may not "understand" it.

[jerrywall]

Let's see, Phil was Not at the "workplace" & "off hours", so all the corporate law does not apply. Phil was speaking about "his faith", not your faith / belief, but HIS personal faith / belief. That (seperates) this cconversation between Civil rights (as an individual) & Corporate Law.

It would only be about civil rights if the government was prosecuting or punishing him for his comments in some way.

[OKVision4U]

On the other hand, there is a formal declaration against non-Christians in the Christian dogma, to convert them if nothing else. Claiming "push-back" as persecution ignores that 1000 pound gorilla in the room.

The Great Commission. To spread the gospel. To spread the message to All the Ends of the Earth. Now, the acceptance portion of that message is a personal decision only that person can decide.

[OKVision4U]

We have no idea what is in his contract with A&E, but they will frequently include provisions on interviews and media appearances. Regardless A&E knew beforehand what his views were, as cited in articles offered previously. He spoke his mind, and there were consequences from his employer. Happens all the time.

Yes, I'm sure there are a few (provisional) items listed ( but they would be specific) to a conduct. In Phil's position, we was speaking about "his personal belief". Let that "sink in". This is where the Civil Rights begin.

[OKVision4U]

It would only be about civil rights if the government was prosecuting or punishing him for his comments in some way.

No. Corporations are not above the Constitution.

[kelroy55]

To all NON Christians, you may not get it. Phil was talking (referencing / quoting) The Bible. The Word of God. Phil was speaking about (sin) for ALL men / women.

Non Christians can read The Living Word of God, but you may not "understand" it.

Seems he was also being selective on what sins he doesn't like.

[Chadanth]

Yes, I'm sure there are a few (provisional) items listed ( but they would be specific) to a conduct. In Phil's position, we was speaking about "his personal belief". Let that "sink in". This is where the Civil Rights begin.

You don't have a constitutional right to a tv show. He government didn't step in, or prohibit his speech. He wasn't jailed. He wasn't silenced. He spoke his mind, and his employer, or an entity he is contractually obligated to, apparently didn't like it. His rights weren't violated unless A&E violated a portion of their contract, which we are not privy to. So no, his "civil rights" are not in question.

[OKVision4U]

Seems he was also being selective on what sins he doesn't like.

No, that is not correct. Phil put them all in the same category... as equal in the eyes of the Lord. Phil was quoting this portion of The LIving Word of God. All sin is the same, that is what Phil was speaing about.

[onthestrip]

He didn't come out against anyone, he came out against sin. Maybe that is the part many of you are missing.

Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson says he is a lover not a hater | Mail Online

Wouldn't you agree that the world would be a better place if there was no sin?

In his attempt to come out against sin he compared homosexuals (who are born with these sexual desires) to having sex with an animal. He did the worst job of coming out against sin

And maybe you should just ask if the world would be a better place if there were no evil. There are things that Christians consider as sin that arent evil. Homosexuality is one of them. I dont consider a gay person as evil.

Gays sure get bashed a bunch for their "sinful" ways but why dont speeders get the same treatment. Isnt not obeying the law of the land considered a sin? Why dont we lump speeders together with homosexuals?

[OKVision4U]

You don't have a constitutional right to a tv show. He government didn't step in, or prohibit his speech. He wasn't jailed. He wasn't silenced. He spoke his mind, and his employer, or an entity he is contractually obligated to, apparently didn't like it. His rights weren't violated unless A&E violated a portion of their contract, which we are not privy to. So no, his "civil rights" are not in question.

It doesn't matter what any group ( Government / Corporation / Private Party Group : Teamsters ) likes / agrees w/ it or not. The Civil portion is seperate. In Federal Court, this will go all the way up and find Phil was "restricted / fired" him for his personal belief? Not in a workplace. Not on duty. Phil was "witnessing" as part of his faith / belief. When Phil was "restricted by this group", then he has merit.

[onthestrip]

Let's see, Phil was Not at the "workplace" & "off hours", so all the corporate law does not apply. Phil was speaking about "his faith", not your faith / belief, but HIS personal faith / belief. That (seperates) this cconversation between Civil rights (as an individual) & Corporate Law.

Corporate law? Tell me of this corporate law that A&E must follow. Because Im pretty sure A&E can follow pretty much follow their own "law" when it comes to the hiring and firing of their employees.

[Chadanth]

It doesn't matter what any group ( Government / Corporation / Private Party Group : Teamsters ) likes / agrees w/ it or not. The Civil portion is seperate. In Federal Court, this will go all the way up and find Phil was "restricted / fired" him for his personal belief? Not in a workplace. Not on duty. Phil was "witnessing" as part of his faith / belief. When Phil was "restricted by this group", then he has merit.

Do you have an example of that? It didn't go well for Paula Deen.

[OKVision4U]

Corporate law? Tell me of this corporate law that A&E must follow. Because Im pretty sure A&E can follow pretty much follow their own "law" when it comes to the hiring and firing of their employees.

REally, the structure that is "in-place" for all employers are the FEDERAL / Civil Rights (Constitutional ) portions of the law. That does not "go away". Like I said, Corporations must follow the Rules of the Road too.

[Chadanth]

REally, the structure that is "in-place" for all employers are the FEDERAL / Civil Rights (Constitutional ) portions of the law. That does not "go away". Like I said, Corporations must follow the Rules of the Road too.

You're saying that a corporation cannot fire someone for their speech?

[Roger S]

REally, the structure that is "in-place" for all employers are the FEDERAL / Civil Rights (Constitutional ) portions of the law. That does not "go away". Like I said, Corporations must follow the Rules of the Road too.

If you and I were to mutually agree to sign a legal contract that restricted you from using any adjectives while under that contract. The 1st Amendment would not help you in any way if you chose to use an adjective while the contract was binding and I fired you.

[OKVision4U]

Do you have an example of that? It didn't go well for Paula Deen.

These (2) items are seperated by "faith / belief / religion" w/ Phil and Paula's was not part of an organized religion w/ common practices. ie. witnessing for the Christians.

[Edmond_Outsider]

A person in Robertson's place has many bosses--direct and indirect. Most likely, his contract has a part which says he can be released if he does anything which is against the network's policy or does anything to make advertisers bail.

As for the theological argument, he is clearly elevating one catagory of sin above all others while committing many sins in the process. Then, he claims to be a sinner, but not as bad a sinner as those he rebukes. Theologically, this works for a particular ideology based theology--IE culture war theology.

One can debate the merits of this view all day. However, this is his and is not really any more valid than the millions of others proclaimed as the ultimate truth over thepast 2000 years.

The biggest sinner may be the one who claims to own the one truth in spirituality. It is most certainly the largest fallacy of theology to claim one size fits all.

In the southern baptist church I was raised in, I was told all must have the "personal" relationship to god and in the next sentence was usually as statement about that personal relationship needing to be defined by somebody else. This seemed inconsistant to me even as a grade schooler.

[Chadanth]

These (2) items are seperated by "faith / belief / religion" w/ Phil and Paula's was not part of an organized religion w/ common practices. ie. witnessing for the Christians.

There's no special carve-out for Christians. Speech is speech, protected (in theory) from government intrusion but not from contractual obligations.

[OKVision4U]

You're saying that a corporation cannot fire someone for their speech?

Yes at the workplace or if there are seperate or additional provisions excluding someone from a "listed" or specific behaviors.

Now, this provision is DOES NOT exclude them from the Federal Laws that are already in place for the Civil Rights / Constituon / Rules of the Road.

[onthestrip]

REally, the structure that is "in-place" for all employers are the FEDERAL / Civil Rights (Constitutional ) portions of the law. That does not "go away". Like I said, Corporations must follow the Rules of the Road too.

I think Im going to have to put you in the Prunepicker category and just stop responding to your posts because you clearly have no idea of what you are talking about.