Phil Robertson, A&E, and Free Speech

Camille Paglia - a lesbian, feminist, liberal whose thoughts are usually highly intelligent and insightful.

Doug Wilson - a straight, theonomist, conservative whose thoughts are usually highly intelligent and insightful.

(some possibly mildly offensive language at that second link)

I am disappointed at the apparent ignorance of some of the above posters. I mean that!

This isn’t about whether the Robertson’s believe in baptismal regeneration. This isn’t about whether you watch Duck Dynasty. This isn’t about cultural separation. This isn’t about Deliverance. This isn’t about whether Phil was too crass. This isn’t about how much money they make this holiday season…

This is about ONE THING. The homosexual agenda. The homosexual lobby is coming after anyone who DARE opposes them. They will run them over by getting them fired and publically humiliated. Next, they’ll get them thrown in jail. After that to the Colliseum!

If you think the US is not on the expressway to jail time for people who speak out against homosexuality you need to wake up now. And don’t think that pulpit will protect you. Look to Canada and Europe for that.

We need to support Phil’s right to express his views and to pray that the gospel would reach into the cold and stoney hearts around us (and maybe in ourselves) to deliver us from this coming nightmare!

The homosexual lobby is coming after anyone who DARE opposes them. They will run them over by getting them fired and publically humiliated. Next, they’ll get them thrown in jail. After that to the Colliseum!

So as we pray for our leaders that we might live quiet and peaceable lives, we should prepare ourselves to be ready to rejoice and be exceeding glad that we are counted worthy to be partakers of His suffering.

Yes, the family is standing behind them.

Also, their doctrinal beliefs are not so simple as “they believe in baptismal regeneration” as if it were in the Catholic sense. If you have watched their personal testimony videos, they give a crystal clear presentation of the Gospel. There also used to be a Gospel presentation video on the church web site, but I can’t find it now. If I’m not mistaken, they view baptism as an essential component of salvation, in that a true believer WILL get baptized, but I don’t believe they think that baptism in and of itself saves, but rather faith in Christ.

And Andrew K nailed it. Even if you don’t like Phil Robertson, or Duck Dynasty, or the Church of Christ, or his crude comments, this is a major front in the culture war. The question is, Can you be a television personality and say what the bible says about homosexuality? The answer is, apparently you can’t. And if you think, “Well, so what? Christians don’t need to be on reality TV shows anyway,” fine. But do you think it will stop with television personalities?

To make this crystal clear, the editor for the Huffington Post Gay Voices said on CNN yesterday that quoting from the Bible like Phil Robertson did is “hate speech”: His exact words: “What he was engaging in was hate speech, and to shroud it in the Bible is ludicrous and ridiculous. The Bible promotes slavery. The Bible has promoted polygamy. The Bible has promoted a lot of things that we don’t tolerate including racism. This man made racist remarks as well. He said that blacks were better off during Jim Crow when there were lynchings [that’s not what he said by the way]. It was better off than before they were getting welfare…So he made reckless and irresponsible comments, shrouding it in the Bible I think is a cop out. There are horrific statements in the Bible about a lot of people and a lot of groups of people that we don’t say that’s OK you can say on television.”

The last sentence was kind of convoluted because he was getting cut off by the host, but stop and think about what he is saying: Basically, there are a lot of statements in the Bible that it is not OK to say on television, and what Phil Robertson said about homosexuals is one of them (because Phil quoted directly from 1 Corinthians 6). It is hate speech.

God also gave you freedom in this nation, and the right to express your views and opinions, and to vote. Don’t forget to do those AS WELL AS pray. We must do all we can to keep our God given political and cultural freedoms in this nation.

I suspect that what really got under their skin was his swipe at entitlements and welfare. These are the two sacraments of the religion of liberalism, and he desecrated them.

I think once the pseudo-persecution rants die off, the big ideas to be wrestled with are:

1) The racism angle to this that Bixby writes about

2) How to intelligently and compassionately discuss the sin of homosexuality with the world

3) Whether Christians need Phil Robertson as a mouthpiece

Wow GregH. What rock do you live under? Go to your local public university and announce you think homosexuality is a sin. Do it in a loving way. As compassionate as you want. You will be removed from the premesis. If you are an employee there you will be sanctioned or fired. Is that persecution?

Several universities have adopted or are seriously discussing official policies that even THINKING homosexuality is wrong, not just expressing it vocally, is intolerance and bias! I can’t provide a link but I have been to faculty conferences and meetings where this is SERIOUSLY discussed…and they mean it.

Was what Phil Robertson said racist? Maybe, maybe not. We just can’t tell from the quote and from the article.

Here is the quote from the article:

Phil On Growing Up in Pre-Civil-Rights-Era Louisiana: “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.”

Some points to be noted:

1. Phil has a biracial grandson.
2. He is talking about his personal experiences with black people he knew in the south. To say he was talking about ALL blacks is reading into his statement.
3. I see a lot of statements of fact about his personal experiences; I do not see any judgments about the rightness of wrongness of it. I think it’s reading WAY too much into it to make Phil say: “I don’t see a problem with the way blacks were treated.”
4. This “quote” was in a quote box set apart from the rest of the article with no context given or even the question that was asked him.
5. Notice the use of “…” So, we don’t have 1) the question(s) he was asked, 2) the context of his answers, and 3) his full statement.

So Greg, when 1) bakers/photographers are being forced (fined) to serve homosexuals, and 2) when a TV personality is indefinitely suspended for quoting the Bible’s views on homosexuality (he was NOT suspended for his crude language or so-called racist langauge), and 3) someone on CNN says it is hate speech to quote the Bible, you dismiss it all as “pseudo-persecution”? Well, you are right—no one has been thrown to the lions. But I think it deserves more than a shrug of the shoulders and a wave of the hand.

[Greg Long]

Was what Phil Robertson said racist? Maybe, maybe not. We just can’t tell from the quote and from the article.

Here is the quote from the article:

Phil On Growing Up in Pre-Civil-Rights-Era Louisiana: “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.”

Some points to be noted:

1. Phil has a biracial grandson.
2. He is talking about his personal experiences with black people he knew in the south. To say he was talking about ALL blacks is reading into his statement.
3. I see a lot of statements of fact about his personal experiences; I do not see any judgments about the rightness of wrongness of it. I think it’s reading WAY too much into it to make Phil say: “I don’t see a problem with the way blacks were treated.”
4. This “quote” was in a quote box set apart from the rest of the article with no context given or even the question that was asked him.
5. Notice the use of “…” So, we don’t have 1) the question(s) he was asked, 2) the context of his answers, and 3) his full statement.

Like you, I am making no judgment on whether Phil is racist but the racial angle to this hits home because I have seen the very same attitude in the deep south my entire life. There are people I know including family that will never admit that black people were mistreated in the 1940-1960 era. They all sound a lot like Phil. Things were good then for black people according to them. But then, those black people could not use the bathrooms at the homes they worked at as servants. They were viewed (as Phil accurately put it) on a level with “white trash.” The irony and inconsistency of this logic just goes right over their head. Bixby claims almost the entire white generation of that time was like that. I think he is overspeaking there but there are certainly a lot of people to this day from that era that have those blinders on.

[Greg Long]

Also, their doctrinal beliefs are not so simple as “they believe in baptismal regeneration” as if it were in the Catholic sense. If you have watched their personal testimony videos, they give a crystal clear presentation of the Gospel. There also used to be a Gospel presentation video on the church web site, but I can’t find it now. If I’m not mistaken, they view baptism as an essential component of salvation, in that a true believer WILL get baptized, but I don’t believe they think that baptism in and of itself saves, but rather faith in Christ.

I don’t think you understand the Church of Christ to make this statement. They absolutely believe in baptismal regeneration. It is not anywhere near as innocuous as you suppose.

I’m not commenting on the Robertsons - I think both parties have every right to say and do what they have done, but both must face the consequences. I’ve never been too impressed with the DD folks, they are hardly my ideal of any kind of so-called Christian testimony. I am less impressed with A&E and the constant pandering to the gay agenda.

Thanks for the advice, Don, and as I did some more research, I found the post below, which seems to support what I said. It is difficult to understand exactly what Churches of Christ teach, and various Churches of Christ may differ on this point, but an elder from White’s Ferry Road Church of Christ (where the Robertsons attend) basically baptism does not save you, but you must be baptized in order to be saved. Obviously as a Baptist I disagree. But do I believe we will see them in heaven? Based on their testimony of faith in Christ, I would guess yes.

http://hereiblog.com/duck-dynasty-some-clarity-baptism/

I am not a Roberson apologist, I’ve never even watched an entire DD show. Sure their show is silly and yes it may not fit into our fundamentalist or new evagelical sensibilities, but I don’t care. I don’t look to them to be my role model other than I do respect their family values and that they routinely publically share their faith.

In a day where people like Lady Gaga, Miley Cyrus and the Kartrashians are honored and celebrated I think a “reality” family like the Robertsons are refreshing and worth supporting. By this I mean they are people of Bibilical faith (as opposed to a catholic “faith”) and they live out quality family values.

I could care less if their show is silly or not, in fact what I have seen of their show I liked it. I don’t even care if they are the same brand of Christian as I am. I know their show is entertainment and they don’t define my faith and walk as a believer.

To be honest, I think much of what I’ve seen from a fundamentalist or new evangelical POV including some on this thread are being unnecessarily harsh and nit-picky on DD and this family. Honestly, some people just need to lighten-up.

I choose to get involved with this issue in a couple small ways because as Mark Smith said above this is really about the homosexual agenda.

@Mark Smith, good comments.

You may be right, Greg, but I just don’t think we can judge for certain based on the lack of context and the full quote. Don’t you think it’s reasonable to assume that the reporter (who mocked the Robertsons and their faith throughout the article) might take something out of context?

Also, as to your point about Phil Robertsons and the DD folks being some kind of Christian “spokesmen.” Who is calling them that? They certainly don’t speak for me, and I’m the one defending them on here.

Here is the point that everyone must keep in mind: Phil Robertson was suspended from his job simply for publicly declaring his belief in God’s view of homosexuality. “Well, it’s a TV show, and he’s in the public eye…” Yes, but think of the implications for any other newscaster, sportscaster, etc. And if you think it will stop with TV personalities…

Another point to make. This morning CNN was repeatedly playing a clip from 2010 where Phil was preaching at Berean Bible Church somewhere in Pennsylvania. In the clip he was paraphrasing Romans 1:26-31, but the brief clip made it seem like he was saying homosexuals are murderers and God-haters. (Of course, CNN had no idea he was kind-of quoting the Bible, they thought it was just a “rant.”) Do you understand that we are nearing the time when quoting Romans 1 will be considered hate speech and cause you to lose your job?