Skip to content

In Defense Of Phil Robertson

December 18, 2013

I haven’t seen anyone come to this guy’s defense though I’m sure it’s a tricky situation. I’m talking (writing, in this case) about the guy from Duck Dynasty who criticized the gay community. Phil Robertson basically said that the behavior of homosexuals is wrong. Personally I admire the guy, making a stand against deviant, immoral and dangerous behavior. A & E blasted the guy and placed him placed under hiatus from filming indefinitely. (for those who don’t know, mostly liberals,  “hiatus” is a break or a period of time from doing something)

Mr. Robertson said, “It seems like, to me, a vagina — as a man — would be more desirable than a man’s anus.  That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”

and

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.”

Then the guy quoted, really paraphrased, scriptures from the Bible … “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers — they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

And the organization GLAAD commented that what he said was  “some of the vilest and most extreme statements uttered against LGBT people in a mainstream publication” and “his quote was littered with outdated stereotypes and blatant misinformation.

What???  He brings out the truth of deviant life choices and they are the “vilest and most extreme statements uttered?”

I’m happy to inform the perverts of GLADD that the Bible is not and never will be “outdated” and your perversion and sick behavior has brought misery and disease to millions of people around the world.

I’m sick of the committed  “loving couples” line of crap we’re constantly fed. If that’s a justification for perversion, why not if a 14-year-old “loves” a 60-year-old?  How about if a mother “loves” her son as a lover and desires a committed relationship with him? How about if a father “loves” his daughter as a lover and desires a “committed” relationship with her?  How about if three 50-year-old men “love” a 13-year-old boy? How about if a 25-year-old female “loves” her male German Shepherd and all of them claim to be “committed” in their “love” for one another?  Why aren’t those situations acceptable, if it’s all about “love” and “committment?”

He was attacked and was accused of showing “disdain” for  LGBT people and families which is not true. He condemned their life choices. “Choices” is the key word here. I know, I know, we’ve been fed a line of certified b.s. that homosexuality isn’t a choice but it’s as natural as a young lady “loving” her dog … er … as natural as a man loving a woman.

Now the guy didn’t say he was “better” than anyone else or claim to be superior. To me it just seems he’s read the “rule book” and that book says what he quoted.

Anyway, I have gay friends and they know where I stand on the life they have chosen. We get along and they are actually very nice people. But when it comes down to the “nut-cuttin'”, God’s word will prevail in the end. I suggest for all those who haven’t read the “rule book” (that’s God’s rule book) to read it for yourselves instead of looking like indignant hateful morons, when you spout off the only partial scripture you know … “don’t judge me” … and use it out of context.

HERE  is the article

 

About these ads
23 Comments leave one →
  1. December 18, 2013 9:17 pm

    There is a purpose for sex. It is for procreation. Our Creator was smart enough to make it a very desirable act so that we would procreate. The hedonists have degraded the act of making love to one’s wife or husband. Homosexual sex is degradation of the purpose of the act. Pure and Simple. Peace Robert Walker

    • December 19, 2013 3:53 am

      Thank you Robert for your most welcomed and spot-on comment!

    • James Walker permalink
      December 19, 2013 7:21 am

      So people who cannot procreate (infertile couples, women after menopause), should stop having sex?

    • December 19, 2013 7:47 am

      Mr. Walker, I’m hoping you’re just being somewhat facetious and that you’re not in reality demonstrating a negative capacity of intellectual capability.

  2. December 19, 2013 12:40 am

    Reblogged this on UsneakydevilU.

  3. prtyfedup permalink
    December 19, 2013 1:37 am

    Believe me, I wrote A&E and told them I am boycotting them and lots of other “things”; wrote GLAAD and even looked them up at Guidestar and found they won’t publish the pay of the ceo or anyone else (you can get it if you want to pay for it), and support Phil all the way. God made man as he did and woman as he did to create and bear and that is the way it is like it or not. If you research and find out all of the diseases and surgeries homosexuals have it is disgusting and scarey. It is believed in the scientific/medical field, something goes wrong during pregnancy which creates an issue with the part of the brain which determines your sexuality. Homosexuality is in reality a birth defect. With all the politics regarding it being a choice I don’t think anyone will be doing studies on how to correct it or treat it as a birth defect. The gay people I have known, two were Vietnam veterans and one of them died of AIDS. The other was a member of the choir at his Christian based church. He told me after his friend died, who would want to be born gay? It isn’t something one would wish on themself, he told me. However, neither of them flaunted the fact they were gay and neither of them joined GLADD. And many times they were embarassed by the actions and activities of other gay people. That a person in this country can’t voice his opinions without be chastised or rather punished, is saying our America is heading towards a socialist democracy and away from being a republic. I am hoping the whole family tells A&E to stick it where the sun don’t shine, turn their backs and walk away.

    • December 19, 2013 7:59 am

      Over 50% of all new aids cases are the result of homosexual activity and gays make up less than 4% of the population. Why shouldn’t this in and of itself be a wake-up call to everyone?

  4. December 19, 2013 2:10 am

    When society disregards the Wisdom of the Ages and tries to redefine marriage, that is a very radical thing to do. It is bad for society and bad for bringing up children.

    • James Walker permalink
      December 19, 2013 7:28 am

      What exactly is the definition of marriage in the Wisdom of the Ages? I’ve read the Bible cover-to-cover twice and read many passages in Sunday school and church hundreds of times…and I’ve yet to find ONE definition of marriage. I’ve found examples of polygamy, of men selling their daughters into marriage (as was common practice in ancient times), of men raping their slaves (according to God sexual intercourse is a union akin to marriage), etc. Where does the Bible say “and marriage will be one man and one woman joined in love”? Not to say it condones gay marriage (because it doesn’t)…but let’s not pretend that it defines something that it doesn’t.

    • December 19, 2013 7:52 am

      Mr. Walker, apparently you missed some scriptures in your “cover to cover” examination of the Bible.

      I seem to recall Christ saying something like: “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.”

      Define that however you like friend, but don’t pretend it doesn’t mean exactly what it says.

    • James Walker permalink
      December 19, 2013 8:15 am

      I think the point, Cry and Howl, is that the Bible doesn’t provide one definition of marriage. Nor does human cultural history. It wasn’t 50 years ago that the idea of miscegenation was viewed as against the Bible, and now it’s commonly accepted (although many in the most conservative circles still cry fowl); polygamy was outlawed, but before that, in certain cultures–including the Judeo-Christian one–it wasn’t frowned upon; it was common for members of the aristocracy to continue to inter-breed within their families to maintain their fortunes, not something the Bible speaks out against particularly clearly.

      The best argument for a “definition” of marriage in the Bible is the idea that the church is wedded to Jesus as the bride to the bride-groom. But even Abraham had a child with his slave, and Solomon had hundreds of wives. And the world did not revolt and God did not condemn.

    • December 19, 2013 9:05 am

      Polygamy was acceptable until Christ’s teaching of the man cleaving to his wife and they two shall be one flesh. Two will become one. Polygamy seems to be in direct conflict with this. We must take into consideration the cultures and literally thousands of years. Solomon would have done well to listen to his own advise in the Proverbs and perhaps he wouldn’t have allowed his wives to turn his heart … who knows?
      I don’t think God had any problem with miscegenation as Moses was married to an Ethiopian woman. Again, who knows?
      I think, and this is just me, that had God meant for two men or two women to become “one flesh”, when he saw that the man he created needed a mate … he made a woman, not another man.
      I think also, (geez I hate that expression, “I think”, but what can I say?) that God created man in his image and at the time he breathed into his creation “the breath of life” and man became a living soul … the heart knows what’s right and wrong. That “living soul” and the conscious is what separates us from animals and keeps us as free moral agents … being free moral agents we have the capacity to make choices. God recommends choosing life.
      As far as the church being “the bride of Christ”, I have opinions that would be a topic for another time.
      Thank you for your comments and you’re welcome here anytime.

  5. December 19, 2013 4:37 am

    Ol’ Phil is determined to get into trouble. First, they censor him for praying in Jesus’ name and now they are putting his show on hold because he had the audacity to speak the truth. I say good for him for being unafraid of this crowd of politically correct morons.

    • December 19, 2013 5:09 am

      Amen L.D.
      I’ve noticed a lot of people are coming to his defense now. It’s about time people stood up to this perversion. It’s isn’t as “popular” or as “normal” as the liberals and perverts would have us to believe. Does the Chick-fil-a boycott sound familiar? That should have opened a lot of folks eyes that just because people aren’t actually voicing their objections to homosexuality, they don’t condone it either.

    • christinewjc permalink
      December 19, 2013 9:40 am

      Well said LD Jackson!

      The truth is, the entire Robertson family doesn’t need more money, they don’t need that T.V. show, and they certainly don’t need A&E’s continual bigotry towards them! A&E will probably end up shooting themselves in their own a$$es over this controversy!

  6. christinewjc permalink
    December 19, 2013 9:35 am

    Steve! You are going to love this! Here is what my husband wrote to A&E’s feedback page:

    “I can’t believe you wimps are screwing with the best show on television. You have shown your intolerance by not letting a Christian man express his views. Do we all have to kiss the gay a$$ just because you do? You are screwing with a winning formula you dumb a$$es and I plan to let your advertisers know my feelings and will do what I can to discourage everyone I know to not support corporations that advertise on A&E other than Duck Dynasty’s advertisers.”

    Ha ha ha! As a retired corporate executive, my husband KNOWS how to get ‘em where it hurts!

    It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

    • December 19, 2013 11:01 am

      Two thumbs up for your husband Christine. Getting hit in the old pocketbook is the oldest form of demonstrating how stupid people can be.

  7. sstorm0730 permalink*
    December 19, 2013 9:50 am

    I am going to remove myself from the gay/straight aspects of this conversation. I do not believe that this is the important point in the story. Our First Amendment rights are.

    I do not condone hate speech, but this was NOT hate speech. It was simply a man expressing his opinion and using the Bible to make his point. Now, being an Originalist, I do not feel the Constitution is a living, breathing document open to being interpreted according to one’s personal beliefs or political aspirations. Mr. Robertson is entitled to Free Speech and others are entitled to REASONED, CALM speech of their own.

    When free speech becomes hate speech is when someone condones or incites others to commit violence against another, a la Martin Bashir. Mr. Robertson did not in any way try to incite others to commit violence in the article.

    I have lost two people in my life to AIDs – one heterosexual and one gay. It is a disease that affects all walks of life. It is not the issue here, though. Free speech is and that is what is systematically being attacked in America today.

    Katrina

    • December 19, 2013 11:03 am

      Good points Katrina! I believe we’ll be seeing the real “hate” speech coming soon.

  8. christinewjc permalink
    December 19, 2013 10:23 am

    Steve,

    These comments reflect what they homosexual community does not want revealed about their perversion:

    “What??? He brings out the truth of deviant life choices and they are the “vilest and most extreme statements uttered?”

    I’m happy to inform the perverts of GLADD that the Bible is not and never will be “outdated” and your perversion and sick behavior has brought misery and disease to millions of people around the world.”

    Phil’s so-called “vilest and most extreme statements” tell the truth about the sinful perversion of homosexual deviancy! Telling people that a woman’s anatomy is preferred over the man’s place for defecation puts a spotlight right on the illogical sexual perversion which leads to your second statement!

    Last night, on the Kelly File, she gave too much time to that man who identified himself as a “Jewish gay.” [Note: HIS words, not mine!] Well, the guy apparently never read the Babylonian Talmud which describes that “men marrying men” and “women marrying women” was one of the perversions that led to the great Flood in Noah’s day!

    Included a link to your post, Steve in my new post:

    Phil Robertson is Correct: Homosexual Behavior is Sinful and Illogical

    • December 19, 2013 11:05 am

      I’m not the most eloquent or most articulate person when writing but at least we can still voice (write) what our positions are.
      Thank you for linking back here Christine. Gotta get over to Talk Wisdom today.

Trackbacks

  1. Phil Robertson is Correct: Homosexual Behavior Is Sinful and Illogical | Talk Wisdom

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 473 other followers

%d bloggers like this: