In Defense Of Phil Robertson
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.”
“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and most extreme statements uttered against LGBT people in a mainstream publication” and “his quote was littered with outdated stereotypes and blatant misinformation.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I’m happy to inform the perverts of GLADD that the Bible is not and never will be “outdated” and your perversion and sick behavior has brought misery and disease to millions of people around the world.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