I didn't know what "Duck Dynasty" was until just a couple of months ago. I had seen the title around; noticed a story about how the "liberals" find it difficult to understand why the show is popular; then happened across a video on YouTube with the male "stars" of that show just mostly listening to Phil talk about what seemed to be mainstream, Southern, evangelical, "conservative" views on Christianity and whatnot.
Now I see plastered all over the mainstream news, which is decidedly false-liberal, that they are all riled up about what Phil Robertson said in this linked interview on Conde Nast's "GQ" magazine's online version: Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Gives Drew Magary a Tour.
Let me say that the author's foul mouth is what offended me.
If Phil Robertson has been suspended for what's in that interview, then he was suspended for repeating the teachings of Paul, which comes straight out of the canonical New Testament. If Phil has been suspended for that, then he has been discriminated against for his religion, a religion that what forefront in the minds of "We the People of the United States" when we passed the Bill of Rights, which includes the First Amendment and the "free exercise" clause.
Homosexuals didn't want to be suspended or fired anymore for being homosexual. People gave them more and more leeway until now in many places, it is against the law to discriminate against anyone for what's termed his or her "sexual orientation." However, it painfully appears that in granting those homosexuals what they wanted, it means in the minds of many that Freedom of Religion is to be sacrificed, abolished.
Phil can't quote Paul. All churches that preach Paul will be crucified if they don't stop.
Imagine that. If you want to take up a religion, you may do so provided you are not free to exercise it in the same manner that it was being exercised when the First Amendment became the law of the land.
There are competing ideologies. There are competing arguments. Those opposed to Christianity bring up Old Testament laws allowing slavery. They mention that people claiming to be Christian were slave owners and defended their position by citing verses from the Bible (Old Testament). Well, that's all fine. However, there reaches a point where that sort of approach bumps right into competing positions that aren't dispensable.
Jesus didn't okay slavery, and Abolitionists knew it and said it against those who held slaves while claiming Christianity. It is abundantly clear that no one could follow Jesus and retain slaves.
What we also know is that a man's penis is not for a man's anus and rectum, and that to put the one in the other is a fundamental error, clearly. It is a mistake, a mistake of the mind and body. One doesn't need Jesus or Paul to know it. It's obvious on its face. A penis doesn't belong in another males mouth or hand for masturbation, etc. Males do not belong together sexually. All instances of it are errors, whether in humans or animals (which situations are vastly overblown by homosexual activists for false-propagandistic purposes). It doesn't matter anyway because human beings are not supposed to take their sexual cues from animals.
Anal intercourse is not healthy. The lining of the rectum is not designed for the friction. It rips. The act is a major vector for further disease. Homosexual males in the US are still becoming infected with HIV/AIDS in large numbers even though they know full well about it.
"Safe sex" is not the answer! Homosexual males are hugely promiscuous. It is an inherent part of the disease. The exceptions make the rule.
Many, if not most, homosexuals become so due to sexual abuse in their youth, often at extremely early ages, so early that the youths can't remember not having homosexuality imprinted upon their thoughts when considering other males.
You see, if I'm not to be allowed to say these things, then the US is fascist: a homosexual-fascist state. Freedom of Religion is dead. Freedom of speech is dead. Freedom of the press is dead. Freedom of Christians to assemble to worship quoting Paul openly in opposition to homosexuality is dead. Quoting Jesus concerning Jesus's opposition to fornication and adultery is dead (all homosexual acts in Jesus's time were one or the other and sinful acts, per Jesus). Quoting Jesus that a man leaves his parents to marry a woman, not a male, is dead.
Truth is dead. God is dead.
However, God is not dead, and those who continue to the end pushing against the truth will find that out. They will find out that it is they who are dead.
I look forward to the separation. I wish it were already here.
Phil is right about repentance and that living in accordance with the teachings of Jesus is the solution to all that ails humanity.
I'm not saying that I know that Phil is perfected. I am not saying that I'm perfected.
I'm also sure I disagree with some of Phil's theology, and I don't kill or eat ducks; but I think Phil won't hold that against me.