My response will be in red.
The ‘Duck Dynasty’ Fiasco Says More About Our Bigotry Than Phil’s
Why is our go-to political strategy for beating our opponents to silence them? Why do we dismiss, rather than engage them?
By Brandon Marxist Dec. 19, 2013277 Comments
Phil Robertson at his home in western Ouachita Parish, La., on May 15, 2013.
Margaret Croft / The News-Star / AP
Phil Robertson at his home in western Ouachita Parish, La., on May 15, 2013.
Email Print Share Comment
Last night, GQ released a story about Duck Dynasty which quotes Phil’s thoughts about homosexuality:
“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.”
As you can imagine, everyone had an opinion about this statement, including GLAAD and Phil’s check-signer, A&E, who suspended the star indefinitely.
It is the calling it a sin that pisses them off Ambrosino leave out this part, “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.”
One of the conservative tweeters I follow—one of those Christians convinced that Obama is going to have him killed for his faith—lives for stuff like this. He quickly took to the Twitterverse and posted a side-by-side image of Pope Francis and Phil, with the following caption: “Both preach truth on homosexual sin. One is TIME’s Person of the Year. The other JUST GOT FIRED.”
Notice how how he describes one of the kookiest sound Christian that you can imagine in this day and age, someone who thinks he is important enough to the President of the United States that he is going to have him killed. If he indeed follows such a person on Twitter it would not surprise me to find out that he is a ringer, someone to be the straight man that sets himself up to take the joke.
(MORE: Why Phil Robertson Got Suspended from Duck Dynasty)
The point is worth considering. Even though Phil used crass, juvenile language to articulate his point, what he was getting at was his belief that homosexual “desire” is unnatural, and inherently disordered. This opinion isn’t unique to Phil. It’s actually shared by a majority of his fans.
I would agree that most of his fans consider themselves Christians, and would believe that homosexual offenders along with the greedy, practice of bestiality and adultery, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they will not inherit the kingdom of God unless they repent of their sins.
It’s also shared, to some extent, by the Pope. Yes, that Pope—the one on the cover not just of TIME but also of The Advocate.
This was shared by the majority of people in America it has been under the guise of gay rights that Progressives have and are waging a vicious, bigoted attack on heterosexual society, which is too docile to realize it. Liberals accuse their opponents of “hatred” but the hatred begins with them. As is explained here: How America went gay
Of course, The Advocate knows the Pope’s thoughts on LGBT issues, including marriage equality. But as they note, Francis’ “stark change in rhetoric from his two predecessors” has set a positive example for how religious people ought to treat LGBT persons—an example that Phil, an elder at the White’s Ferry Road Church of Christ, ought to have followed in his GQ interview.
What the Pope, be it Francis or any other, believes regarding anything is not binding upon the Protestants who left believing that was not infallible and has more right to proclaim anything more than any other believer. “[an] intrinsic moral evil,” in the words of the previous pope, I reckon he picks and chooses which pope he will refer to. Just why should an elder at the White’s Ferry Road Church of Christ, or any other Protestant Church, ought to follow the dictates of the leader which many believe to be the Church of Babalon?
To compare Papa Duck to Papa Francis, as conservatives are doing, is, in my opinion, to misrepresent both of them. Francis, though he privately holds to certain doctrine which some might see as “anti-gay,” has not used any of his public speaking opportunities to share these with the world. Instead, Francis has repeatedly offered grace to the LGBT community. At one point, he even uttered what might go down as the expression of public humility that singlehandedly saved the Church: “Who am I to judge?”
I know of no one who is comparing Papa Duck to Papa Francis other than Ambrosino. The LBGT people like this Pope because of his saying, “Who am I to judge?” We Christians are not called upon to judge who will be saved or damned, that is in God’s hands. However, we are called upon to judge a tree by its fruit, and a man by his action.
(MORE: Sarah Palin Defends Duck Dynasty Star Suspended For Anti-Gay Remarks)
Phil, on the other hand, went on record as rhetorically asking how any man could ever enjoy gay intercourse, since vaginal intercourse is better. (Which certainly makes you wonder how he’s able to make the comparison.)
That is an observation which GLLAD and the LGBT people do not share. One can tell that sticking one hand into a fire is different that picking up an ice cube without ever having pup one’s hand into a fire. That was a snide cheep comment.
There are two notable differences between the Pope’s views on sex, and Phil’s. First, the Pope is a trained philosopher, and has undoubtedly spent countless hours examining, challenging, and refining his views. Phil—if we are to take his brief statements on homosexuality as representative of his position—seems to hold a view on sex that manages to reduce the entire orthodox understanding of “desire” down to nothing more than a juvenile “tooshie = bad, vagina = good.”
This Pope is the results of the Marxist infiltrators of the Catholic Church the American Catholic Church is becoming a neo-pagan Marxist Revolutionary church. Francis will deny it but his words and actions demonstrates it. Without a doubt Robertson will put me into the category of ‘allummion wrapped heads’ group along with the guy who he says he thinks Obama is out to kill him, and Ann Barnhardt, Bty, is that guy still alive?
The second difference has to do with tone. In fairness to Phil, the tone of his off-the-cuff statements may not accurately represent his philosophy on this issue, but I do think it’s a fair representation of what many see as his southern charm. There’s a way to disagree with majority opinion without coming across as disagreeable. The Pope knows how to do this. Phil does not. As a result, we respect Papa, and shame Phil.
In my opinion Phil is expressing the majority opinion, it is the screaming of the very small minority that makes it solid like he is not in the majority. What is that Robertson found disagreeable? It can be nothing other than Phil calling the homosexual act a sin. That is what he finds so disagreeable, Phil calling what he thinks is a spade a spade.
For the record, I’m undecided on whether or not I think Phil actually is homophobic, although I certainly think his statement was offensive, and not only to the LGBT community. But I also think that if I were to spend a day calling ducks with Phil, I’d probably end up liking him—even in spite of his position on gay men. It’s quite possible to throw one’s political support behind traditional, heterosexual marriage, and yet not be bigoted.
Homophobic, that is a made up word to cover anyone who thinks homosexual act are wrong and speak up about it. It is used to isolate, marginize, and ridicule those who works against the homosexual agenda.
I’m reminded of something Bill Maher said during the height of the Paula Deen controversy: “Do we always have to make people go away?” I think the question applies in this situation, too.
That does seem to be the design, make anyone that disagrees with you to be so severely pounced upon that other’s will think twice before they speak out in a way you disapprove.
Why is our go-to political strategy for beating our opponents to silence them? Why do we dismiss, rather than engage them? One of the biggest pop culture icons of today just took center stage to “educate” us about sexuality. I see this as an opportunity to further the discussion, to challenge his limited understanding of human desire, to engage with him and his rather sizeable audience—most of whom, by the way, probably share his views—and to rise above the endless sea of tweet-hate to help move our LGBT conversations to where they need to go.
What the LGBT need to do is just live your lives as you will and leave people like Phill alone for speaking his heart felt beliefs.
GK Chesterton said that bigotry is “an incapacity to conceive seriously the alternative to a proposition.” If he is right—and he usually is—then I wonder if the Duck Dynasty fiasco says more about our bigotry than Phil’s.
Brandon Ambrosino is a writer and professional dancer based in Baltimore.
Read the original: Times Artical