1 - 3
While I appreciate that Camille Paglia expressed disdain about how liberals attempt to violate the free speech rights of those who have biblical objections to homosexuality, even she expressed an idea that needs to be challenged. She said that "people have the right to be homophobic as they have the right to support homosexuality" So, apparently Paglia has bought into the idea that, if you don't support the gay lifestyle, then that automatically means that you are homophobic. What does that word mean exactly? I looked up the definition and found: 1. "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals" (merriam-webster.com) 2. "Fear of or contempt for lesbians or gay men" (thefreedictionary) 3, "prejudiced against homosexual people" (worldnetweb.princton.edu) Those who hold to the belief that the Bible condemns any sex outside of marriage (whether hetero- or homo- sexual) don't typically have a fear of, contempt for, or prejudices against homosexuals anymore than they would against those guilty of any other sin. It's just that they believe that lifestyle violates God's law of sexuality which is: only one man and one woman within the bonds of matrimony. To label everyone who objects to homosexuality for any reason as a homophobe is a bit disingenuous but use of that term by gay supporters seems to have become mandatory. It is such a highly overused word that it really should be on the yearly overused-words-to-drop lists. So, no, not everyone who objects to homosexuality is a homophobe.
My thoughts exactly!
"A source close to the show tells FOX411 that even if Robertson apologized, at this point, A&E is done with him." What is it exactly that A&E feels that Phil Robertson should apologize for and why? Personally, I don't think HE is the one who needs to be apologizing. GLAAD owes him an apology for making a mountain out of a mole hill. Robertson expressed his opinion on sin and used the Bible as his reference and GLAAD totally - but typically - overreacted with a response that was truly vile. But, GLAAD doesn't care about that; they are only interested in bullying or intimidating anyone who doesn't agree with them into silence. They want the public to understand and support gay rights but they apparently don't care to understand those who have religious objections. For the same reason, A&E owes him an apology for not sitting down with him and discussing the matter before they pompously handed down their royal decree to get rid of him. They have made millions of dollars of profit off of his show which reflects the Robertsons' conservative Christian values and then to turn around and bar him from his own show because he expresses his conservative Christian beliefs is shameless and hypocritical. The Robertsons were wealthy before Duck Dynasty came along and they'll do well if the show ends. It's A&E who will suffer the most and, at this point, I believe that they deserve it.
1 - 3