‘Duck Dynasty’ Family Issues Statement Standing Behind Patriarch

'Duck Dynasty' Suspension: Family Stands Behind

The Robertson family, stars of the A&E hit show “Duck Dynasty,” is fully behind family patriarch Phil Robertson following his suspension from the show for anti-gay comments, and says they cannot imagine doing the show without him.

A statement on the family’s website, posted Thursday evening, reads:

We want to thank all of you for your prayers and support. The family has spent much time in prayer since learning of A&E’s decision. We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word. While some of Phil’s unfiltered comments to the reporter were coarse, his beliefs are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. Phil is a Godly man who follows what the Bible says are the greatest commandments: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Phil would never incite or encourage hate.We are disappointed that Phil has been placed on hiatus for expressing his faith, which is his constitutionally protected right.We have had a successful working relationship with A&E but, as a family, we cannot imagine the show going forward without our patriarch at the helm. We are in discussions with A&E to see what that means for the future of Duck Dynasty. Again, thank you for your continued support of our family.

A&E suspended Robertson indefinitely following the release of an interview he did with GQ magazine in which he made several controversial remarks regarding homosexuality.

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 209

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

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

  1. Kathryn Encinas says:

    Saying that Christians are “persecuting” ANYONE is an out and out LIE!!! Apparently the one who thinks that never picked up a history book let alone a bible. It’s a matter of public & historic record that Christians have been the ones being persecuted for THOUSANDS of years, since the time of Jesus the Christ. We were beaten simply for our beliefs, thrown to the lions in arenas just to see us being torn apart, crucified (not with nails) for believing in the all powerful God & his Father and not the false gods that the government and others of their cities prayed to. Christians have NEVER persecuted ANYONE. Simply stating what it says in the Bible is not persecution, it’s just quoting what the Bible states as fact. Certain people called atheists and agnostics don’t believe in any kind of higher power. They think that because of THEIR beliefs that they are the higher, more intelligent power among the rest of the human population. The think that they are BETTER than Christians. A highly intelligent scientist stated that, “Anyone who can look at the wonders in a drop of water or a leaf and say that there is no God is a fool.” ~ Dr. Albert Einstein

  2. Brian Dzyak says:

    Christians asking for tolerance after centuries of persecuting anyone who doesn’t share their belief structure.


    Happy Holidays!

  3. Brian Dzyak says:

    “Gee, Brian, maybe I’ll ask my Jewish wife and all of my Jewish in-laws about your comments. OK, just had the wife read your comments. She says not only are you a fascist, but you are also a putz. But that’s ok because she calls me worse Yiddish names.”

    You’re hilarious. I’m a fascist because I don’t want someone else’s religious beliefs to be forced onto the general population?! Seriously, buy a dictionary. Get one for your wife too. Does your wife want to force everyone else to not eat pork, or was that point lost on the both of you?

    “Seriously, Brian, if you don’t see how your views of others is fascist, then this conversation is not going to convince you to look into yourself to realize how hateful and fascist you are behaving. ”

    I’m behaving like a responsible caring adult, arguing against the idea that someone else’s hateful intolerant bigotry should be permitted to fester in our society. If you don’t see how your views of religious zealots is bigoted and destructive to society and to the individual rights of others, then this conversation is not going to convince you to look into yourself to realize how hateful and repressive you are behaving.

    “This Phil Robertson duck guy stated clearly that he loves all people, no matter what their beliefs. That is what Jesus Christ teaches, and that is what Mr. Robertson stated. As a follower of Judeo-Christian teachings, especially those teachings of Jesu Christ, I wish I could say I have been successful in being as good as Mr. Robertson on the “Love one another as I love you.” theme from Jesus’s teachings.”

    So basically, and your your hero Phil are saying, “Hey, you gay people are all despicable sinners in the same category as drunks, terrorists, and those degenerates who have sex with ducks (and we’ve given you the tools to attract them), but ya know, still luv ya!”

    It’s a cute sentiment, to insult someone as being so low that they will be in Hell before the Sun burns out but claim that you luv ’em. You guys are adorable. Do you insult your wife and damn her to eternal Hell for not believing in the Lord Jesus Christ as her Savior before telling her how much you love her?

    “If loving one another as Jesus Christ loves us is bothersome to you, you have the right to those feelings. What you do not have a right to do is to dictate how others feel and believe. That is fascism.”

    For the Love of God, PLEASE buy a dictionary and look up fascism. In standard Conservative fashion, you want to redefine any words that you want just to pretend to hurl insults. I mean, there are likely many epithets you could use which may be accurate, but fascist certainly isn’t one of them.

    And “loving one another as JC loves us” isn’t bothersome to me, but it must be to you and your Phil-supporters because JC would never have condemned homosexuals to Hell with Terrorists, drunkards, and duck-f**ckers the way y’all do.

    “Jesus also teaches us not to throw our pearls before swine, as I am guilty of doing with you. I just needed to let you know how silly you are to assume so much about me that you would make stupid comments involving Jews when I have grown up in a heavily Jewish area and have married into a Jewish family.”

    Dear God, what assumptions did I make about Jews? ALL I asked was if Jews were attempting to force others to not eat pork. What possible “assumption” did I make in presenting that question? The point (which was clearly lost on you and your dear doomed wife) is that other religions get along just fine not attempting to cast stones and force others to live according to their religious beliefs. But for some reason, so-called Christians have some irrational need to ram their own religious beliefs down the throat of society. From abortion to homosexuals, so-called Christians just can’t “live their faith” alone, they just have to make sure everyone else knows about it and lives by it too.

    You’re not a Fascist for desiring such a society, but you and your Phil-buddies are guilty of not comprehending the meaning and intent of the US Constitution.

  4. Brian Dzyak says:

    Wow, you are deranged.

    “Bottom line, Brian, you and those like you want to be able to dictate what everyone is allowed to say, hear, see and do…according to your opinions and beliefs.”

    NO. Me and others like me want to ensure that everyone has equal rights and opportunities not allowing others to discriminate against them.

    Your statement above perfectly describes religious zealots who wish to ram their beliefs down the throats of others, forcing them to live by their chosen religious edicts.

    Tell me, Robin, when’s the last time a Jew tried to force others to not eat pork? If you hadn’t noticed, it isn’t really a problem. Jews belief that they shouldn’t eat pork and that’s the end of it. They aren’t trying to force others to live by their beliefs. However, Christian Zealots ARE attempting to force their belief system onto others by enshrining those religious beliefs into secular law books. Precisely which part of this can’t you comprehend?

    “Brian, that is called fascism. Yes, I just called you a fascist. It was my God given and U.S. Constitutional right to call you a fascist. Whatchagonna do about it? …more importantly, why would it even bother you?”

    Well, Robin, I’m not offended because I’m not a fascist. I’m amused that you are clueless as to the actual definition of fascism. Fascism, Robin, is when government is ruled by Corporate powers. In strict terms, a Fascist Government would have actual direct employees from Corporations sitting in seats of power. Our own nation is near Fascist as most of our representatives are bought and paid for by Corporate/Monied powers. So sure, it’s your right to call me whatever you wish, but it’s my right to laugh at your obvious lack of education and willful ignorance, pretending to be more intellectual that you clearly are.

    “A&E could just as well have put out a statement that A&E does not share or endorse the comments made by those in shows that A&E makes lots of money on. Instead, A&E decided to divide the nation and it’s audience under pressure from what A&E obviously feels is it’s core supporters.”

    Well, unless you are privy to the inner meetings of Corporate A&E, you have no idea why they decided to punish Phil. It could’ve been a quick reaction to quash criticism about their employee (Phil) being a bigot. Or it could be a big publicity stunt engineered with the cooperation of Phil. Or something else. We don’t know.

    And A&E didn’t “divide the nation.” It is divided already and has been, between intolerant greedy selfish judgmental bigoted willfully ignorant religious zealot Conservatives and the rest of us adults. Issues like this one just make it more obvious for a time. Elections have the same effect.

    “I’m done conversing with you, Brian. You have become quite a bore. Even though I don’t do the Christmas thing, I will bid you a happy holiday season.”

    A bore because why? You’re losing the argument?

  5. Brian Dzyak says:

    “Ahhhh….justification for being intolerant of those you claim are being intolerant? Do you even read what you write?” Of course! Tell me, Robin, should would be TOLERANT of someone like Hitler, ya know, just because we are supposed to be tolerant of everyone’s opinions? Or should we perhaps stand up to those who are specifically intolerant toward specific groups of people for unjustified and bigoted reasons? Claiming that I and others are being “intolerant” and thus as guilty as the religious zealots is amusing to the core.

    “The bottom line is that there is nothing in what Phil Robertson said that in any way promotes intolerance, just his opinions of those who he also states are no worse than he is as far as sinning is concerned. Unlike those who claim to oppose intolerance, Phil Robertson states he believes that neither he nor anyone else has the right to be judgmental of others, that judgment is only to be done by that which he refers to as God.”

    Do you even read what you write? You claim that nothing Phil said promotes intolerance and that he doesn’t judge. Yet in the same paragraph, you talk about “sinning” as Phil labeled homosexuality putting it into the same category as terrorism and bestiality. Phil is most definitely “judging” and so are his supporters expressing intolerance simply because they don’t like the idea of homosexuality for whatever reasons they conjure up.

    “The bottom line is that Phil Robertson has every God given and U.S. Constitutionally supported right to say what he believes without being oppressed for having made such comments.”

    Well, no. The Constitutional Right to free speech has to do with how the government is not permitted to restrict speech. It has nothing to do with a private for-profit corporation or individuals. But Phil DID say what he had to say so none of his “rights” were oppressed.

    ” I hope that works out for A&E, but it may have been a bad call in the long run.”

    It is a likelihood that this is all a publicity stunt to drum up publicity. The family is a fraud, as they are millionaire yuppies who donned the costumes of “country bumpkin hicks” to attract the viewership of Conservatives. The Producer of the show is gay. All right before the busy Christmas season with oodles of product on the shelves.

    “Phil Robertson has done nothing wrong. A&E has done nothing wrong.”

    Well, Phil expressed racial and sexual bigotry so while his “right” to say it exists, what he’s being persecuted for is in believing such ugly thoughts at all.

    “Duck Dynasty and A&E is a more unlikely marriage than would be an Adam and Steve marriage in Genesis. ”

    Yes, the original concept for A&E didn’t include idiotic reality shows that cater to the lowest common denominator. But a for-profit media company is in the business to make money, not to be responsible stewards of quality informative factual information.

  6. Robin Boyd says:

    Gee, Brian, everyone should strive to be as tolerant of others as you are……(sarcasm)

  7. Robin Boyd says:

    LOL! Irony or old keyboard….take your pick.

  8. Robin Boyd says:

    Brian, if you are not going to bother reading my posts or you are just going to ignore what you don’t want to know about me, there is no sense in our continuing this conversation. I have made it clear that I deplore most of what organized religions are all about, for some of the same reasons you are claiming that you don’t believe the Universe is of an intelligent design. I have also stated that I stand by A&E’s decision to choose being pressured by the homosexual community and disassociate itself from Mr. Robertson just as much as I stand by Mr. Robertson’s God given and U.S. Constitutionally supported right to make public comments based on his understanding of what he believes.

    You seem to be very intolerant of those who do not think exactly as you do, and you are very judgemental. Are these not the exact attitudes you and others who attack people of theological faith keep claiming to be opposed to?

    • He said some pretty dodgy things about slavery, too.

      • Brian Dzyak says:

        The clear implication was that black people were all happy and stuff before all that Civil Rights and Welfare nonsense that turned modern black people into lazy moochers.

        Anyone with a brain knows precisely what ol’ Phil the Hypocrite was implying with his silly statement.

      • Fair enough, I’ll rephrase it. He also said some pretty iffy things about how black people were treated in his part of the country.

      • therockhound says:

        Doesn’t have anything to do with salvery, though. Also, he just stated what he saw as a kid working side by side with African Americans in the fields. He didn’t say the whole country was that way, either. Just what he, as a kid, observed in his own neck of the woods. You should have the article in front of you before you go telling people he was talking about slavery. That’s one reason this whole situation has gotten so blown out of perportion, people over exaggerating what was said and stating it as quotes. Because of that, he’s now a bigotted, racist, hatemonger.

      • Basically that black people were well-treated, that “no one was singing the blues”, that they were happy and godly, and that even after Reconstruction and before the Civil Rights Act, they weren’t all that hard done by. I’m just paraphrasing here. I don’t have the article at hand.

      • therockhound says:

        What did he say about slavery, exactly?

    • Brian Dzyak says:

      I read everything you write, Robin. And I never claimed anything about the nature of the Universe beyond not knowing anything for certain. Now who’s not paying attention? All I’ve said is that the entirety of religious belief, organized or not, is pure conjecture. All anyone has is hope and faith and belief, but absolutely zero data or hard facts to prove or disprove anything about a “god.” Because of this state of unknowing, it is unacceptable for anyone to subscribe to any of the so-called rulebooks particularly portions which advocated intolerance and bigotry toward oppressed classes of people.

      I am only judgmental of willful ignorance, intolerance, and laziness. So no, your conclusions about me and why I appear to be “judgmental” are fundamentally incorrect and are not synonymous with those of “theological faith” who claim moral and factual high-ground despite their inherent intolerance and tendency to place unsubstantiated BELIEF over facts, reality, and logic.

  9. Robin Boyd says:

    Being a man of science, I have no doubt that someday science will allow us to understand whatever it is that is responsible for the Creation of the Universe. I see no conflict between science and theology. In fact, scientific discoveries have proven out many of the historical values of the Judeo/Christian bibles, such as the existance of peoples and places. Also, there is really no real conflict between the basics of Creation from Genesis and the scientific explanation of Creation. Everything was dark and formless. Planets and suns were created from the void. Vegetation grew and animals came on the scene. The scientific explanation and the vague Genesis story both develope in the same sequence. We must understand that science doesn’t really prove anything, but rather allows us to understand what was and what is.

    Thanks for the spelling correction. And remember, God loves you, and I’m trying….

    • Brian Dzyak says:

      The difference between science and religion is that science never stops asking questions. Religion never asks any questions.

      Science isn’t “proving” religion in any way. The Creation myth is more of an allegorical fiction piece concocted by simple-minded “scientifically ignorant” humans. Virtually anything they didn’t understand was attributed to an unseen God. The entirety of Roman and Greek God myths describe that perfectly. The Judeo-Christian concept merely compacted the many gods into one convenient “He did it ALL!” package.

      The fact is that we don’t really know if all of this had a beginning at all or if it had always just been here. That concept of limitless eternity with no beginning nor end is quite difficult for humans to comprehend which is why we naturally lean toward looking for a beginning. The “Bang!” could’ve just been “stuff” from an alternate dimension being spewed into a new Universe (see String or M Theory).

      And was any of it created or caused by a god? If so, then what created God? Has it always been in existence? Where did it reside if there was no Universe to be in?

      There are all sorts of questions to be answered before we go off half-cocked A) determining with certainty that there IS a GOD and B) that this unproven god dropped a book of rules down for us to follow, one being (supposedly) that we are to first discriminate against and then execute homosexuals.

      Following a book of any rules would require knowing that the rule maker has some kind of credibility. We’d want to know that anyone telling us what to do was doing so for our own good…and in addition, that the rule maker could reliably punish anyone who refuse to follow those rules. That’s how any human would proceed with a human rule maker. So why should it be any different when dealing with an unproven invisible religious conceit? I would think that the bar would be set HIGHER for proof given that a human is far easier to prove existence for than an unseen super being.

      Therefore, any rules from any religious text are invalid until such time as the rule maker (a god or other unseen supernatural force) reveals itself in a way that is unquestionable.

  10. Robin Boyd says:

    LOL, Brian! Either you still can’t grasp a simple thing as the spelling of my name or you believe you are antagonizing me by deliberately being rude about mispelling it. It’s just a name, and I am referred to as much worse by much better people, so rally on, brother.

    No, Brian, there is no onus on me to prove what I and billions of others throughout the history of mankind believe in. It is what it is, and no one can prove any theological belief to be wrong, including the belief that the Universe just suddenly appeared one day.

    Just curious, Brian, what exactly is your point in being so offensive to those of theological faith? Is it only Christians you oppose, or do you oppose all theological beliefs?

    As for your assumption that I am a conservative, I do not allow such labels to stick to me. I am considered a liberal by most so called conservatives and a conservative by most who think of themselves as liberals. By this standard, I seem to be pretty much a Renaisance man who leans to the right politically and to the left socially.

    As for this conversation, the duck guy is a bit more fundamentalist thinking in his faith than I am, and your faith that there is no intelligent design to the Universe, meaning that nature just sort of happened from some unknown source that we have no clue as to where it came from, is just way to much for me to have faith in.

    In other words, Brian, you are more guilty of the things you claim about faith than theological believers are. You are simply too dishonest with yourself to admit to this.

    • *misspelling*, not *mispelling*. Ah, irony….

    • Brian Dzyak says:

      “No, Brian, there is no onus on me to prove what I and billions of others throughout the history of mankind believe in. It is what it is, and no one can prove any theological belief to be wrong, including the belief that the Universe just suddenly appeared one day.”

      Actually, the onus is on you to prove something you claim to exist. If 12 billion people believed, say, that houseflies were actually brilliant neurosurgeons, it wouldn’t make it true. It isn’t “what it is.” You are claiming that an invisible super being that created all things exists and therefore it is your responsibility to prove it with tangible data. I can’t prove your theological belief to be wrong (you believe it, therefore you belief exists), however you can’t prove your assertion to be correct either.

      The how and why any of this exists at all continues to be a mystery that no one knows as of yet. We hope that the scientific process will lead us closer to the answer.

      “As for your assumption that I am a conservative, I do not allow such labels to stick to me. I am considered a liberal by most so called conservatives and a conservative by most who think of themselves as liberals. By this standard, I seem to be pretty much a Renaisance man who leans to the right politically and to the left socially.”

      Yeah, you’re a Renaissance Man. (note the proper spelling for future business cards you have made up). Tee hee. You’re a Conservative in denial. It is what it is. :/

      “As for this conversation, the duck guy is a bit more fundamentalist thinking in his faith than I am,”

      Perhaps, yet you still defend him.

      “and your faith that there is no intelligent design to the Universe,”
      I never claimed that either. I merely said that you and no one else can prove it.

      “meaning that nature just sort of happened from some unknown source that we have no clue as to where it came from, is just way to much for me to have faith in.”

      True, we don’t know what happened or why anything is here. I have my own beliefs (which I have not shared because they are pertinent) which I don’t know are true or not, just as you don’t know about yours for certain. Thus, the requirement of FAITH. Faith is the tool of Hope we use when we don’t know for certain. Kapeesh?

      “In other words, Brian, you are more guilty of the things you claim about faith than theological believers are. You are simply too dishonest with yourself to admit to this.”

      Huh?! Want to decipher that word-salad? Those who believe that their BELIEFS are facts are guilty of willful ignorance. I’m quite honest with myself and you attempting to lay your own sins upon others doesn’t speak well of your own intellectual honesty… Robin.

  11. Robin Boyd says:

    Brian, why do you presume to worthy of judging my “problems”? It is impossible to prove a negative, so why do you continue to not believe that the Universe is of an intelligent design when it is so much more a matter of faith to believe that the Universe just somehow appeared by some sort of happenstance that has no explanation for where the materials for such an happenstance came from?

    I’m sorry, Brian, but it takes a lot more faith to believe there is no intelligent design than it does to believe what every culture that has ever existed has writings to support that there is an intelligent design to the Universe.

    Let me guess, Brian, you believe that government’s should be the benefactors of mankind?

    • Brian Dzyak says:

      I can’t prove a negative. You’ve asserted that there IS a “God” so the burden of proof is on you. Merely saying that “all of this” is “proof” that there is a God doesn’t cut it. You have to prove the super being itself, not rely on assumed “god droppings” as proof.

      Your use of the word FAITH is key to this concept. I parked my car in the garage last night. At that time, I KNEW for a fact that it was there. But since it has been out of my sight all night, I have to rely on FAITH that it is still there and exists at all. FAITH is the tool we use when we DON’T know something for certain. Another way to word it is HOPE. We use those words when we don’t know for certain if something is true or real or not.

      “Let me guess, Brian, you believe that government’s should be the benefactors of mankind?”

      I believe that “government” is a tool that We the People can use to advance humanity and ensure a stable economy and society. “Government” is merely a tool that can be wielded for good or bad, just like a knife or a hammer. In the hands of Conservatives, “government” is utilized as a tool to inflict evil…war, poverty, greedy, religious oppression, economic inequality. Conservatism claims to abhor “government” but relishes its power to inflict mass damage upon the greatest number of people in order to benefit a very small population who just happen to be obscenely wealthy.

      Liberals, on the other hand, view the tool of “government” as the best option to organizing society in a civilized manner in order to fulfill the mandate of the Constitution to ensure equal rights and opportunities for the greatest number of people.

      So, your question, should government be the benefactors of mankind is obviously leading, tainted by your Conservative ideology, so there is no way to directly answer you. The tool of “government” CAN benefit mankind when used correctly. Certainly religion has failed repeatedly throughout the eons to benefit mankind when mankind has needed it most.

      Conservatives like to look at CHARITY as the cure-all for all our social and economic ills. But there are simply too many people in need for charity to help everyone who needs it. The wealthy are hoarding an estimated $32 TRILLION dollars in offshore tax havens, so they clearly aren’t coughing up the dough to benefit mankind. The Middle Class is being decimated by thirty years of Conservative economic ideology, so we have less money to give to those in need as we are struggling ourselves.

      Individually, we are mostly powerless to affect change on a wide scale as is needed. But TOGETHER organized by GOVERNMENT, We the People have much more influence. Our actual intended national motto is E. Pluribus Unum… Out of Many, One.

      But the Conservative ideology says, “I got mine, you get yours, and if you can’t get enough, then F YOU!”

      So yes, Robyn, Government should be the primary benefactor of mankind simply because nobody and nothing else will do it.

  12. Robin Boyd says:

    Brian, just because so many people throughout the ages have abused what is written in the Bible as well as all other theological scriptures does not make what is written, bad. The problem with theological scripture is our understanding of what the intelligent design of the Universe is trying to be conveyed to us through those scriptures. Our arrogance in believing we are more intelligent than we really are is the problem, not the messages being conveyed.

    For example, as I have already attested to, I do not see in Judaic/Christian scripture real support that God (just a term we use for whatever the intelligent designer of the Universe is) hates homosexuals. There are a lot of conclusions that are being jumped to by those who want to hate homosexuals, but that is not the fault of scripture. From what I can gather from my extensive studies of scripture, the act of sodomy is the problem. Since homosexuallity commonly involves sodomy, the leap that God hates homosexuals has been made.

    Even the idea of the term “hate” is misunderstood by most. At our present understanding, which is still neglegible, the term “hate” in Old (Hebrew) Testament scripture refers to non-acceptance, and is not at all an emotional value. In the New Testament, comments attributed to Jesus when Jesus is speaking as a man, indicate that “hate” is an emotional term. However, when Jesus is speaking as God the Father, the term “hate” reverts back to the Hebrew Testament value of referring to non-acceptance. For example, when God “hated” Esau, God did not have an emotional detestment for Esau, but rather did not accept Esau’s actions.

    I don’t expect every follower of Christ to see scripture exactly as I do, but if sodomy is the problem and not the love of one man for another or of one woman for another, then it is only one physical act that is common amongst homosexual men that is detestable to God. After all, the line about a man not lying with another man as he would with his wife is more logically referring to the act of sodomy and not an overall reference to two men cuddling.

    • Brian Dzyak says:

      Your fundamental problem and that of most religious zealots is assuming three things: 1) that there IS without question a super being who created all of this 2) that this super creator did so with a purpose (that we are not intelligent enough to comprehend) and 3) that the written religious texts are full of rules that this “god” has sent down for us to follow.

      A, you don’t KNOW that there is/was a super being creator at all.
      B, if there is/was a super being creator, we have no way of knowing if it had a purpose at all for all of this.
      C, and all of these rules in the variety of religious texts are not inscribed in some sort of mysterious heavenly element…they are written on stone and paper by humans who undoubtedly, had their own agendas and cultural influences.

      Jews were/are not permitted to do a lot of things, such as eat pork. A rational person would ask, why? God didn’t tell anyone else to avoid pork. Well, the likely reason is that at the time, people were dying from some kind of pork-related disease (or so they thought) so whallah! God orders His people to not eat pork! Amazing!

      So, sodomy. Ya know, some women actually enjoy this practice too (receiving obviously). The health risks of course could be there and in a time when basic cleanliness wasn’t up to modern day standards, it’s entirely possible that people were getting sick. So, cue GOD to arrive and issue an order to cut it out.

      It’s amazing all the ways a versatile tool like GOD can be utilized. Better than a Swiss Army Knife!

      The odds are that “God” didn’t lambast sodomy or even homosexuality or pork. Some MEN did, mortal humans who had an agenda for good or bad and have managed to market the ideas so successfully that they live on thousands of years later. NASCAR marketing should be so skilled.

  13. Robin Boyd says:

    I have to say, those on both sides of this “discussion” are proving this duck guy’s comments to be very accurate. After along battle against religions and Christianity in particular, and a lot of study of theology, I decided years ago that most scripture from most religions prior to 2,000 years ago in some way come from a supreme being we refer to as God. How we interpret some of those writings is highly suspect, so I still do not support man made religious organizational standards, creedos, doctrines or dogma as being absolute. We are still in a learning process. We have proven time and again we are nowhere near as intelligent as we believe ourselves to be. That would fall under the eating of the tree of knowledge part of the Genesis parable.

    Every hateful statement to one another in this conversation, regardless of who is making the comment, is despicable. From what I have read of Phil Robertson’s comments, he has made no such types of comment. Mr. Robertson should have every right to make whatever comments he believes to be true without being demonized by those who have no theological faith to even understand what demonizing is all about.

    At the same time, A&E has every right to make the decision to cater to one specific audience over another. In this case, A&E has decided to cater to the homosexual community. As the Robertson’s have stated, this is a business decision for both A&E and the Robertson’s. My guess is that the Robertson’s are going to benefit more from A&E’s decisions than A&E is going to.

    For the record, I don’t watch Duck Dynasty or any other type of show just because they don’t interest me. Since The Big Bang Theory is the only show I will seek out or stop what I am doing to watch, I doubt my opinion of what is entertaining is any more valid than anyone elses.

    No matter if you support Mr. Robertson’s freedom to speak of what he believes in or A&E’s decision to cater to demands made by the homosexual community, it is just silly for us to be so judgemental about each others beliefs in this matter. Whether one believes in a Creator of the Universe or not is irrelevant to the existance of a Creator. Whether one believes in teachings from ancient theologically based writings or not is irrelevant to the lessons to be learned. We know without any question that sodomy creates many health, and so ultimately social issues. Without condemning homosexuallity overall, there is no doubt that scripture teaches us that sodomy, regardless of sex, is against the design of mankind as we have been Created.

    I don’t get that Mr. Robertson has anything but love for his fellow sinners, even those whose sin is the homosexual act of sodomy. Just because Mr. Robertson does not condone homosexuallity does not mean he is hateful toward homosexuals.

    • “Whether one believes in a Creator of the Universe or not is irrelevant to the existance [sic] of a Creator.”

      Or, more to the point, NON-existence.

    • Brian Dzyak says:

      And you, Robyn Boyd, contradict yourself. You lead with this statement which negates “scriptures” as being irrelevant to any “lessons” to be learned.

      “Whether one believes in teachings from ancient theologically based writings or not is irrelevant to the lessons to be learned.”

      But then immediately after, you follow with a series of “absolutes” that you justify with that same Scripture that you just said was irrelevant.

      “Without condemning homosexuallity overall, there is no doubt that scripture teaches us that sodomy, regardless of sex, is against the design of mankind as we have been Created.”

      “I don’t get that Mr. Robertson has anything but love for his fellow sinners, even those whose sin is the homosexual act of sodomy.”

      YOU declared homosexuality as a “sin” which is point-of-view only determined by religious text…which you led by declaring irrelevant.

      You also proclaim “We know without any question that sodomy creates many health, and so ultimately social issues” without one iota of data to back up such an absolute (“without any question”) statement. We don’t “know” that sodomy creates ANY health issues at all NOR is there any data to prove your assertion of causation that asserted “health issues” lead directly to “social issues.” Which you fail to define…what precise “social issues” are you referring to that have been caused directly by so-called “health issues” caused by sodomy?”

      The cast and writers of Big Bang Theory would have a field day tearing your pseudo-reasoning apart. You started out okay, sounding reasonable and objective, but fumbled the ball terrifically at the end as you revealed your true nature.

      Good work!

    • Brian Dzyak says:

      The Bible has been used to excuse a large swathe of bigoted and hateful beliefs. Case in point:

      Leviticus 20:13, “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”

      If one takes a literal interpretation of the Bible, not only is it moral and ethical to discriminate against gays, it’s also moral and ethical to kill them.

      That said, the law of the land in the US provides for a separation of church and state. As such, we live under a secular set of laws and not those guided by the Bible or other religious books. (Not yet, anyway.)

      Southern slaverholders used the Bible to justifiy owning slaves. The roots of American racism are steeped in Biblical justifications.

      The Bible was also used to justify the slaughter and relocation of Native Americans.

      In the US, believing in the freedom of speech and religion are at the top of our civil rights. As such, it means we have to tolerate speech we’d rather not hear. (And I think we’d be far better off without speech that inflames hate and bigotry.)

      When we hear a Jindalesque or Palinesque type cry about being victims it rings hollow to anyone who sits and gives a cursory glance at the facts. They may truly believe they are victims because they’re not free to promote their belief system that spews hate and ignorance.

      This is where we need to study logical fallacies and call people on their distortions or misinterpretation of the the facts and reality.

      Which brings up an interesting question. How far does their (anti-gay crowd) Faith go?

      Leviticus 20:13, “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”

      If one takes a literal interpretation of the Bible, not only is it moral and ethical to discriminate against gays, it’s also moral and ethical to kill them.

      So, should the United States enact policy to execute gay people in order to be in compliance with God’s Law?

      If yes, then we would become a theocracy in violation of the US Constitution.

      If no, then so-called Christians would be hypocrites, using The Bible to justify their bigotry but also ignoring God’s demand that gays be put to death.

  14. Duck Dynasty is lowbrow, neanderthal trash that doesn’t belong on the Arts and Entertainment Network. What ever happened to the noble experiment that was A&E? It’s not fulfulling its original mandate at all. It used to be about cultural programming, arts programming, documentaries, biographies, dramas—you know, quality stuff. Then the rot started with American Justice and it just got more sensationalistic after that with Dog the Bounty Hunter, Mindfreak, Gene Simmons’ Family Jewels, Storage Wars, Growing Up Gotti, and so on, finally ending up with this Duck doo-doo. A&E is no longer Time Well Spent. It’s just mental pablum.

    Same thing with TLC—it used to have worthwhile shows when it was The Learning Channel and it focused on educational programming. You could actually learn something, but no more, because apparently people no longer want to use their brains. Now TLC is more like The Lurid Channel, with programs that offer audiences the human freakshow in all its dull, depressing “glory”. Who gives a crap about Honey Boo-Boo and other reality programs about hoarders, midgets, the morbidly obese, and families that keep popping out baby after baby? I’ll tell you, nobody with any taste. But the dumbed-down demographic eats it right up.

    I can’t help but think society is devolving, and TLC and A&E is television for Gamma Minuses on down.

    • Brian Dzyak says:

      Perfectly stated. Thank you!

      The History Channel is also guilty of catering to this low-information crowd by airing a pearly white version of “The Bible.”

      It’s the frickin’ History Channel… not the “let’s present Myths as if they were actual historical fact” Channel.

      This is the reason that We the People established (what are supposed to be) the non-partisan fact-based Public Broadcasting System and National Public Radio. We the People NEED media that is not under the influence of Corporations, the profit-motive, or the need for profit at all. The necessity of earning a profit drives programmers to cater to the most base elements of society who choose to sit and consume mindless drivel instead of being productive members of our society, contributing positively to help humanity progress.

      I suggest we resurrect The Fairness Doctrine and amend it to include channels like A&E and History. The Fairness Doctrine basically said that if you call your News Channel a News Channel, that it must only contain actual NEWS. Not commentary or anything else unless such independent biased commentary was clearly pointed out as being such. So if A&E proclaims to be about Arts & Entertainment, the assumption is that A&E would program with ARTS in mind first and entertain with appropriate programming. I’m thinking “museums” instead of reality TV drivel.

      But none of that will happen until we remove the scourge of Conservatism from government at every level.

  15. James Ward says:

    We are behind you. God bless America and the right of free speech and the right to worship God Almighty. God will have the last word on Judgement Day!!!

  16. Jason says:

    They are stupid to begin with. The show is fake and stupid. The show should be cancelled because its bland. His comments are his opinion but people gotta realize this country is soft , PC. Better off keeping comments to yourself. God this god that. It’s all bs anyways.

  17. len says:

    As for Duck Dynasty: An interesting point to remember is that Freedom of Speech protects you from the GOVERNMENT interfering with what you say, not from a private entity such as this network. He has the right to say and believe what he wants, as bigoted as it is, but the network doesn’t have to support it, and they retain the right to distance themselves from him so as not suggest that he speaks for them or that they agree with him. They’ve done the right thing. One SHOULD stand up against this kind of bigotry, until one day it doesn’t exist anymore.
    It’s also interesting that the family does not actually apologize for his bigotry, but rather talk about how they are hurt by this decision. They also defend themselves by suggesting that the Bible teaches him what he believes, which is a crock. The Bible doesn’t teach people to hate. He’s a bigot because he’s a bigot, not because of the Bible. People of faith should be offended that they are using the Bible to defend his bigotry. Does this man speak for all Christians now?

  18. Cheryl says:

    Right on the Robertson’s. A&E has gone too far.

  19. kimberly page says:


  20. Grant Sherrill says:

    Why is it that every moron that shoots his mouth off on air and gets nailed for it thinks he is protected by the First Amendment?

  21. robRmh says:


  22. milo says:

    “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech” People need to learn what “freedom of speech” means. It means that the government can’t restrict speech, and that hasn’t happened here. It doesn’t mean that when people use their right to free speech that there will be no consequences. And it doesn’t mean that an employer can’t take action against an employee based on the statements they make.

    This guy IS free to make whatever free speech he would like to. But “free speech” doesn’t somehow magically protect him from whatever backlash may arise from it.

  23. Mark says:

    A&E ‘s decision is just unAmerican. So Phil’s opinion is different then yours. So what. That’s life. What he said was NOT said on your network, or about your network, and was not detrimental to your network. His comments also were not hateful, as some were accusing him of. This is America. Phil has the freedom to voice his opinion, just as the executives at A&E have the freedom to be homosexuals.

  24. James says:

    Please don take mah duck DAAHNUSTY away! Aah prayed and prayed for A&E to come to their sintses but the devils grip is BUT TOO TIGHT!
    Listen everybody knows that Duck DAAHNUSTY is a tight moral bible show and the good lord above has ordained them because the almighty sees fit that this fine INTELIGINT suksesfull family come on the teevee and teach mah kids a thing or too about GOOD CHRISTIAN BEELEFS.
    Homosex-shalls are WRUNG! Just dead WRUNG! Y’all darn well know GAWD created ADAM and EVE NOT ADAM and STEEVE! haha y’all like at? That’s mah very own joke! Don’t y’all steal it now- cause stealing is a SIN! And if you AINT a homosex-shall but yoo steele- you R still gon’ burn in the lake of FIRESTONE! Aaaah, ah mean BRIMSTONE! Sawry I was just think in I needa gown down to Bobby-Ray jrs and git mah TARS fixed fer WINNUR.
    But I tri-gress,
    Phil’s Uh-MEND-mints wer VILATED!!! God dern it, y’all know eet was! Them GURLY boys cryin cause he say what he’s thinkin and them LIBERALLS cryin cause we ain’t gonna take it no Moore! I’m fixin to finish this case of Budwizer then go MUDDIN! But right after that ima take mah kids and go pray the homosex-shalls at A&E fall tonite while they’re at there little disco dances and break their heads open! Then ahma pray GAWD fixes there heads and straten them out!

  25. Beach says:

    The suspension of Phil Robertson from A&E’s Duck Dynasty is outrageous in a nation that values freedom, according to social critic and openly gay, dissident feminist Camille Paglia.

    “I speak with authority here, because I was openly gay before the ‘Stonewall rebellion,’ when it cost you something to be so. And I personally feel as a libertarian that people have the right to free thought and free speech,” Paglia, a professor at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, said on Laura Ingraham’s radio show Thursday.

    “In a democratic country, people have the right to be homophobic as well as they have the right to support homosexuality — as I one hundred percent do. If people are basing their views against gays on the Bible, again they have a right of religious freedom there,” she added.

    Robertson has been suspended from Duck Dynasty due to comments he made to GQ that have been deemed “anti-gay.” According to Paglia, the culture has become too politically correct.

    “To express yourself in a magazine in an interview — this is the level of punitive PC, utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist, OK, that my liberal colleagues in the Democratic Party and on college campuses have supported and promoted over the last several decades,” Paglia said. “This is the whole legacy of free speech 1960’s that have been lost by my own party.”

    Paglia went on to point out that while she is an atheist she respects religion and has been frustrated by the intolerance of gay activists.

    “I think that this intolerance by gay activists toward the full spectrum of human beliefs is a sign of immaturity, juvenility,” Paglia said. “This is not the mark of a true intellectual life. This is why there is no cultural life now in the U.S. Why nothing is of interest coming from the major media in terms of cultural criticism. Why the graduates of the Ivy League with their A, A, A+ grades are complete cultural illiterates, etc. is because they are not being educated in any way to give respect to opposing view points.”

    “There is a dialogue going on human civilization, for heaven sakes. It’s not just this monologue coming from fanatics who have displaced the religious beliefs of their parents into a political movement,” she added. “And that is what happened to feminism, and that is what happened to gay activism, a fanaticism.”

    Follow Caroline on Twitter

    Tags: camille paglia, Duck Dynasty

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/19/paglia-duck-dynasty-uproar-utterly-fascist-utterly-stalinist/#ixzz2o3AI2IIH

    Humm, Christian Bakers are being drummed and sued out of business, as well as Christian photographers and sports announcers. Yeah, she is right, last time this crap happened was to Jews in fascist Germany. Phil was hired as a Christian redneck now fired cause he acted like a Cristian redneck. The left has gone of the rails, expect a huge backlash directed at hollywierd and the Democratic part…..

  26. Justin Mancari says:

    I think it’s very funny how everybody has freedom of speech unless it has to do with faith. Politicians speak out againt homosexuality all the time and they don’t get in trouble for it. So when somebody who believes in a religion and what it says, speaks against homosexuality they have to get punished? Americans always talk about freedom of speech, so if that’s what we believe why doesn’t that apply for everybody?

  27. NotABigot says:

    What can you expect from a bunch of low life trash like these people and the people who would watch this show?

  28. Thomas L. Crouch says:

    I think it is time for the American people to wake up!!! All Americns have the right of free speech(Constitution) so when does the happen or should I say WHO decides?? I support Phil and all Americans to stand up and say enough is enough,,this Nation was founded on rights,if those is Washington don’t like it then you move a country that has your beliefs,,God forgive this Nation and it’s leaders for the unrighteousness,and release your love back into it,,A&E get a life you knew who they are,what they are anne the nation loved them,wow now that says something ,a Nation that loves God and believes in free speech,wow now that is a thought,God Bless America,!!!

  29. Hey Phil God doesn’t need your love , but your fellow man does. Try preaching that sometime.

  30. peter says:

    Did this guy made a hate speech against homosexuals? In case of a negative answer: He lives in a free country, He should be allowed to have an oppinion. If you do not like it do not watch. IN CASE OF A POSITIVE ANSWER: He should not be on television, because spreading hate should not be tolerated. In my opinion.

  31. mark says:

    Wow, its amazing how its ok to call every country boy a hillbilly, but he cant say that he doesnt believe in homosexuality? Kinda hypocritical if you ask me. I bet phil wont cry cause you called him hillbilly. But disagree with the gays, and you dont deserve respect anymore? You daniel are full of it.

  32. Daniel says:

    A hillbilly who accidentally struck it rich is homophobic. Boy, that certainly wasn’t unexpected.

  33. Brian says:

    Everyone needs to take note of A&E sponsors and stop buying any of their products! today!

  34. Ricardo says:

    Not supporting the gay community doesn’t mean that you are against it! This guy had an opinion and its to not agree with homosexuality. Why and someone say that they don’t like seeing two members Of the same sex together. Gays have a right to express themselves but anyone who doesn’t like it should shut up? NO that’s not right either. I have gay family and I live them but I don’t won’t be around them when they’re making out with their partner. I don’t like if but they’re free to do what they want and I have told them that I won’t be around when they do it, its my right to be able to sag that if I want. Go on Phil Robertson!

    • johndgriffiths says:

      Dear Debbie, thank you for correcting this lesbian’s poor grammar. I am sorry for the pain you have experienced over the years form being called a hillbilly. At least no big TV star has said that all hillbillies will go to hell according to his religion, causing some of our nation’s leaders, mainly in the south, to rally by him and basically agree with the belief that all hillbillies, including devastated and scared teen hillbillies, will go to hell. That would be tremendously sad, for hillbillies were born that way.

  35. thetruebible says:

    “for expressing his faith”

    oh boy. Here we go again with these out of touch Christians, dressing up hatred as expressing “faith” or standing by the bible. I’m glad this redneck has been punished for his outdated, bigoted views. I’m so sick of people hiding behind the bible and God as a means of telling millions of people that something they have no control over is wrong. It’s the same thing as looking down on someone for their race. I hope this moron’s show gets canceled as a message that this kind of hatred and intolerance are not acceptable in this day and age.

    • James says:

      You sound like a typical liberal fag.

    • Beach says:

      Kinda like your hate and intolerance…..

    • Centurian says:

      “Outdated views.” Funny you must not know much about history. There have been several cultures that embraced homosexuality that died long ago.

    • C. R. Hayes says:

      Sounds like a lot of hatred and intolerance coming from you toward Mr. Robertson’s beliefs. Pot and Kettle mean anything to you? And where do you guys keep coming up with “hatred”? And calling him “out of touch”, “redneck (not really a bad label, even though you’d like it to be)”, “bigoted”? Sounds like a lot of hate on your end. But, I suppose that’s O.K. You guys seem to be heaping a lot of hatred and anger on this guy because of bad experienced with other supposed “Christians” and the bad examples they make for true Christians. It can’t be because of what Phil said in this article, because this “bigoted” “hatred” just wasn’t there.

      • C. R. Hayes says:

        DisectYourBeliefs says:
        Whether we like it or not, God views all sin the same, and he sees homosexuality as a sin.

      • DisectYourBeliefs says:

        He lumped in gays with terrorists. Can this ignorant generation please die off already, and let the human race progress instead of stagnate?

    • re:thetruebible

      You clearly know little to nothing about anything and your hate speech is more offensive than anyhting Phil said. You’re insipid and an idiot.

  36. Travelducky says:

    Most excellent! I’ve never been a fan….in fact, the show really annoys me, but it does my heart good to see someone stand up to people who spend their life looking for opportunities to be offended, and those who fuel the fire to make a buck. Way to go, Robertson clan!

    • John Griffiths says:

      People who tell the mainstream media in a fancy, very gay-friendly magazine such as GQ, that gay people disgust them and will go to hell, and that blacks were happy picking cotton back in the day and were generally treated well and didn’t need the passing of welfare and “entitlements,” do Christianity a tragic disservice. It seems to me they use the their childishly literal, cherry-picked references to the Bible — a document written at a time in a potion of the world when many traditions and behaviors we would today consider just horrrrible were embraced with righteous fervor — as a shield for their fear, stubbornness, hypocrisy, laziness and own entitlement. Not seeing or feeling or thinking that their comments would hurt people — their own friends and coworkers and maybe even family members — and that said comments might even lead a gay or black teen with emotional issues deeper into despair, more than suggests these mainstream media stars do not live in God’s reality but their own warped, uninformed reality. A&E should host a town hall with the Robertsons and prominent and average gay men, lesbians, blacks, adulterers, transgendereds and whoever else they equate with people who have intercourse with goats and who they think will burn in hell. Maybe then this self-described loving, moral family will get closer to true reality. Or they can take risk their own money, start the Stone Age channel, and free-speak all they want.

      • johndgriffiths says:

        To “Cameron”: Here are the pertinent quotes from Phil Robertson in his discussion with GQ:

        Re “gays”:

        “We’re Bible-thumpers who just happened to end up on television . . . You put in your article that the Robertson family really believes strongly that if the human race loved each other and they loved God, we would just be better off. We ought to just be repentant, turn to God, and let’s get on with it, and everything will turn around.”

        “Everything is blurred on what’s right and what’s wrong. Sin becomes fine . . . 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 . . . 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.”

        “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.”

        “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

        “All you have to do is look at any society where there is no Jesus. I’ll give you four: Nazis, no Jesus. Look at their record. Uh, Shintos? They started this thing in Pearl Harbor. Any Jesus among them? None. Communists? None. Islamists? Zero. That’s 80 years of ideologies that have popped up where no Jesus was allowed among those four groups. Just look at the records as far as murder goes among those four groups.”

        “If you simply put your faith in Jesus coming down in flesh, through a human being, God becoming flesh living on the earth, dying on the cross for the sins of the world, being buried, and being raised from the dead—yours and mine and everybody else’s problems will be solved.”

        Re blacks:

        “I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once . . . Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field … They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’ — not a word!”

        “Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”

      • Cameron says:

        You should probably go back and read the GQ article because he never said anything about gays going to hell or that they disgust him. Those words just never appeared in the article. I agree that people shouldn’t say things that will cause others pain but what he said is a belief that many Christians share and is part of the Christian religion. He has that right to express what he believes just like people of the gay community have the right to fight for what they believe, that’s the beauty of America. I really do sympathize with those who have emotional struggles because I have had struggles too but the fact is that no one can let what one person says or what anyone says keep them down to such a dark emotional place. People have got to learn how to properly deal with people who say things that offend or hurt them because that is reality, there will always be people who will hurt or offend others. Instead of trying to feeding gay teens or others who are experiencing emotional struggles a false reality that no one will hurt them, we should be showing them how to properly deal with someone who disagrees with their lifestyle or hatred. We can’t try to create this false reality in which there is no hatred or disagreement in the world because that will never happen. We are humans, therefore we will never be perfect. My last point is that Phil Robertsons comments were to the act of homosexuality not the gays themselves. If you knew any then about the bible you would know that it also says to hate the sin but never hate the sinner. Phil, being the bible-following Christian he has shown to be, would not feel hatred towards the gays but he would disagree with the act.

  37. Allison Straw says:

    Thank you Robertson family. I was happy to see you standing with Phil as a family. It says a lot. Money does not motivate your beliefs and you won’t be bullied by those who threaten your chance to make money.

    I enjoy your show especially seeing you sit as a family to dinner. I can watch you on any channel not just A & E.
    It is great to see you get support from others who could be threatened as well.

    Merry Christmas from my family to yours.

  38. Lauren says:

    I guess the “lord” allows you to cheat on your wfe for years, drink and get high all the time though Phil? He says he’s a man of faith well I don’t see it. Like another commenter said the New Testament states we sin. It’s impossible to live without sinnig. And he shouldn’t judge people or make comments about their way of life due to his immense ignorance. Especially when his closet is full of skeletons.

    • C. R. Hayes says:

      Why do you, and people like you, keep bringing up stuff that’s been admitted to, and making up stuff he never said. He’s NEVER said he was without sin! He admitted that he’s sinned in the past and sins today. He also said he DOES NOT judge people, that’s God’s job. He was asked a question, and gave an answer in his own words taken from Biblical text. Simple as that. It’s not like he’s making up the rules as he goes. He believes in the Bible and the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. It breaks down to this…God created the universe and everything in it. He made the rules and they were passed down through the Bible. We may not like all the rules that He has set forth, but they are His rules and they must be followed, or there will be consequences. You have the freedom to accept or reject this. Freedom given by Him. I’ll admit that there are a lot of His rules I don’t like or understand. But I accept that they are the rules that I must strive to live by. We are his children, and just like when we were young and being raised by our parents, there were rules we didn’t like or understand but had to follow. I also understand that in the past, and even to this day, people do terrible things in the name of Jesus and Christianity. They are not true Christians, or don’t understand what Jesus was teaching. You can’t use those people, or the ADMITTED past sins of people like Phil, as an excuse to cast down Christianity as a whole. And that’s what you and others are doing. You don’t care about the good things he said like love your neighbor. You just want to point out the bad. Oooh, look, he did bad things way back and now he’s trying to tell me how to live. He answered the man’s question and you are acting like he hunted you down, got in your face, and wagged his finger at you saying you are going to hell. He didn’t, so relax. GET IT TOGETHER PEOPLE. HE DIDN’T ATTACK ANYONE. HE JUST GAVE AN ANSWER TO A QUESTION!

    • Allison Straw says:

      He is a testament that we are imperfect sinners.
      Your harsh judgement says more about you than Phil Robertson. He seeked forgiveness and was given grace from The Lord and forgiven for hurt he caused his family by his family. That takes true strength.

    • K says:

      This is such an ignorant comment Lauren. Yes, Phil has admitted his past sins and repented of them. Everyone does sin, but to inherit the kingdom on God you must repent and turn away from your sins. Plus Phil is not the one judging anyone, God is. He was simply stating what the bible says. It would really help if you knew what you were talking about before commenting in the future.

    • Liz says:

      The bible actually says that homosexuals will not inherit the Kingdom of God; meaning they will not go to heaven but will actually be in Hell. I am not announcing they are guilty God has already done that. I will be the first to say many Christians go about this totally the wrong way. But what we believe says they will spend eternity in Hell, and when we say this we’re not “judging” but truly concerned for their where they spend eternity.

      • Who says there’s even a god—I mean, what reputable person whom I can trust to tell the truth? We all know how trustworthy people are. And don’t say something that amounts to “God exists because God says so,” because that’s just circular reasoning and faulty logic, which makes for an unacceptable argument.

  39. phyllis says:

    I am so happy to see that there are Christians left in the world who are willing to stand up for the word of God. After all thw bible tells us that this is our only mission. I agree this is not spreading hate in any way. The bible twlls us that we are all sinners. We are to love the person and hate the sin. This includes our own sins.

    In Christian love

  40. larry says:

    Anything that gets that stupid show of the air is fine with me. It’s not right to punish someone for speaking their mind, even if what they’re saying is ignorant and stupid. I do think it’s odd that that “Conservatives” are quick to defend this trash tv show. I mean, this show is garbage television which conservatives typically rail against. I don’t support someone being punished or even havnig to apologize for speaking their (idiotic) point of view. Still, if it gets that peice of crap show off the air then fine.

  41. NarratorJack says:

    TV character expresses religious view.

    It’s Homer Simpson next, perhaps?

  42. MO says:

    I am thankful we still have true followers of Christ that are willing to take a stand for their beliefs. The Bible is very clear on certain issues. Just because he doesn’t agree with certain lifestyle doesn’t mean he doesn’t care or love the person. I agree with the family completely. I am sad to say the least that we truly aren’t free to express our opinions or beliefs.

  43. Paul says:

    The New Testament indicates that everyone has and does sin, it’s not particular to any marital status, sexual orientation, race, religion, etc. By God’s grace and our acceptance of His love and forgiveness, our sin is not remembered by God, and at our death we join God in His Kingdom, forever. May sound valid or farfetched, but we all need to decide what happens when we die. That is the core human condition.

  44. Donna says:

    I don’t even watch the show and I am a lesbian. I am not surprise that he said what he said. There are southern and probably hillbillies. Everyone has there opinion.

    • Debbie says:

      Donna, I am from Eastern Kentucky, and I know what it is to be labeled a hillbilly. We are called stupid , inbred, and every kind of derogatory comment in existence. Why is it ok to call someone a hillbilly, but it is wrong when someone gives a free expression of belief about your lifestyle? I also want to correct some of your words in your post. You should have written in the following way. They’re southern and probably hillbillies. Everyone has his or her own opinion. At any rate, there is not correct. You would use the possessive plural pronoun, their. I don’t usually correct other writer’s posts, but I just wanted to let you and anyone else out there know that a southern hillbilly can think and write in an educated manner. We can also express our beliefs, and the last time I checked the constitution, we are still allowed freedom of religion and speech along with the rest of you. You say you are a lesbian. That is your business. Just remember, you are not the only one who deals with hurtful labels. Think before you label anyone else as a southern hillbilly in the manner in which you did in your post. You are not the only group who can be offended.

      • johndgriffiths says:

        Dear Debbie, thank you for correcting this lesbian’s poor grammar. I am sorry for the pain you have experienced over the years from being called a hillbilly. At least no big TV star has said that all hillbillies will go to hell according to his religion, causing some of our nation’s leaders, mainly in the south, to rally by him and basically agree with the belief that all hillbillies, including devastated and scared teen hillbillies, will go to hell. That would be tremendously sad, for hillbillies were born that way.

  45. phillip says:

    I have an observation about gaybashers….usually whoever yell “queer” the loudest, usually is queer.

    • Jamie says:

      I would like to first say I am a fan of the show and I am in no way religious. I respect everyone’s opinion as that’s all it is an opinion. Everyone finds a reason in this day and age to get there feelings hurt when someone says something. You can’t talk about, god, gays, politics, abortion, what background people come from or color they are without hurting someone’s feelings. For those of you that find this an opportunity to play the card ” well they are republicans so what do you expect” , well that’s numerous at best. Finally I am a middle age white republican that watches the show because I find it funny. Guess what I go to black comedy shows sit in the front row and get made fun of and laugh about it. Relax people you have one life to live don’t live it concerning yourself about what people say.

  46. Cymry Jones says:

    The authoritarian regime that controls the nation’s agenda via television programming decided that the Christian-based Robertson family was gathering too much influence. The thought-police determined it was time to attack through an “interview.” Their plan – cut off the head and then divide the body.

    However, their stratagem was flawed – clearly they failed to see the potential consequences of their attack because they were blinded by their own irritation and self-worth.

    The consequences of their attack? Phil Robertson has survived, the body was not divided and the Robertson family’s influence has increased exponentially throughout the country.

    • Brian Dzyak says:

      What Mike says… Plus…. The so-called “Authoritarian Regime” you claim “controls the nation’s agenda via television” is owned by just five major multi-national Corporations which are over-archingly CONSERVATIVE in nature. Their motivation is exclusively financial as that is the purpose of a for-profit Corporation. It has no allegiance to social issues, humanity, democracy, or even the economy as a whole. Corporations exist to obtain wealth for themselves, period.

      That is the “Free Market Capitalistic” ideology that so-called Christians advocate for against all other concerns. So here it is, Cymry Jones. The Conservative Business Ideology running headlong into the Conservative Religious Zealot ideology. And money is the priority over your ignorant intolerant bigoted worldview. Welcome to the world that Progressives have known for decades. When we allow MONEY to be the priority over all social good, everyone loses.

      Well, except in this case, A&E is doing the right thing by muting the intolerant bigoted worldview of one of its employees. It is the responsibility of media to, well, be responsible enough to not provide a bullhorn to broadcast the hateful opinions of bigots.

    • Mike says:

      So you’re the type of person who sees everything in terms of liberal and conservative, left vs. right, ‘Us’ vs. ‘Them?’ This isn’t a political issue. You want to throw around words like ‘regime’ to imply that there’s some over-arching governmental entity controlling this decision. This is not a political, religious, or ideological issue – it’s a corporate commercial issue. A&E’s bottom line was going to be hurt, in their opinion, by Robertson’s comments. So they suspended him. Is there backlash – of course! That’s what happens.
      Did you even read the entire article? My guess is no. The ‘thought-police’ you talk about didn’t attack anyone. The article paints the entire Robertson family in a positive light. The author is self-deprecating, apprehensive of the family’s hospitality, and brings their faith up as a positive, not a negative.
      Conspiracy theorists like yourself look at all situations as if there is an imminent attack. Grab some tin foil, make a hat, and wait out the darkness in your basement.

  47. phillip says:

    If i had just tuned into Duck Dyansty for the first time, I wouldn’t know that phil robertson and his clan were Christians. Being that i’m in the fastest growing religon in the world, atheism, I would have been offended by the prayers and such. It doesn’t suprise me that he believes that way about gays and minorities. Religon seeds more hate than most ideals do. Money, sex, and politics and some of the others.Politics mainly because of religon(christianity).

  48. Lisa says:

    I found the show extremely difficult to watch. I was not surprised when this story was first reported. I am glad A&E suspended him because only God knows what he’s really thinking about other minorities and special populations. Are single parents sinners because the bible doesn’t advocate divorce? If he had expressed those sentiments, he would have been insulting 40% of the population with his comments. Gay people still endure discrimination and hate, they certainly do not need a backwoods hick who made it big because of his buffoonery to perpetuate the hate against them. By keeping him on, A&E would have been condoning his comments against a population that it should be supporting.

    This is why A&E has to be selective in what they broadcast – human rights trumps ‘entertainment’ and even religious teachings every time.

  49. writerchick10 says:

    Did any of you actually read that GQ article. On top of Phil’s comments equating being gay to besteality, or any other manner of sin, he claimed that African Americans were happier before Civil Rights. After all, they looked so happy picking their cotton and singing their songs. He claims that he never heard one black person in his home state complain, or be mistreated. This isn’t just an issue of gay prejudice, comments like the ones Phil made regarding blacks were used daily as justification by those supporting slavery. Freedom of speech is one thing, but spouting off about how on top of being a sin, he doesn’t understand the appeal of an anus over a vagina, or how he voted for Romney over Obama bc Romney’s hometown of Salt Lake City is safer than Obama’s Chicago, absolutely paints a picture of Phil as an ignorant moron. They don’t give a damn if viewers see them as uneducated rednecks, bc what they’re ultimately aiming for is whatever gets people tuning in. They’re not stupid, but anyone who says Phil isn’t a bigot, doesn’t know what that word means. To expect A&E to support him bc he’s simply a Christian speaking his mind, wld mean that they are backing one group over another. They’re not a openly and solely Christian, or white station. Perhaps there is a station that is a better fit, one that caters solely to Christians who wholeheartedly and completely follow the bible, and who believe blacks were better off under Jim Crow. Otherwise I’m sure it was in the Robertson’s contracts that they cld be terminated at anytime if A&E thought they weren’t being accurately represented. And anyone who honestly believes that Phil’s way of thinking is that of the majority are 1) seriously and statistically deluded, and 2) not comprehending the massive amount of people who cld possibly take offense to his comments (gays and blacks being just two of the many, many possibilities).

    Im a Christian, and I come from a family of Christians (except for my Jewish step-father, who also loves the show) who considered Duck Dynasty their favorite show (not me personally though). None of my family members support Phil’s comments. No one can possibly live within all the constraints of the bible. Everybody sins, and the bible contradicts itself too many times to count. And we certainly don’t believe in the “circular hypocrisy” defense that’s being used by Phil supporters (most of whom are conveniently focusing solely on his comments regarding gays)…that claiming Phil is a bigot is somehow the same as calling all Christians bigots, which is bigotry in itself. That’s crap. Im against any sort of judgmental prejudice or bigotry. Someone not agreeing w/Phil’s beliefs isn’t somehow all encompassing bigotry against Christians. That sort of logic is flawed bc it just goes round and round, with each group protesting the hypocrisy of the other.

    Btw, I don’t know a single DD fan who tunes in bc the show offers wholesome family fun. They watch bc it’s entertaining, and the ridiculous (many times intentionally idiotic) things the Robertsons say make them laugh.

More TV News from Variety