Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Suspended in Wake of Anti-Gay Tirade – Was It the Right Call?

Phil Robertson Leaving Duck DynastyDuck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson has been placed on indefinite hiatus by A&E in the wake of anti-gay comments he made to GQ.

“We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series Duck Dynasty, the network group said in a statement just now. ”His personal views in no way reflect those of A+E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely.”

RELATED | Fall TV Ratings: Winners and Losers

In the GQ profile, the 67-year-old Duck Commander founder called being gay a “sin” and compared it to bestiality. “It seems like, to me, a vagina — as a man — would be more desirable than a man’s anus,” he told the mag. “That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer… But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical… Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.”

Duck Dynasty stands as the No. 1 reality show in cable history. Its fifth season, much of it shot prior to Robertson’s ouster, is set to debut on Jan. 15.

Comments are monitored, so don’t go off topic, don’t frakkin’ curse and don’t bore us with how much your coworker’s sister-in-law makes per hour. Talk smart about TV!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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. josh says:

    what? a redneck with a backwards view of a societal issue? NO WAY

    • mike says:

      who’s intolerant now?

      • Jo says:

        You are judging by the endless stream of moronic comments you’ve left on this site the last two days.

      • Proud American Lady says:

        You’re sooooo correct, Mike. The gays & libertards are completely untolerant of any other views – especially Christians. Get over it, you fools. God’s Word is the final authority on ALL things, homosexuality included. It is wrong, it is a sin & you will go to hell if you live that way.

        • Angela says:

          Uh-huh. Sure.
          Also, “libtards”? Wow. How original.

          • Leonard says:

            Don’t need to be original to be effective.

          • Angela says:

            @Leonard: Except it’s not effective. It’s lame.
            Also, I’m proud to call myself liberal, especially on the issue of gay rights. So if someone thinks “liberal” or variations thereof is actually an insult…it’s kind of not.

        • The Beach says:

          You’ve heard of the term “blind faith”? Well, there’s your perfect example.

        • But a soulless bitch like you will ALWAYS beat everyone and get to hell first, trust me. :)

        • Elyse says:

          hahahahahahahahahaha thanks for the laugh. I’ll be proud to burn in hell one day since I lived a happy life unlike you lived who yours spewing hate. you don’t have to be gay to support the LGBT community… you just need a heart.

          • Elyse says:

            *who lived yours ffs i need to stop posting right after i wake up

          • Tron says:

            That’s exactly right! There are a lot of people who have hearts. We embrace lots of people who were “born that way”. We embrace people who were born deaf or blind. We embrace people who were born with other congenital defects, like spina bifida, down syndrome and even homosexuals. But when a group begins to disparage all others because they want to be accepted even if they’re not understood, then they are pushing the wrong buttons. At worst, Robertson’s remarks show his ignorance of gays. I didn’t notice any hate at all in those words, just a guy who doesn’t understand the allure of another man. I don’t understand it either, but I do understand that the wiring’s a little different for someone who’s gay, and I accept that.

          • Stan says:

            So you are not having same sex? Interesting since we share that, eh?

            Plenty of people who are not Christian do not support lgbt lifestyle. We tolerate it and we tolerate the bible thumpers…at least some of us.

            Wait till you get a load of Sharia law…you talk about an intolerant bunch, they are them.

            I support free speech and I can actually turn off the boob tube when I don’t like the programing. And nothing is ever said about the liberal hatred of lgbt…they can joke about it, shout it out and no one says anything about it…that is tolerance…for some but not all.

        • Let me just say that you are pretty ignorant of God’s word. God does not preach hate, ignorance, intolerance and the bible also says “judge not lest ye be judged.” Maybe just maybe you need to remember who Jesus befriended and not preach all the tea party rhetoric. Don’t call me a liberal either – my thoughts don’t lie that way, but I love my LGBT friends, they are no different that you or me and they have the same dreams as you and me. They are not perverted.

          It saddens me to see so many ignorant and intolerant people in the world.

          • Buddy Murdock says:

            HOMO’S were not born that way.GOD gave them a way to escape this kind of sin,our own mind…..

          • Skip says:

            The Bible is pretty straightforward on the subject of sexual sin, whether it be sex before marriage, adultery, homosexuality or bestiality – it is all sin. But so is theft, gossiping, backbiting, murder, envy…

            Why is it surprising that someone who is a Christian would believe what the Bible says? He was not condemning anyone, just explaining his view of the topic based on his beliefs. If you read the whole interview, you will see that he includes himself in the list of sinners. He mentions drunkards twice (he is a recovering alcoholic), and admits that in the 60’s he was into the whole sex, drugs and rock-n-roll scene. Then his life was changed, and his Christian faith is why.

            If you don’t think homosexuality is a sin, or adultery, or whatever, that is fine – no one is going to force you to believe differently, or to prevent you from saying so or from living how you wish. But in that case, it really shouldn’t matter to you that someone else believes those things are sin – just agree to disagree. One day when we’re all dead we’ll find out who is right and who is wrong (or we won’t – depending upon the outcome).

          • Skip says:

            Oh, and you are right – Jesus befriended all types of people, but He never gave any indication that befriending them required accepting their sin. Instead, He told them to “go and sin no more”. Was that being judgmental? :-)

          • Stan says:

            And what about the passage of righteous judgment…you might as well study up on that too. Because they can be fruit inspectors but they can’t judge the heart of an individual.

            And quoting scripture is “quoting” scripture…so their beef is in fact with the Bible. But they will need to take on the Jews and the Islamist…cause all three have scripture passages that are virtually the same with regard to this subject.

            But the atheists are winning in the hatred department. Have you noticed how far they have removed the Christians, minimized, and pushed down?

            They might as well ban the Bible, been there did that many many years ago. Say let’s repeat history, eh?

        • xwiseguys says:

          Leaving an intolerant remark chastising intolerant… brilliant.

        • David7118 says:

          Dear Proud American Lady…if God’s Word is, as you say, the final authority then I suspect you have committed a number of sins: Stand up in the presence of the aged, Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head, Do not eat any meat with the blood still in it, Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material…and I could go on and on. These are all in the Bible in Leviticus. You can’t pick and choose what you want to follow which it seems you are doing.

          • Marie says:

            David, The scriptures you quote all come from the Old Testament. This was the covenant God made with the Israelites. They sacrificed animals at the temple to be forgiven of their sins. Christians live under the New Testament. This is the new covenant Jesus Christ made by the shedding of His blood for the forgiveness of our sins, if we believe, repent (which means to turn from sin), and are baptized into Christ being raised to live a new life in Christ by striving to obey His words in the New Testament.

          • not wearing clothes of two fabrics doesn’t mean litterally not wear clothes made of two different materials. It means don’t get involved with people that don’t believe in the same god as you, as it often causes trouble.

          • Johanna says:

            Your words speak of your ignorance of the Bible. Perhaps before you make such remarks you should be well educated about what you say. You are right that is in the bible. However if you go back and read your bible, you would know that those rules only applied to the nation of Isreal (I don’t claim to be a good speller. I’m just a kid.) when they were under the Covenant of Moses. this does not apply to people now days. Those laws were only laws that the Jews had to follow as a reminder of who they were and that they are not of the world. Never the less, this ended in the New Testament with the coming with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
            The thing I don’t understand today, is that every one is tolerant of and respectful about homosexuality. Homosexuals claim to be loving and tolerant, but if you dissagree with them and voice your opinion you get in big trouble. Homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible. It is no greater of a sin than not loving one another as your self. We have the freedom to express our views and to practice religious freedom. A man asked Si his opinion about the topic and he replied honestly. The way people are treating him is terrible.

        • Buddy Murdock says:

          Glad some people have the right look at things…this world needs to be tolerant of the good christian belief and morals..

          • Carol says:

            The last I heard America is a free nation. One that you have the freedom of speech, freedom to go to church, etc. Just because you say what your feelings are about a question that was asked you is no reason for you to condemn anyone. They have the right to feel and believe the way they want to. Phil wasn’t naming names when he spoke. He mearly answered a question with an answer on how he felt the Bible teaches him. A sin is a sin no matter whether it is stealing, murdering, etc. We all deal with sin everyday. Each person is responsilble themselves. Phil didn’t say well Joe is gay and he is sinning he said being gay is a sin in the word of the Bible and that is his belief. We all have that right. We all sin in the eyes of the LORD and have to ask for forgiveness. I don’t think anyone has the right to say you have freedom of speech and then when you answer a question honestly the way you feel you get fired because some people have a chip on there shoulder and every time someone speaks a honest word you want to say they are pointing fingers at you. I thought when you came out of the closet that meant you wanted the world to know you are what you are but if anyone says anything everyone gets there drawers in a wad. If someone calls you a murderer and you know thats not what you are then I could understand why you are affended. Each person will stand in judgement one day and the almighty will deal with each of us then, it want matter to the Almighty what was said by someone else he will look in his book of life and thats what you will judged for. It want matter to him he will only be looking at your facts of life and not anyone elses. Everyone has the right to have there own out look on the way life should mean and be to us. If everyone only took care of themselves and the way we should be then no one would have the time to be judging or saying they should not say that it might hurt someone elses feelings, but I will tell A&E this if they don’t put him back on Duck Dynasty I will never watch another show on this channel again. I am tired of everyone saying we have rights but you can only have them when I say you can and you can only say what I say you can. God wants us to love all and gives us all the freedom of choices in Life whether they are right or wrong. He knows we no right from wrong and he gives us the freedom to make them. He will tell us all one day how well we made those choices.

        • Andrew says:

          Of course you bible thumpers focus on ONE thing and conveniently ignore the rest (and this is just a partial list):

          Eating ham is a sin (Leviticus 11:7-8)
          Getting a tattoo is a sin (Leviticus 19:28)
          Getting a haircut is a sin (Leviticus 19:27)
          Consulting psychics is a sin (Leviticus 19:31)
          Gossiping is a sin (Leviticus 19:16)
          Cursing your parents is a sin (Exodus 21:17)
          Getting remarried after getting divorced is a sin (Mark 10:11-12)
          Working on Sunday is a sin, sorry NFL (Exodus 31:14-15, Leviticus 23:3 )
          Women speaking in church is a sin, Church Lady (1 Corinthians 14:34-35)
          Eating shellfish is a sin (Leviticus 10-11)
          Losing your virginity before marriage is a sin (Deuteronomy 22:20-21)
          Not wearing a hat is a sin (Leviticus 10:6)
          Wearing mixed fabrics is a sin (Leviticus 19:19)
          Growing more that one thing in your garden is a sin (Leviticus 19:19)
          Touching your pet if it’s dirty is a sin (Leviticus 5:2)
          Drinking wine (i.e. communion) in church is a sin (Leviticus 10:9)
          Touching the dead carcass of a pig is a sin, sorry again NFL(Deuteronomy 14:8)
          Going to church within 33 days after giving birth to a boy is a sin (Leviticus 12:4)
          Going to church within 66 days after giving birth to a girl is a sin (Leviticus 12:5)
          Lying is a sin. You conservative dingleberries have a real problem here. (Leviticus19:11)
          Spreading slander is a sin. Ditto on that for the dingleberries. (Leviticus 19:16)
          Seeking revenge or bearing a grudge is a sin. Again with the dingleberries. (Leviticus19:18)
          Mistreating foreigners is a sin. “the foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born”. Man, you conservative dingleberries are going to hell for sure.(Leviticus19:33-34)

          So, since I know you’ve done more than one of the things on this list Church Lady, maybe you and your ilk should learn the golden rule: STFU. And quit trying to force your b.s. on everyone else when you can’t even live by it yourself, you hypocritical buffoon. Oh, and HAPPY HOLIDAYS. You’ve just been schooled by a “libtard”. Class dismissed.

          • jazzyt2u says:

            This is the best post EVER. Thank you!!!!

          • Marie says:

            Andrew, Christians do not live under the Old Testament (old law). See my answer to David 7118 above. All of the scriptures you quoted are from the Old Testament. Christians live by the New Testament, not the old.

          • Andrew says:

            “Andrew, Christians do not live under the Old Testament (old law). See my answer to David 7118 above. All of the scriptures you quoted are from the Old Testament. Christians live by the New Testament, not the old.
            Comment by Marie ”

            So that would include the part about homosexuals then too.


          • Marie says:

            To answer your question – None of the ritualistic laws of the Old Testament are included in the New Testament. However, all of the ten commandments (except for keeping the Sabbath, which was a Saturday) are included in the New Testament. As far as sins,
            1 Corinthians 7:9-11 says “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” This is from the New International Version of the Bible. We have ALL sinned and come short of the glory of God. But God loves us, and has provided a way through Jesus Christ (His Son) for us to repent and turn from sin and be saved. That doesn’t mean we are perfect afterwards, but we strive (like the apostle Paul said) to change our ways according to God’s word, and become mature Christians. There are other scriptures which warn us not to be liars, or gossip or be gluttons. Our goal is to be more like Christ, and to have the love He had for others. Jesus loves us all, and died for us, but he did not condone sin. He hates sin, but loves the sinner, hoping to save him/her.

          • Alexis Raines says:

            Marie is right, many that you listed are in the Old Testament and taken completely out of context. Many of the things listed in Leviticus were things that God told Moses to tell his people to do to stand out, but they do not apply today, Jesus said that when He came the old passed away and he was the Law now, just believing in him, turning from our sins. The Bible even declares itself as living, meaning it can be applied to today’s world too, the New testament. And the ones you listed from the new testament are sins, like sex before marriage, gossiping, cursing our parents. That’s why, as Christians, we know that we are all sinners. I mean who hasn’t gossiped before, right? I know I have, but I know Jesus died for those sins so that I could go to Heaven one day. Please at least do your research on someone’s religion before you try to throw it back in their face.

          • Andrew says:

            Well Alexis here’s some words that you and the rest of your ilk can live by: MIND YOUR OWN DAMN BUSINESS. No wonder more and more people are becoming atheists.a

          • Skip says:

            Andrew, remember that the New Testament as well as the Old Testament also classifies homosexuality (as well as pre-marital sex, extra-marital sex, etc.) as sin. That is not true of most of the items you have listed. Lying, slander, seeking revenge – those are all things mentioned in the New Testament as sin. But that is about it that is on your list.

          • Alexis Raines says:

            Thank you Skip! that’s my point. A lot of people just have misunderstandings about Christianity and what sin is.

          • Char Inman says:

            I agree, especially the ones that preach the bible while they are going and getting their bodies all marked up with tattoos and piercings. It bugs the hell out of me. One day it is a bible quote then its a picture of their new tattoo.

          • Alexis Raines says:

            Again, the thing about tattoos is in Leviticus, the Old Testament. And it was Moses telling Christians not to do it, because tattoos meant something completely different back in that time. Then Jesus said the old Law is gone and the new has come, and the new law says nothing about tattoos.

          • topoopon says:


          • CaryRDH says:

            Well said Sir, well said.

          • MIKAYLA says:

            For everyone quoting the Old Testament, please read the bible. We are in the New Testament and there is a New Covenant. The law has been redefined by Christ. THE NEW TESTAMENT SAYS HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN. And so what? Even if we are supposed to be obeying the Old Testament laws. Homosexuality would still be a sin. That is irrelevant. It is condemned in BOTH covenants.

          • Leah says:

            Andrew you rock! Im posting this list to my facebook.

        • Lori says:

          “Untolerant”???? Oh my, even autocorrection can’t help a redneck!! Hahahahahaha!!!!!

        • HTGR says:

          “gays & libertards are completely untolerant of any other views ….you fools…. God’s Word is the final authority on ALL things…. ….you will go to hell….”
          Haha, wow, definitely more than a little pot, kettle, black going on there! That’s one of the more ironic sets of words ever posted here hah.

        • Alison says:

          Your grammar/spelling is really bad, and to say that your opinion is correct over everyone else’s lands you in the same boat full of idiots that disagree with you.

        • Gary Legge says:

          I agree that homosexuality is a sin, but only God decides who will not enter the kingdom of heaven. I personally am very attracted to women and would like to sleep with many, I control my urges and stay away from that sin. We all fall short in the eye’s of God, I hope mercy is given to me and I will let The Lord pass judgement on others.

        • kelly says:

          I am a Christian and a liberal. Please don’t assume that all Christians think like you. And please do not assume that only you and those who think as you do will go to Heaven. Adolf Hitler professed himself to be a Christian. Adam, Abraham, Isaiah, Moses, David and Noah would today be called Jewish.

          • Jessica says:

            In Hitler’s Table Talk Hitler often voiced stridently negative views of Christianity. Bullock wrote that Hitler was a rationalist and materialist, who saw Christianity as a religion “fit for slaves”, and against the natural law of selection and survival of the fittest.

        • Carol says:

          I agree with Phil Robertson in his right to freedom of speech. I also understand A&E also censored just how much Duck Dynasty could say relating to Christianity.

          Come on now – If you can tell them what they can say regarding their views, by the way, on what is called a “Reality Show”, why don’t they have the right to their opinion? Hopefully another better station will pick them up and A&E will drop drastically in the ratings. I, however do not plan to watch A&E TV (other than Duck Dynasty) again.

          Why can’t Phil have his opinion just like gays have their opinion. Gays think they are right in what they do and speak out about their views. STOP airing some views as right and other views as wrong. It is all a matter of what someone believes within themselves.

          Christianity is a big NO on TV, however the use of cursing and vulgarity along with nudity is encouraged.. What is the difference in what one views as wrong and what one views as right. A&E is more than willing to allow cursing for our young people to hear, but curbs the Christian point of view. Wonder why we have so many school shootings etc.?

          “Comments on are monitored. So don’t go off topic, don’t frakkin’ curse, and be gone with your offers of discount leather goods. Talk smart about TV!”

          TV used to be family oriented, now it is either violence, nudity and/or profanity. People are allowed to use the “F” word on a regular basis. That is offensive to me, so why don’t they make a huge issue out of what they are airing so that our children grow up thinking “well, they do it on TV”.

          What a sad state TV has put our world in, people reporting on Phil’s behavior, but VERY little about the “knockout game” and abuse of the elderly and children.

          A&E should, in my opinion, be completed dropped from airing time.

        • mike says:

          a special kinda of stupid aren’t you.

          • Carol says:


          • Carol says:

            By the way either become literate or sign off. What you mean “your” kinda stupid. The correct word is You Are and you’re. Take time out and take a literacy course and then return.

        • wooster182 says:

          I’m a liberal and a Christian. But thanks for judging!

          • mikaylalove says:

            It is imposslble to be a true Christian and be a liberal. Read Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:21. Not all who call him Lord will go to heaven for being lawless. Jesus said many people will be rejected for being too liberal and not following the commands of God. If somebody actually obeys the bible tey will be called conservative and hated on by the world. That is why Timothy said it is impossible to live a godly life without suffering persecution. And you can not be a friend of the world and a friend of God. LUKEWARM Christians will be spit out by Christ himself. Read revelation. And by the way, Judging is not the same thing as preaching. Judging is condemning someone as how they used to kill people in the old testament. That is judging. I wish all of you fake Christians would start reading the scriptures , all of them and realize you are going around representing a false Christianity. If you read 1 Corinthians ch. 5 you will see that Paul actually gets mad at a church for NOT judging someone else that called themselves a Christian but kept on fornicating. You like so many people are cherry picking the bible and choosing what you want to believe, what is convenient and what is not. Liberals believe in abortion. That is called murder and no murder will go to heaven the bible states. Liberals believe in homosexuality and no homosexuals will go to heaven (1 Corinthian 6:9) If you are going to tell people you are a Christian, do not be lawless , otherwise Jesus will reject you. Holiness is a must for anyone to go to heaven the bible says. And many, not all, liberal beliefs are unholy. Liberal with sin.

        • Amber says:

          Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexual ACTS, however, are, but they are no worse than heterosexual acts done outside of marriage. Being a Catholic myself, I cannot stand when people who claim to be Christian call being gay a sin. Please get your facts straight before opening your mouth. People like you give the rest of us a bad name.

        • Tim Dixon says:

          And may I just add that are not born that way they are just full of filthy lust like digging in the sewer

        • Rodney Annis says:

          they have taken CHRIST out of Christmas lets not let those hell bounders take Phil out of duck dynasty

        • Scrambles says:

          …So says some book written by men….

      • josh says:

        so they are allowed to pride themselves on being rednecks but yet, when they go and reinforce all the stereotypes, we aren’t allowed to call them out for it?

        I’m very tolerant of dumb, until it is given a platform to spread it’s incredibly narrow-minded message

        • jazzyt2u says:

          I knew I could come on this site and find people of intelligence. Thank you. Between you and Andrew I’m a happy comments reader… lol

          • Andrew says:

            Happy to be of service. Smacking down these moronic mouth breathers is not only fun iy’s a moral imperative.

      • natalie says:


      • This unreal ! Television is filled w/methamphetamine makers, dealers, folks using GD, S_ _ _ & NOW A & E SUSPENDS PHIL ROBERTSON FOR SPEAKING THE TRUTH FROM GOD’S WORD. THE OLD TESTAMENT SPEAKS CLEARY OF A MAN & WOMAN ONLY HAVING SEXUAL RELATIONS. WHY NOT FIRE ALL OF THE PORNO LIKE PROGRAMS, DRUGS THAT KILL & MAIM THAT A & E SEEM TO BELIEVE IS OK FOR BROADCAST, BUT A MAN’S PERSONAL VIEW “TAIME” SUBJECT MATTER IN TODAY’S WORLD, RESULTS IN DISSMISSAL ! Decent Christian folks are a minority & now it looks as “being clean” is censored, not the despicable filthy content on almost ALL major networks as well as cable networks.
        We will organize & boycott all A & E programing. good riddance to a wrong view of network censorship. Obviously 100s if “celebrities” should be fired, dismissed etc as their content is MUCH, MUCH more troubling & should not be broadcasted.

    • Dennis. says:

      what an ignorant lib that’s so quick to judge others and crush a persons rights of free speech? NO WAY. it’s funny how you people support everyone’s rights unless you disagree with them. hypocrite.
      I’m really starting to hate gay people and I don’t like it, I use to be tolerant and accepting but the more I see things like this and the almost jihad like reaction of the gay community the angrier I get and I really don’t like feeling this way. I never thought I would see the gay community reacting and acting like some totalitarian government or Nazi like entity trying to suppress any opinion you don’t like you’re starting to act just like the people that treated you so badly, is that what you really want? where hate against gays was misplaced and misguided you are starting to earn that hate and that is something you should be ashamed of. I don’t hate gay people it’s the gay agenda machine the community of hate that you are creating, it’s almost as bad as the tea party.Phil Robertson has a right to his opinion and the right to express them

      • Emma says:

        Dennis, that’s your problem, not ours. If you want to hate, that’s on you and you alone.

      • Emma says:

        Forgot to add: “I’m really starting to hate gay people” / “I don’t hate gay people”. And there you have it, the very definition of hypocrisy.

        I don’t hate you-until I hate you- I don’t really want to-but YOU make me-and in the end all opinions that matter are mine. Never change bigots, never change. At least we know what we’re fighting.

        • Dennis. says:

          @emma you seem to lack the ability to comprehend so I’ll try to help you, did you miss the word “starting” or just not understand the word? it means I am beginning to hate which means I am in the anger state which I do not enjoy, I don’t want to hate I would love for you to stop acting like Nazi or gay mafia, Keep pushing and soon you’ll get pushed back. act like bullies and soon you’ll be turned on. I had a gay friend and some acquaintances growing up and now i’m feeling this way what does that say? your tactics now seem hostile and oppressive and opinion is turning.

          • Dennis. says:

            btw I don’t watch this show or care anything about it

          • Emma says:

            “you seem to lack the ability to comprehend”, says the idiot comparing gay people to the nazi (with a capital N, at that) who tortured and killed 1M people. I rest my case.

      • Fiona says:

        Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. He can say whatever he likes and the government will not prosecute him for it. However, that does not mean that the government has to protect him if the private company that has hired him feels that his statements might damage their bottom line and they wish to withdraw the relationship. He can still say whatever he likes to whomever wants to listen, but A&E is not obliged to give him a platform on which to do it if they don’t wish to. That’s *their* freedom of choice.

        • jazzyt2u says:

          Thank you!!!

        • murray says:

          A & E didn’t give him the platform it was GQ. They are penalizing him for something he said elsewhere.

          • Sara says:

            Yes, he was being interviewed by GQ, but he was still representing the show, which makes it A&E’s concern as it is their product.

        • megan says:

          The sad part about all of this is the fact that a&e just wanted Phil gone. When they heard the pitch about the show they thought it was just going to be about a bunch of rednecks that Americans were going to laugh at and they were going to capitalize on that. What they didnt realize was that this family had morals and lived by the word of God. A LOT of Americans came to respect and love this show for that very reason. A&E has been trying to get rid of Phil ever since; they even had someone there to make sure Phil didnt say anything too bad. . .right. They also could have stopped this from even getting out but like I said before they are trying to get rid of Phil and the sense of Christianity that he brings. So sad.

          • megan says:

            Fortunately Phil and the rest of the Robertsons dont need A&E, but A&E needs them, I just dont think they realize how much at the current moment.

          • HTGR says:

            @megan – OK, but how is insulting gays and implying that blacks would be better off if we went back to the era of Jim Crow good morals? That sounds like bad morals to me.

          • megan says:

            He never said anything that was “insulting” fisrt off, seeing as how he is a Christian that is his belief. We are all allowed to believe what we want to. Secondly as for the mention of blacks and Jim Crowe if you actually read what he said he says, he was saying and this is paraphrasing that from his personal experience that when he was working in the fields along with them he did not see any mistreatment, not to say it did not happen he just didnt see it.

      • Kat says:

        I don’t see anyone crushing anyone else’s right to free speech. His remarks were published in a magazine after all. Phil has a right to his opinion and a right to express it. That said, A&E has the SAME RIGHT to express their disagreement and opposition to his opinion by taking him off the air. And all you “good Christians” can certainly turn off the TV if you’re offended by the abounding Godlessness. Ain’t America great? :)

      • Andrew says:

        But I’ll just bet that you were yelling for the firing of Martin Bashir for insulting Sarah Palin. Forget betting. I KNOW you were. Only conservative dingleberries like yourself have the right to free speech. Scuzbucket Phil has the right to say what he wants and we have the right to smack his skanky ass for it. Deal with it.

    • john l darrow says:

      why is it ok to openly support homosexuality but wrong to openly oppose it ? we all have the right and responceabillity to voice our opinion about social issues as long as were not hindering an indivuals rights. society is often guilty of excessive open mindness , in my opinion.

      • Let's Not Encourage Prejudice says:

        Well, why is it wrong to openly support racism, but okay to openly oppose it? Is it okay for me to be racist in the privacy of my own home, as long as I’m not racist in public? If I was to state in a public interview that being asian is a sin, would that be acceptable? Same thing goes for prejudice against women, or old people, or people with disabilities. None of those are okay. Describing any characteristic someone has through no choice of their own as a “sin” *does* hinder that individual’s rights. It’s just not a cool thing to say.

      • Angela says:

        Because there’s no logical reason you need to oppose it, perhaps? Because none of the anti-gay arguments hold any water?

    • Monte Cowen says:

      If A&E wants to drop one, they must drop them all. Some other station will pick it up and Christian Values will continue to be viewed. Real Christian Americans need to stand up and take control of what is being said and what is being shown in this country. We were built by Christian Standards and we are being torn down by Anti Christian movements and Muslim beliefs. Gay Movement is supported by the Anti-Christ. A&E is making a big mistake and I hope they realize what they are doing?

      • Carole Jarrell says:

        I suspect that there are a number of other stations more than happy to have us Christians follow Phil (all 14mm of us viewers) and their merchandising and go somewhere else. I have worked with many gay nurses who were excellent. But, when their lifestyle, opinions, etc. prevent us from voicing any opinions of our own, (BTW, we do not need to judge this behavior…..God has clearly stated that it is an abomination and a stench in HIS nostrils) so we don’t need to judge. God is clear. I feel sad for the life that they have chosen, but I am also becoming angry when Christians are being persecuted for exercising free speech. I hope that gays and lesbians are aware that the playbook of Hitler and Saul Alinsky was to execute homosexuals FIRST and media second. Along with the loss of our freedom of speech, eventually comes yours. I hope A&E tanks, and it happens quickly. These folks don’t need A&E, or their money so I would just walk away and take my money with me and my viewers.

        • Ryan says:

          So when exactly did you choose to be straight Carol? Oh you didn’t, you were born that way? Shocking.

          He is entitled to his opinion, A&E is entitled to suspend him. This isn’t a “gay” agenda, and there is reason behind why the LGBTQ community is vocal: they don’t have equal rights. you are certainly entitled to disagree with the gay lifestyle, but they don’t have the same equality under the law as you. You want to get married, divorce, have twenty kids, get social security when your spouse dies? Those are rights afforded to you because you were blessed to be born with a genetic predisposition and attraction to the opposite sex. Not everyone was as “lucky” as you. I didn’t read malice in Phil’s words, but unfortunately they’ll be used as a battle cry whenever anyone pushes for equal rights for LGBTQ going onward.

      • TL says:


    • Randy says:

      Lets see Mr. Phil didn’t say anyting hateful or untrue. Mr. Ausiello on the other hand:

      tirade [taɪˈreɪd]
      1. a long angry speech or denunciation

      This was not conducted by Mr. Phil.

      A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person’s reputation.

      The act of presenting such material to the public.

      This was conducted by Mr Ausiello.
      tvline should be concerned:(

    • Not a redneck. says:

      What makes them backwards? The fact that they live like people have for centuries? How is that backwards?

    • Dawn D says:

      This was not his opinion this is straight from the bible, this is Gods words not his:
      1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (New King James Version)

      1 Corinthians 6:9-11

      New King James Version (NKJV)

      9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,[a] nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

      • Brent Norman says:

        The earliest Greek words that have now been substituted with “homosexuals” and “sodomites”, were “malakoi” and “arsenokoitai”(56 A.D.), the latter of which’s meaning is not entirely understood to this day. “Malakoi” which basically translates as “soft” and came to be understood as “effeminate”. Various translations have brought other meanings to these words that may not have been the original intent. St. Thomas Aquinas had written about this — the meaning of “effeminacy”.

        “malakoi” and “arsenokoitai” have also been translated, respectively, as “weaklings” and “abusers of themselves with mankynde”(1539); “sensual” and “given to unnatural vice”(1951); “voluptuous persons” and “sodomites”(1958); “sissies” and “child molesters”(1968); “boy prostitutes’ and ‘practicing homosexuals’
        , while some versions simply mesh those two words into the single rubric of “homosexuals”, which only shows up in the 20th century. Basically it’s been subject to the interpretation of the translator at the time based on the cultural context available to them. Even the word “homosexual” did not exist until the late 19th century! There’s definitely some editing that has happened since the original words of Paul.

        The translation you cited is convenient for the needs of those who would seek to diminish the humanity of a person who is not 100% heterosexual. Unfortunately it is not as perfect and air-tight as many have been made to believe.

    • Tim Dixon says:

      I just hope that they’re not monitored one-sided because that’s what it seems like TV is come to the Gay way. Phil spoke out of his heart and he is being punished for it. And this is the very reason why there is so much hate against homosexuals and homosexuals hating heterosexual because there never can become a dialogue of truth because it’s always just one sided. But the plain fact remains every word he said is true but now because of his values and morals he has now become a big hit a TV branded bigot! You should be ashamed of yourself I will continue to support the dynasty but I will buy nothing that is advertised AE and I hope this starts a revolution to bring back freedom of speech no mam or group should be above the Constitution and Obama should be tossed out of office for not upholding the laws that was handed to him by Congress by the people just another slap in the face sad day in our world again thank you Phil for standing up and not backing down or worrying about a dollar I will still by your shirts.

    • kimberly says:

      It’s definately a sign of the times when THIS is considered a BACKWARDS view of societal issues.

    • GLENDA says:


  2. yankeesrj12 says:

    I hate the show and disagree with his comments, but he should be allowed to have his own opinions. I wouldn’t be surprised if the family says no to A&E when renewal is up and moves elsewhere.

    • Completely agree with everything you said. I’m sure that when their contract is up another station will be eager to take them on (my guess is TLC, because well, it seems like a place they would fit).

    • i didn’t know the show existed prior to this. he has his own opinions, and obviously has not been stopped from spouting them, nor thinking them. that has little to do with his employment contract. if an employee does something that is detrimental to the business image and bottom line, through their intentional, self chosen, self serving very public actions – the employer is in no way compelled to keep on an employee that has, by their own actions, made themselves a liability. this is a business deal – he threatened it with his public relations stunt. the fellow has no one but himself to blame for his suspension, and it has nothing to do with free speech, or his ability to hold his hostile and bigoted opinions. he is still just as free now to think what he does as he was prior to his ill conceived denigration of part of A&E’s customer base.

      • Rinibini says:

        This is a reality show about this family and their beliefs. I’m sorry but A&E knew this was a religious and extremely opinionated family. He is not and was never representing A&E as the show, by it’s own name, is about HIM and his family. Therefor, although I hate everything he stands for, in my opinion, A&E has no basis to suspend him. Chastise him because he said that, sure. Distance themselves from his comments and make sure everyone understands he’s representing his own views and not that of the network, yes. But suspend him from a show that is about HIM and HIS family? I think that’s going a bit far.

        • sd says:

          There’s no inalienable rights to have a TV show. If you’re a liability you’re let go. A man running on at the mouth about how he prefers vagina to the anus is maybe not someone they want representing their network. A man praising Jim Crow days for black people is maybe not what they want to see. Maybe they thought they were getting a real Christian family that actually had values and not some homophobic bigots– they’re many Christians who aren’t those things so the whole they knew he was a Christian as an excuse is baffling.

          • Babygate says:

            To be clear, the Bible does condemn the gay lifestyle. Just as it condemns adultery, sex before marriage, dishonoring your parents, lying, etc. A Christian that denies the teachings of the Bible is not a Christian. That’s just the way it works. The Bible, however, also teaches love and compassion for all. You can like and love gays but a Christian that lives his faith will have to choose between the secular philosophy and the teachings of the Bible because you can’t do both. In other words, as a Christian, you can love someone without endorsing their lifestyle or their choices. But non-Christians don’t get this because they want to force a “all or nothing” situation. And that’s not right nor is it tolerant or respectful of others’ beliefs. Intolerant people say, if you are against gay marriage its because you hate gays. So everything has to be black or white. But in the real world, I can be against gay marriage and still love gay people and want their civil rights to he protected.

          • Lilly says:

            Yes, and for people here who have never heard him, Phil Robertson is sometimes a preacher. And he has repeatedly said that he is a sinner. He has done many things of which he is not proud. He, too, believes in judging the sin and leaving judgment of the sinner to God.

          • sd says:

            @babygate to be clear the bible NEVER mentions homosexuality. What people do is paraphrase and INTERPRET and change the wording in Corinthians to suit their hate. Not only that, you’re interpreting a book that’s been interpreted so yes, there are other views on Christianity and yours are not the be all and end all of it. And whatever else is said, when a man in an interview goes on and compares beastiality and prostitution to homosexuality he’s not being loving or kind or Christian.

          • Angela says:

            @Babygate: You can like and love gays but a Christian that lives his faith will have to choose between the secular philosophy and the teachings of the Bible because you can’t do both.
            Really? That’s funny, ’cause I can think of many Christians out there who CAN and do support gay marriage, and gay rights in general. So how do you explain that?
            But in the real world, I can be against gay marriage and still love gay people and want their civil rights to he protected.
            But why do you have to be against gay marriage to begin with? Why not consider the fact that any anti-gay rhetoric in that book was written at a time when people had practically no understanding of the concept of homosexuality, or that it just happened to be written by some prejudiced individuals? Why not consider the fact that the Bible has many contradictions and translations, and therefore it’s really hard to tell exactly what is the “true” message of the Bible?
            Just because a book says something is wrong doesn’t automatically mean that’s set in stone and true. And if you’re as concerned about gay people’s civil rights as you claim, then I would think you’d want to make sure they have the opportunity to explore every single right and privilege straight people have, including marriage (there are many legal, important, necessary benefits that gay people would get if they got married that they wouldn’t otherwise get, after all).

          • Babygate says:

            No one can judge the heart of a man but God. At the end, I believe that many unexpected people will be in the presence of God because He looks at the heart. But it is disingenuous to say the Bible says nothing about homosexuality. Off the top of my head Leviticus and Romans are very specific about this. But again, the Bible is also very specific about other behaviors. I don’t care to engage in a debate about whether or not being gay is a sin because salvation is much more than that and no man if fit to judge. My point is simply that if you call yourself a Christian then you have to follow the teachings of the Bible and that’s all this guy is saying. He admits he’s messed up too and he can’t judge but he also makes reference to what the bible says to justify his position. And he has a right to do that.

          • Angela says:

            My point is simply that if you call yourself a Christian then you have to follow the teachings of the Bible
            Yes, but that brings me back to my point. How much of it is someone supposed to follow in order to be a proper Christian? Everyone picks and chooses the teachings they take away from the Bible, nobody follows it to the very letter in every aspect of their lives.

          • Babygate says:

            @Angela: You think that Christians behaving in a way that contradicts Biblical teaching is something new? Let’s bring it down to the most common denominator: if those Christians you make reference to support gay marriage because that is their personal conviction, I have nothing to say against it because we all have a conscience that guides us. But likewise, there are others, Christians or otherwise whose conscience dictates the opposite to be true. My question is: dare we be equally as tolerant to both types of individuals? Because that’s the question for debate here. This man is being condemned for following his conscience.

          • Babygate says:

            @Angela: “Yes, but that brings me back to my point. How much of it is someone supposed to follow in order to be a proper Christian? Everyone picks and chooses the teachings they take away from the Bible, nobody follows it to the very letter in every aspect of their lives.”

            Excellent question but I think you have already provided your own answer. Everyone picks and chooses what they can tolerate because some of the expectations seem insurmountable. There are a great many things that the Bible does not address, but there are things that it does address. Ultimately, I don’t think it’s all black or white. There are religious people who follow the letter of the Bible and have some of the blackest hearts that have every existed. If you can possibly fathom such a contradiction. I think that it’s between a man and his God. That’s why I can’t fault this man for expressing his opinion because he’s being true to his faith. In this country we have learned to be extremely tolerant of people that openly wish us harm. We should extend the same courtesy to someone who is honest enough to say what he thinks without calling for harm to come to anyone or for a revolt. He’s just being who he is and being honest when answering questions.

          • Angela says:

            @Babygate: You think that Christians behaving in a way that contradicts Biblical teaching is something new?
            No, definitely not. But that’s why it never ceases to amuse me when Christians sit there and cast judgment on others.
            Let’s bring it down to the most common denominator: if those Christians you make reference to support gay marriage because that is their personal conviction, I have nothing to say against it because we all have a conscience that guides us. But likewise, there are others, Christians or otherwise whose conscience dictates the opposite to be true. My question is: dare we be equally as tolerant to both types of individuals? Because that’s the question for debate here. This man is being condemned for following his conscience.
            No, he’s being condemned because of the way he expressed his beliefs. He compared homosexuality to bestiality. That’s a pretty disgusting, inane comparison to make. And much of the anti-gay rhetoric others in this country express is very similar to his. A lot of people who are anti-gay always start talking about how gay people are sinners and will go to hell, and talk about how they’re “destroying the moral fabric of this country” (because we all know THAT is what’s going to make a 200 plus year old country finally crumble, of course!), or they always, ALWAYS bring up the bestiality thing (can someone PLEASE explain to me how they make the jump from same-sex couples marrying to having sex with animals? What the hell is it about the one that makes a person automatically think of the other?). They actively support laws that deny people equal rights. Why exactly are we supposed to be tolerant of such harsh, cruel behavior and words?
            Anti-gay people are entitled to think what they wish, and state their feelings. But the fact remains that their arguments have no basis in fact or reality. I live in a state where gay marriage is legal, I know many gay people. Our society has not fallen apart at the seams. It’s going along about as good/bad as it always has been.
            And anti-gay people are against something that is an integral part of who a person is. You can choose your religion and your beliefs. You cannot choose your sexuality. To see people still stubbornly clinging to outdated beliefs in a day and age where all the facts prove their beliefs to be untrue…it’s very hard to not become frustrated by and fail to understand or respect that.

          • Angela says:

            @Babygate (in response to second post): Excellent question but I think you have already provided your own answer. Everyone picks and chooses what they can tolerate because some of the expectations seem insurmountable.
            Thank you, first off, and precisely. The expectations seem insurmountable. So why do some Christians decide to obsess over homosexuality? That’s not something they can change, exactly, after all, and of all the issues to address in the Bible, there are plenty others that I think deserve much more attention and hand-wringing.
            There are a great many things that the Bible does not address, but there are things that it does address. Ultimately, I don’t think it’s all black or white. There are religious people who follow the letter of the Bible and have some of the blackest hearts that have every existed. If you can possibly fathom such a contradiction. I think that it’s between a man and his God.
            Cannot argue with any of this.
            That’s why I can’t fault this man for expressing his opinion because he’s being true to his faith. In this country we have learned to be extremely tolerant of people that openly wish us harm. We should extend the same courtesy to someone who is honest enough to say what he thinks without calling for harm to come to anyone or for a revolt. He’s just being who he is and being honest when answering questions.
            I’m curious who it is that’s openly wished us harm that we’ve been tolerant of? And again, he may not be calling for harm or staging a revolt, but his comments still come off very ignorant and grossly offensive in the comparisons made.
            I do welcome the honesty, though. Better to know someone’s true views than to have them put on a polite façade.
            (Also, apologies to people at large for the lengthy posts-if you actually read these, I salute you, LOL :D.)

        • cheyennerose says:

          You hit the nail right on the head. Well put.

      • Angela says:

        Thank you. So good to see a logical, rational post.

        • taran63 says:

          I’ve just been reading the back and forth posts between Angela and Babygate and they made me smile. Each individual had opposing views, but they were both able to express their views in an eloquent manner. Neither one accused the other of hate speech for disagreeing with them.
          Thank you for sharing that with us. It’s nice to see that people are still capable of calm, rational discussions even if they disagree with each other.

          • Lilly says:

            Hear, hear!

          • Angela says:

            I certainly can’t disagree with this. If you read this, Babygate, thank you for your respectful tone. We obviously don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but I do appreciate that you’re wiling to hear me and others out. And thanks to you, too, taran63, for your kind words.

      • Robby Horine says:

        What about the ‘customer base’ that made Duck Dynasty the blockbuster it is? Do you think they’ll just stay watching A&E? Or will they take their eyes and with it their money and watch another channel?

        I’m better there are going to be more supporters of the Robersons than protesters of Phil’s statement.

      • Ollie says:

        A&E doesn’t won him 24/7!! His freedom of speech off air is his choice and not to be punished because the LGBT wants his head on a platter!! But that seems to be the pattern when a Christian quotes God’s Holy Bible, it started with a guy named John the Baptist!! and has been going on ever since!

        • lacy says:

          At the risk of being snarky, there were plenty of people before John the Baptist being ostracized for preaching and proclaiming the Word of God (and by “Word” I do not mean the written word.) Read the Old Testament. They’re called prophets… Isaiah, Amos, Hosea, Ezekiel, etc.

        • Emma says:

          You do realize that not everyone on the planet believes in a god, let alone yours, right?

        • Myrna says:

          This is a very controversial topic and I bought Duck Dynasty Dvd’s because I appreciate family values, upfront “straight talk” saying it like it is. A&E pointed out their views on the subject is not necessarily the views of the D.D. programs, but they are in it for the $$money$$ people and will remain on the fence uncommitted to either. Just bring us in the money and we’re content.
          I’ve seen so called half hour tv comedy shows that are not even funny. I do not laugh at sin nor find it funny the world is pushing so hard to try and make people swallow it up by the boatloads. God called evil, sin and it is what it is. Trying to get around God is a losing battle even if the world and it’s laws constantly are changing, God doesn’t change his values and won’t for anyone. Do things his way and you’ll be far better off and a happier individual; more than you can trying to do things your way. I hope Duck Dynasty remains on tv to make more wholesome entertainment that I can continue to laugh and agree with their true common sense statements.

          We accept all kinds of people of all races regardless of color, ethnic group, etc. but when practices go against God’s word, then each and every Christian has their RIGHT to take a stand and speak up against wrong and not to be enforced to become acceptors and tolerate sinful behavior. When my children did something wrong, they were corrected and trained to be the best they could be and I never stopped loving them ever for any of their wrong. That is how it is with those who are going against God’s will. He loves you, but he also punishes to bring you away from the wrong deed(s) not to remain in them.

      • Skip says:

        You are right that this is not a free speech issue. An employer can fire an employee that they feel has somehow harmed the company. In the same manner, a Christian-owned company could fire a gay store clerk for promoting gay rights. Now, many who are applauding A&E would be outraged if Hobby Lobby, for example, fired a gay clerk or store manager for giving an interview in favor of gay right or sam-sex marriage. But they would have that right if they chose to.

        However, A&E may regret the decision. Duck Dynasty is a very popular show for a cable show, and when they leave for another channel, A&E may feel the economic impact of losing those advertising dollars.

    • Rinibini says:

      Totally agree! I don’t watch the show because it seems very staged and forced and honestly, down right STUPID and I 100% disagree with his comments. Unfortunately, any idiot is allowed his own opinion. And while I may not agree with it he has his right to say it.

      • allie says:

        I agree. If that crazy woman on Fox News can say that Jesus and Santa were white… how is this any different? I might not agree but we do have freedom of speech.

        • Michelle says:

          And he still has freedom of speech — the government in no way silenced him. There is no freedom from your employer being angry that your words reflect poorly on their brand.

          • Heather says:

            THANK YOU, Michelle! EVERY article about this has comments about freedom of speech. Thank you for being the first person to ACCURATELY state what that actually means!

          • Winter says:

            Legally this is true and they do have this right. But we have become a nation where you can’t say any opinions without first running them through a lawyer and a publicist to make sure you don’t hurt anyone’s feelings. What happened to public discourse? Now all we do is call names and openly mock those that disagree (this happens from both sides). There can never be any resolution if we just choose to silence others.

            And this is not news to A&E there is literally no way they wouldn’t have known how this guy felt if they had ever watched their own show.

          • Bill says:

            I have the perfect solution: let us all be sure that our comments about gays should be positive, anything to the contrary must be treated with the loss of one’s job. Gays want to be full participants in society. I agree but that means they are going to get roughed a bit in print, conversation, and deed.

      • Robby Horine says:

        You mean just like every other reality show on every other channel on cable?

    • Aeol says:

      I think it’s bs when people claim hate-speech is just an opinion. He could have said he’s not in favor of gay rights or homosexuality; instead he compared it to bestiality!! His words, while just “his opinion,” were filled with hate. He also said black people were happier before civil rights! He is an employee of A&E now and he can’t use his job as a platform to speak with hate. And it does no good to suspend just Phil when Jep Robertson already came out and said the whole family shares a similar viewpoint.
      I’ve seen a lot of people agreeing with Phil and saying this is a Christian message and Christians are being persecuted for having these beliefs. I am a lifelong Catholic and think these “Christians” are a disgrace. So much “persecution.” Maybe they should think about the guy on the cross and what persecution really means.

      • Angela says:

        Excellent post!
        Indeed, everyone is entitled to have and voice an opinion. But that does NOT mean that they are automatically immune from criticism of the views they express. And if your beliefs are incredibly backward and nonsensical in their thinking to boot, then, yeah, prepare for a backlash.

      • Xerxes says:

        Thanks for your judgment of others. I will give it its due weight. Then flush twice so it goes away.

      • J says:

        People read into what they want. He never compared it to bestiality. Go back and read. “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.” “sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men”, does that imply homosexuality? And is there a comparison made there? No. I read it as someone who could be homosexual or heterosexual “sleeping around”. So he’s basicly naming off a few sexual preferences here, when he says “morph” out. As far as the statement you made “black people were happier before civil rights”… you implied that. Re-read.. he is saying the ones he worked with were happy, not complaining, because they were godly. He didn’t at all say ALL black people. He said, “where we lived” does that imply the whole state? the whole south? He said he hoed cotton with them. There could’ve been a handful of black people he worked with and the ones he worked with were happy and didn’t complain. He never said they were happy before civil rights.
        Please get the facts straight! Stop reading into it as you want. The media will spin it all the time!

    • S. says:

      Free speech is a right the government can’t infringe on. The government, not a private business like a cable network. He’s allowed to have his own opinions, but when you work for someone, there are consequences if you say publicly whatever you please in a way that negatively impacts your boss. Exhibit A: Charlie Sheen. This could cost A&E a ton of money even if it’s just in repairing the PR damage. Corporations can tell you to not say things that reflect badly on them and they do. I’m sure it’s in his contract in such a way that they can do exactly what they’ve done. I’m appalled by the “no” votes on the poll. It’s blatant homophobia and racism and A&E is allowed to distance themselves from that.

    • Everyone should be allowed to have his/her own opinions, but when put in a position to influence so many young people in the world, words should be chosen carefully. Regardless of his opinion which he does have a right to, I will do my best to remove the influence of this kind of hate from my family.

      • Lilly says:

        Remove Phil Robertson from influence in your family if you like. In fact, that is what you SHOULD do. (After all, when we Christians complain that Miley Cyrus shouldn’t be allowed to feign sex acts on live award shows, we’re told to “turn the channel”.)

        But do not call what Phil Robertson said “hate speech” because that is not what it was. Blunt, yes. Crude, yes. Wrong in your opinion, yes. But he never, ever said anything about hating or wishing evil to happen to any group or individual.

  3. Babybop says:

    He also compared sleeping around to beastiality… Doesn’t necessarily seem to me like he was outright trying to offend people. But then again, I didn’t read the article, so I really have no idea.

    • cas says:

      He wasn’t. People just like to take stories like this and run with it to create drama. He also released a follow up statement to clarify that while he thinks those things are sins he would never be disrespectful to anyone or rude, that he loves all of humanity like the Bible teaches, and he doesn’t judge but that doesn’t appear in any of these articles. I don’t even like the show but I think A&E did the wrong thing.

  4. In this case I don’t believe that A&E made the right call.
    Don’t get me wrong, I completely disagree with everything Roberts said, but I still think that he should have the right to say them. We can’t call for tolerance and then attack everyone who disagrees with us after all. That just makes us look like worse hypocrites than they are, because at least they’re honest about the fact that they’re intolerant.

    • this has nothing to do with free speech or the right to hold an opinion. this is a business transaction between a corporation that hired an employee that now has become a very public liability by choosing to offend the customer base of the network. he has a right to his opinions. he still has his opinions. he does not have the “right” to be a “reality” show star.

      • Billy says:

        Except when they hired him they knew exactly what he believed and they should have expected this so it’s on them not Phil…

        • Katherine215 says:

          And they have the right to change their minds and fire him. Just like every other company in this country. You have a right to your opinion. I have a right to fire you for spouting your rather unpopular opinion in such a way that it could harm my business.

      • The customer base of the network? Maybe. Of the show? Incredibly unlikely. I would wager that an incredibly large percentage of the viewers of the show completely agree with him, and could very well now start watching the show live in support of his views, rather than DVR it. (please remember that these are the same people who gave massive amounts of business to Chik-Fil-A last year over this exact same issue)

      • Lilly says:

        Totally agree about this not being a freedom of speech issue. The Constitution guarantees our right of speech free from punishment by the government. That does not mean that your speech may not come with a price. Exhibit A: The Dixie Chicks alienated their own fan base with their comments against President Bush (heck, if they’d been a hip-hop band, their music sales would have gone up!).

        A&E has every right to suspend Phil Robertson if he has violated his contract. (And, likewise, the rest of the family may have their hands tied from “walking off the set” in protest.)

        The point you’re missing is that the HUGE fan base generated by the Robertson clan understands them. In fact, they hold many of the same beliefs. And yes, I’m one of those “backward” people (though I can’t imagine me commenting about sin and homosexuality and beastiality and promiscuity in the same blunt way Phil did).

        The fact is, A&E knew what they were getting when they took on the Robertson clan. And their beliefs are no surprise to A&E (especially now). A&E has been perfectly content to make millions of dollars off the popularity of this family’s unabashed practice of their religious beliefs. Make no mistake about it: A&E will live to regret this decision because the people they are alienating will be the massive audience, not those offended who don’t even watch the show.

        Oh, and before you spout an opinion about Phil and his beliefs, read the article and watch the show at least once….

        • sd says:

          A&E is not worried about the fanbase of the show, they’re worried about their network. This is the network that has all the red carpet shows for instance. They have a Gay fanbase that watches their other network shows and they can’t afford to lose them. They probably looked at the bottom line and figured if they don’t cancel Duck Dynasty but suspend one of the characters, people will still watch. What are they going to do, boycott a show they supposedly love? In the meantime they get to not alienate their other viewers they need for their other shows.

          • Lilly says:

            And I agree that is A&E’s prerogative. If their network was their primary concern, then they could have distanced themselves from his words, not the man. They KNEW this is who he was. Mark my words: A&E will regret this decision.

      • kim says:

        All this he said she said crap.freedom of speech or Christian this is b.s. I’m from the south very small town I think what the Robertson’s are doing is great. Its a good show. I’m Christian do not agree with homosexual and yes I think a&e where wrong and I hope when renewal comes up they say no and go with a different Chanel. And yes that’s my opinion just like Phillips has his

        • sd says:

          Who cares. If your employer don’t want you spouting off with your opinions then they have a perfect right to fire you for it. Like all bigots he won’t be missed on TV.

    • Alex says:

      You don’t seem to get the basic fact here. He DOES have the right to say stupid, horrible things. He still has this right. But the network also has the right to suspend/fire his intolerant a$$.

  5. Cassie says:

    I have a feeling the whole family has similar beliefs. I don’t watch the show because IMO it gives a false impression of many of the people who live here in North Louisiana. We’re not all ignorant, bigoted racists.

  6. bigdede says:

    I’m not understanding this. The whole show is about their Christian beliefs. They pray at the end of every episode. They show them at church and talking about god all the time. So if he speaks out about his beliefs, it doesn’t reflect the show? That’s how you know that show is scripted now.

    • Ginger says:

      Christianity isn’t (and never never be thought as) about a group of perfect people looking down on sinners. According to the Bible, there is no one sin greater than another. From. The. Bible. So lying, coveting, sex outside the marriage, sex with someone of the same sex, cheating, gluttony, taking the Lord’s name in vain, ETC…..are all equal sins. Any Christian who says or thinks otherwise goes against God’s own word. So do the people who conveniently forget the Love Thy Neighbor (stipulation free words)…

      • Ginger says:

        TYPO ^^^ (and never *should* be thought as)…

      • taran63 says:

        Except love thy neighbor doesn’t mean accept everything they do without question. And just because all sins are equal in the eyes of God doesn’t mean we should then just ignore all sins. Phil goes on to say that while those are his beliefs, he himself has a very sinful past, so he doesn’t judge others, he leaves it up to God to judge.
        What makes me disagree with all the backlash is that he didn’t offer up this statement unsolicited. He was asked a question in an interview about how he felt and he answered it. Was he supposed to lie and not answer honestly? Apparently only some people have to be tolerant.

        • sd says:

          The man went on about how he’s all about the vagina and not for the anus—there’s your Christian comments for you. He also said some stuff about black people about how they were all happy and singing in the cotton fields before civil rights and he’s never seen any of this so called discrimination they speak of. Glad his butt was suspended.

        • Jimmy says:

          Except, by uttering this statement he is, in fact, judging.

        • Ginger says:

          Ignoring sins vs. passing judgement…two different things. You don’t have the right to judge him nor me and same for me with him or you. And he doesn’t have the right to judge another, nor does he have the right to judge ‘vagina vs. anus’ – and as someone else pointed out, you want to share your family, Christian values? Don’t even talk about vaginas or anuses, no matter what the original question could have been! Again, free speech won. For both Phil and A&E.

    • Mely says:

      I agree with you that the wording of that was confusing, but I think what the network meant is that his comments did not reflect the network. His comments definitely reflect the show, and it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that he feels that way.

      • bigdede says:

        Ok. His comments didn’t reflect the network. That makes more sense because like you said, it reflects the show. Heck they have them doing church hunting together on that show!

      • J.Norman says:

        What A & E is trying to do is very simple.

        They are trying to find the best possible compromise between keeping the show on the air while kissing the ass of the gay community.
        That is, “suspending” Phil Robertson at a point when almost all of the next seasons shows have been shot. Then, 5-6 months from now when the s–t has dissipated, they bring the show back for the 6th season and hope all is forgotten.

        I will laugh if the Robertsons – who at this point really don’t need the show anymore – refuse to renegotiate with A & E (who to this point have gotten the show for a song), and take the show to another network.
        Don’t believe for a nanosecond that many cable networks will snap it up if it becomes available.

        • J.Norman says:

          Oops, I said, “Don’t believe for a nanosecond that many cable networks will snap it up if it becomes available.”

          Meant to say, “Don’t believe for a nanosecond that many cable networks won’t snap it up if it becomes available.

        • sd says:

          Who cares–one less homophobe on the air is all good. I’ve yet to see any network regret firing these reality stars who shoot off their mouth. The Cooking channel seems perfectly fine without Paula Deen. No one misses Jimmy the Greek, Don Imus, Alec Baldwin or Bashir nor any of the countless people fired for making idiotic remarks. If Duck Dynasty leaves A/E I’m sure they’ll come up with something else to replace it.

          • mike says:

            The difference, though, is that Duck Dynasty is the most highly rated reality show of all time. It dominates A&E. Without the show, A&E is nothing.

    • wyatt says:

      this day in age, they should have just ran with the reality show….the religion thing just kept growing, and growing ;and growing……if you want to be in business, shut up about politics, sexuality, diet (vegan vs. beef) abortion, in there case they should have just kept the conversation to hick talk and duck calls

  7. mike says:

    A&E is suspending him from a show about his life for making comments about the Bible? Horrible.

    • Annie says:

      He didn’t make comments about the Bible. He made comments about gay people as a group, comparing them to bestiality (having sex with animals), stated that they are going to hell, etc. etc. Please read more thoroughly before posting inaccurate, confused replies that may embarrass you. (That’s assuming you have the grace to be embarrassed to remark about something you evidently didn’t grasp).

      • mike says:

        Hmm, before you try to be a smart ass, maybe you should read his ENTIRE interview instead of the 4 lines that you saw on buzzfeed or twitter.
        “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”
        THAT is a modern translation of Corinthians. If you didn’t know, that’s a book of the Bible!!!!
        What you don’t find if you don’t read the whole interview, is his closing remark: “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job,” he added. “We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus – whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists.”

        • Sara says:

          Soooo, he said that homosexuals are as bad as terrorists? Yeah, totally not judging whatsoever.

          • mike says:

            Goodness. He never said that. You’re extrapolating- just because he grouped them together doesn’t mean he equates them! It’s a speech technique.

          • Angela says:

            @mike: But see, that’s kind of the point: why does he need to group them together at all to begin with? By doing that, it DOES seem to imply there are similarities between them of some sort.

          • mike says:

            yes-saying that they’re all sinners. I’m not saying he’s right, but he NEVER made the comparison everyone thinks he made

          • Sara says:

            So, mike, that means he “equates them” (your phrase) all together as sinners…so, by your own justifications, that means that he is saying they are just as bad as terrorists. That is the ultimate goal of that speech technique you referred to, by the way, to make the listener become convinced that one thing equals the other and therefore all are good or bad. It is a standard goal of the persuasive speech technique. So, basically, what both you and Phil have said is that homosexuals are just as bad as terrorists. Which is a fairly judgmental thing to say for someone who doesn’t judge people.

          • mike says:

            show me in quote where I said that gays= terrorists. You guys are reading into something that’s just not there. quit trying to find the worst in people

    • Jo says:

      I didn’t see any mention of that poorly translated book of fables.

      • Babygate says:

        This is a perfect example of the intolerance many embrace while denying others the same privilege. First, he did make reference to the Bible. Second, you don’t have to believe in it, but millions across the world accept the Bible as the inspired word of God. As being truth and life. But you choose to denigrate it and relegate it to a book of fables.

        • Angela says:

          Calling the Bible a book of fables (which, by the way, isn’t necessarily an insult, as the stories in it ARE structured in fable-like fashion, with lessons embedded in them) isn’t even close to being as inflammatory as comparing homosexuality to bestiality, though.
          Also, if someone is going to express intolerant views, they shouldn’t be surprised when someone responds in kind. Doesn’t your very Bible say something about “an eye for an eye”, after all?

          • Babygate says:

            A fable is not the same thing as a parable which was a very popular and effective teaching method in that era. The Bible is also a historical book widely supported by many extra-biblical sources. And you may have noticed in the article that Mr. Robertson did not only make reference to homosexuality but also to other behaviors that the Bible calls ‘sinful’. Context is very important. This man was asked for his opinion and he gave it. He has been on his show for quite a while and he’s never come forward to attack anyone or anything. He obviously felt safe enough at the time to express his opinion because it was solicited and he also stated that he judged no one. Lastly, the ‘eye for an eye’ concept is old testament. That didn’t fly with Jesus when Peter went after the soldier. He told him, ‘if you live by the sword, you die by the sword’.

          • mike says:

            He never compared homosexuality to bestiality. Titles of articles are gonna say that to generate views, but all he did was group them together when talking about sin. Not saying that he’s right, but that’s just not what he said.

            Also, Jewish law mentions Eye for Eye, not Christian Biblical law.

          • Angela says:

            @Babygate: 1)You are right that fables are different from parables, but fables are still in use in the Bible. The Bible might have SOME events/people in it that have been proven to be true or existed, but there are also instances where situations were embellished and fictional stories were created (a person did not actually part a sea. A burning bush did not actually talk to someone).
            2) The fact that he lumps homosexuality in with those other behaviors is the problem here. It doesn’t belong in that list of “sinful” behaviors to begin with.
            3), and this is in response to mike as well-then why do some Christians still abide by that belief? That brings me back to my above argument-the same Christians that sit there and say, “I’m against homosexuality because the Bible says it’s wrong” are the same ones who can look at other aspects of it, like the “eye for an eye” thing, and go, “Well, just because that part of the Bible said that doesn’t mean that’s how we should continue to do things.” What? If you’re willing to brush off one belief stated in the Bible as outdated or contradictory or whatever, why not do the same with the Bible’s attitudes about homosexuality?

    • sd says:

      When you have quotes like this : “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 don’t think that was in any bible I read.

      He also suggested Blacks were happier under Jim Crowe laws: “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,” he said. “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.”

      Apparently he misses the days of the smiling happy negroes.

      • Lilly says:

        Do you ever watch the show? Phil Robertson is a simple man who speaks bluntly about EVERYthing. Even though I didn’t hear him speak those words, I can understand what the man, Phil Robertson, meant: That the black people HE worked alongside (hence, he was not better than them) were happier back then. They had their families and their beliefs. He never said or even implied that he thought they should not have won equality. His point was all this freedom and the entitlements that followed haven’t exactly made the black community happy.
        Agree or not, there is one inarguable fact: If you’d set out to destroy the black family, it is difficult to know how you could have been more effective than the government has been since the 1970s.

        • Angela says:

          Yes, because who better to speak about what does and doesn’t make black people happy than a white man, right?

          • Lilly says:

            He was making an OBSERVATION. He worked with and KNEW these people. Heck, you don’t know they weren’t his friends! These were people he called “happy” families, happy in their beliefs. He was making the point that, yes, the black community has come a long way, but not all of it has been good, or good for them.

        • sd says:

          It’s pretty racist and condescending to imagine you get to tell an entire race of people what’s good for them and how they were better off when they were under Jim Crowe laws when they were working for slave wages in the cotton fields and fearing for their lives due to prevalence of injustice and lynchings going on. How very Paula Deen of you.

          • Lilly says:

            Oh no you don’t, sd! You know nothing about me. I was merely stating Phil Robertson was making an OBSERVATION about black people he knew and worked alongside many, many years ago. For all we know they were friends! He never said he wished they’d stayed subservient to white “folk” (or as someone here said – remained good negroes). He was just pointing out that for all the change that has happened to the black community in the last few decades, not all of it has been good. Even YOU can’t argue with the breakdown of the black family since then.

          • sd says:

            Yes I can argue with your suppositions about black families and how they’ve broken down. There’s as many good black families as there are white. There are as many broken down white families—see the Palins with their illegitimate baby and baby daddy posing nude as one example—as there are blacks. But you IMAGINE that you can make some kind of claim about black families because of pure hearsay and prejudice.

          • Lilly says:

            I’m talking statistics, sd, not my own prejudice.
            The sad, sad facts are indisputable (I confess, I don’t have them memorized): something like 70% of black babies in this country are born to single mothers, many of whom receive little to no support from the fathers. Argue all you want, but babies born to single mothers, without the support of two parents, are something like 10x more likely to remain in poverty. The white family has indeed fallen apart in the last 30-40 years, too!! Just maybe not as fast (we’re apparently working on it, though).
            And you may be shocked to realize that I do “disapprove” of some of Bristol Palin’s life choices. (As a mother, I myself would have counseled my daughter to give her child up for adoption, if she’d found herself in that situation.) Bristol is a white example of what so many young (black) women do: have sex out of a committed marriage relationship, only to produce a baby who now has a worthless, immature daddy who may or may not even visit. That is my opinion. I’m not judging Bristol or other single mothers. I’m just citing the fact that when we do that to little children – no matter their color – we start them off in life at a disadvantage, financially and emotionally.

        • sd says:

          Lily, your stats are bunk which is why you can’t quote it exactly. You don’t get to say black people were better off enslaved and working for slave labor in the cotton field because look what they’ve done with their freedom or you don’t like the kind of family they created since they’re now free. That’s a racist statement no matter how you try to pretty it up with your condescending explanations. Phil Robertson deserved to be suspended for that alone.

          • Lilly says:

            Oh my gosh, what comments of mine are you reading?!!? Neither I nor Phil Robertson EVER said anything about wanting blacks to remain in the cotton fields. What I said was that I interpreted Phil to say that the black people he knew and worked alongside (hello! probably were his friends!) were happier back when he worked side-by-side with them BECAUSE their families were in tact and they had God in their lives. That’s it. You can disagree with that statement all you want, but that was his observation and you were not there!
            And by the way, go to and check out the sad statistics about ALL children of all races raised in single-parent households. Not only is the percentage of children raised that way trending in the wrong direction in recent years, but as a result the number of children raised in poverty has grown too.
            Stop reading racism and bigotry into people’s words where they do not exist. I believe that is what you (and others) have done with Phil’s comments. But I KNOW that is what you are doing with mine.

          • sd says:

            Save your concern about how black people raise their families and concentrate on your own and you won’t get called out for it. Phil Robertson said they black people were happy and singing in pre welfare and entitlement days–that’s implying blacks were happy when they were working for slave wages in the cotton field, that’s implying that black people are the ones making up the welfare rolls when in fact the majority on welfare is white. And saying he has black friends is pretty much the standard line of all racists. It’s pretty clear exactly what he meant to say about black people and gay people and none of it was warm, friendly and nice.

          • Lilly says:

            Oh, I finally see: You can’t be reasoned with because you just refuse to READ or LISTEN to what people are saying to you. Got it. Moving on……

  8. lunaburning says:

    A quote often attributed to Voltaire sums it up best: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death, your right to say it.”

    • no one is stopping him from using his talking hole. A & E just decided to stop paying him to do so.

      • J.Norman says:

        I’ll bet A & E reinstates him in time to film next season. The current (upcoming) season is in the can.
        The family may decide to move the show. A & E could try to laugh it off, but they would be losing their best moneymaking show. They get it dirt cheap to this point. That won’t continue in the future after this. They (A & E) is going to either have to cancel the show or pay through the nose in the future.

    • Jimmy says:

      No one is stopping him from saying it; however, the people who disagree with him have that same right. What we say and do has consequences. Just because you can what you want doesn’t mean you get a free pass on the consequences of your opinion.

  9. mike says:

    tolerance goes both ways.

    • Jo says:

      Hitler would have loved you!

      • Ashley says:

        You seem much more Hitler’s cup of tea.

      • love all says:

        What a stupid response. Jo, you are an idiot. Anyone who doesnt agree with you is equal to one of the most evil human beings in all of history.

        • Jo says:

          What? Saying everyone should tolerate hate in the spirit of tolerance is a comment hitler would have loved. And you clearly do too.

          • Proud American Lady says:

            Being against homosexuality is NOT hate. It’s obeying God’s Word. He is the Alpha & Omega; He made it all & will be the judge of all. You’ll never convince Him that sin is ok, no matter which sin it is. You are the hater, not Phil Robertson or Christians. God says hate the sin but love the sinner; yes, He said hate.

          • Lilly says:

            I may agree with you on several things, Proud American Lady. Like loving the sinner, but hating the sin, for example. But let’s be clear: God does not distinguish between a homosexual’s sin and my sin of lying or over-eating, or whatever sin plagues you on a daily basis. What God condemns is a LIFESTYLE of sin and a hardened heart that refuses to listen to God and his Holy Spirit. The ONLY thing that saves us from Hell is repentance and the blood of Jesus Christ. Neither homosexuality nor lying alone sends a person to Hell; rejecting God’s redemption, sadly, does.

      • taran63 says:

        When you can’t win your argument, shout the word Hitler! Then they have to say you win right? /sarcasm

      • mike says:

        what is wrong with you, Jo? I said “tolerance goes both ways”, and you compare that to Hitler? That’s messed up.
        The guy is a 67 year old Southern Baptist- what would you expect!? He never said that he hated gays or anything like that- only said his personal opinion about homosexuality based on the Bible when prodded. I don’t agree with his comments at all, but when people make anti- Christian comments, it’s no big deal. There’s a double standard when this LGBT minority is attacked that applies to nobody else.

        THAT’s how you respond with dignity and class, without crying “Hitler”

    • Aeol says:

      So I should tolerate someone using blatant hate speech, and perpetuating stereotypes? Not only were his comments about the gay community beyond the pale, but I love how everyone is overlooking the fact that he said black people were happier before civil rights when they were picking cotton in the fields. WTF? I know plenty of people who don’t support the gay community but don’t compare their lifestyle to having sex with animals. Of course Phil is entitled to his opinion. He’s not entitled to insult whole communities based on that opinion. And as a lifelong Christian, I don’t appreciate him using my faith as a tool to speak hate.

      • Lilly says:

        Look, disagree with him if you want. Be offended by the blunt WAY he communicated his beliefs. But stop calling it “hate” speech. Hate speech is when you wish vile and evil things on a person or people because you don’t like them. Phil did none of that. He quoted the Bible and answered a direct question honestly. It’s too easy to dismiss a person’s heart-felt beliefs (whether spiritual or political) by dubbing it “hate speech” when it is just a strong opinion you disagree with. Then you don’t have to argue on the merits (or lack thereof).
        And please get the facts right: Phil did NOT equate homosexuality with beastiality – other than to call both, along with “sleeping around” heterosexually, sin. Period.

    • Jimmy says:

      Why should anyone tolerate an opinion that denigrates them and reduces them to an evil sinner. It’s one thing to be tolerant of people who don’t share your opinion, it’s quite another to just turn away when someone says something horrible.

  10. ChicagoDan says:

    Absolutely not. His comments may be offensive, but they are HIS beliefs, not A&E’s. BTW – since when did A&E or any other network OWN the personal views of a reality personality? I suppose if MSNBC could fire Alec Baldwin for his rampant homophobia, maybe the networks, do own these people.

    As far as idiots making redneck comments, please refer to the African-American churches’ views on homosexuality. After all, this was the group that blocked passage of gay marriage in Illinois in May. It wasn’t until a deal was “brokered” aka money changed hands that black Chicago congressmen voted for the bill.

  11. Kevin Dillon says:

    So opinions are a$$holes everyone has one but does that make them right ? No.

    When you are a part of a television show/network you represent a brand and who wants to be in the brand of bigotry? No one ! A&E made the right choice, and it saddens me people disagree

  12. Rachel says:

    I think this is so blown out of portion. What happened to freedom of speech? Does this only apply to the gay community? Are they the only ones that can negative things about heterosexual couples? Come on. A &E knew his beliefs going in and for the last five seasons. Why are they so surprised now?

    • Rebecca says:

      Freedom of speech is from the First Amendment. It reads as follows: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” NOWHERE in there does it say that a private entity, such as A&E, has to continue to give a voice and a spotlight to someone, no matter what they say. If they violated his contract, that would be one thing, and he would have civil remedies available to him. But unless you are arguing that the government somehow forced A&E to take these measures, you are just being ignorant.

      • Robby Horine says:

        You’re right. There nothing that says A&E has to keep Phil on the show. But please show me that clause in his contract that he supposedly ‘violated’?

    • Liz says:

      Hate-speech against heterosexuality isn’t really a thing. Like racism against white people. It doesn’t really exist. People may hate straight people, but the world is structured so that straight white people have the easier life; whereas gay people and people of colour have a harder life because the world is built to keep them in secondary positions. The few voices that hate on straight people aren’t loud enough or powerful enough to have a serious serious impact on the lives of straight people. We aren’t going to wake up one day and have all our rights stripped away. Government aren’t constantly changing their minds on whether we can get married. Homophobia does have this power though.

  13. Tanya says:

    Does this surprise anyone? He’s an old southern redneck.

  14. Jo says:

    This trash needed to be taken off the air well before these comments. The show is a national embarrassment and is no doubt lowering the IQ of all who watch.

    • Abby says:

      I don’t understand how it might be lowering the IQ. The man in question has a masters degree, and his sons have college educations as well. They are an intelligent group.

      • Lisa says:

        That may be true but on this staged reality show they dumb themselves down so far it is unwatchable to anyone with more than a tenth grade education. I know it is all fake but that doesn’t change the fact that they ‘act’ like idiots a lot.

  15. madbengalsfan85 says:

    As soon as he compared homosexuality to beastiality, I think A&E had the right to suspend him…that’s just insulting on many levels.

  16. Jillian says:

    This article didn’t even mention what he said about Black people. There have been many celebs who have said far less and have received stricter punishments. This suspension is a joke.

    • Jo says:

      I’d like to read those. Of course I don’t want to give GQ the page hits they were going for when they baited this piece of trash.

  17. Cory says:

    As a gay man, I disagree with him being suspended for stating his opinion. Everyone, everyone is entitled to their opinion. If he feels homosexuality is a sin, that is between him and his God if he is right or wrong. At no point have I heard him spout off “Burn all the gays” “They should be placed in a fenced in area so they can die off” etc… The man just spoke how he felt. Under the first amendment we have a right to speak our peace. What we do not have is the right to infringe on the rights of others. Phil did not infringe on my rights as a Gay American by stating how he felt. I would still break bread with him, I would sit down and discuss matters with him and I am sure he would do the same with me in a peaceful manner. This action taken against him was overkill.

    • wyatt says:

      Cory, don’t set your table….these types usually probably won’t be breaking any bread with you…..

      • Cory says:

        I disagree. I have a good friend mine who breaks bread with me often. We discuss all aspects of life in a peaceful manner. He does not agree with my lifestyle. He openly says that homosexuality is a sin and prays for (God) to forgive me for my sins. However, we eat dinner together (even invited my boyfriend to join when I’ve had relationships)… we’ve seen movies together, gone to ball games, he’s come to my theatre productions, we’ve helped each other through money problems..etc.. all despite his dislike for the way I live.

        You can disagree with the way someone lives and still respect them, and live in peace with them.

        • taran63 says:

          I couldn’t agree more with you, particularly your last sentence. That’s something we could all stand to remember.

        • Aeol says:

          Has your friend ever compared your relationships to having sex with animals? Asked you why you don’t prefer a vagina to an anus? I feel sad for you that this person openly critizes the person you were born to be and openly wishes you were not who you are. Some “friend” he is! With friends like that, who needs enemies? Smh

          • Cory says:

            In our discussions regarding homosexuality, the harshest remark he has ever said is “I’ll pray for your sins”… the greatest words he has ever spoken to me are “You are still my brother in Christ, and like Christ, despite your sins, I will love you and be there for you. My door will always be open to provide you shelter, my table will be full of food to share with you, my heart will be full of love to accept you and your sins… and if you find a companion to spend your life with, the same love will be given to him as well.”

            In this world we judge a person too quickly because of the actions others have taken. If we wish to live in a world of peace, we must first find peace with ourselves and those we disagree with.

          • Emma says:

            @Aeol Who needs enemies indeed lol. Whoa masochism is serious stuff. That’s what I call dedication!

          • Lilly says:

            Actually, that’s what you call friendship and love. Have you never had a friend who did things YOU disapproved of or disagreed with? (Of course, no way you were wrong, you just kept your opinion to yourself, right? Never want to judge others, would we, even if what we say might be good for them?) But did you stop being their friend? Or would that have been wrong? Disagree with the basis of this friend’s beliefs but that doesn’t mean somehow a Christian person is less capable of caring for someone they disagree with than you would be.

    • Babygate says:

      Cory, I don’t know you but I have a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for you. Class act.

  18. Et al says:

    They should have asked him his views on sex outside of family. He’s clearly against that too.

  19. Ash says:

    So a show where the ‘star’ is a uneducated, ignorant bigot gets on the list of Barbara Walters’ most fascinating people, but ABC doesn’t allow Edward Snowden to be listed. Bigot are OK, but not whistle-blowers.
    Yes A&E did the right thing.
    Free speech is one thing. But so is hate speech.

    • Bren says:

      Actually, Phil Robertson has a Bachelors Degree in Physical Education and a Masters Degree in Education. He was the starting quarterback at Louisiana Tech, with Terry Bradshaw as his backup. He decided not to pursue a pro football career because the season conflicted with hunting season. He obviously walks to the beat of his own drum. I think it’s hateful to assume southerners are uneducated, ignorant, bigoted rednecks. As Forrest Gump’s mother said, and I paraphrase, different doesn’t mean better or worse. Just because I don’t agree with someone’s personal opinions does not give me the right to call them hateful names or try to shut them up. Hell, if I could control who is allowed to speak and when, this world would be a mighty quiet place.

  20. Chelle says:

    Phil has the right to his own opinions and beliefs…and he never once said he hated gay people….

  21. love all says:

    I love all the comments of redneck, stupid, uneducated and bigots coming from all of you bleeding hearts. You may not like his opinion, but the true strength in your belief of freedom of speech comes from how strongly you support someone you disagree with. If you ask the same question to almost any religious person, the response would be similar. Jews, Christians and Muslims all have the same beliefs.

    • LOL says:

      No one is taking away his freedom of speech. He can say those things out on the street corner. He works for A & E and they do not have to pay him.

  22. I am 100% in support of the LBGT community. But I am also 100% in support of people’s rights to disagree with that stance.

    We have lost all perspective in this country. What is this thought policing and punishing people going to accomplish? You can’t punish people into agreeing with you. If this guy came out tomorrow and apologized and said he loves gay people, what changes? That he lied about what he believes? That makes you feel better? We’d rather have people lie than be honest? None of this stuff is “fixing” the problems, it’s just pushing it under the rug and creating a boring world where everybody walks around on egg shells, afraid to comment on any situation because it might affect their careers.

    Everybody always worried about the dreaded “big brother”, but in the end WE have become big brother. The government doesn’t have to take away our freedom, we are more than happy to play hall monitor, point the finger at our neighbor and give away our own freedoms.

    Free speech isn’t about protecting positive remarks. It’s about protecting the right to offend and have unpopular opinions. When a free country loses it’s right to offend then it is no longer a free country.

  23. Kevin Dillon says:

    You all do not get it ! This is about business and a brand, he’s a public figure who represents A&E whether you like gay people or not, his words represent this company. My guess is is that there are clauses I’m all of their contracts related to this, seriously people are you new to the way business is conducted ?

    • taran63 says:

      Just because some of us don’t agree with you, doesn’t mean that we “don’t get it”, that we aren’t intelligent enough to understand the points you are making. Try to be a little more tolerant.

    • mrsdp says:

      If I follow all this thus far, the show is currently on hiatus with new episodes pending. Not only that, but the shows recorded and prepped to air will still feature this guy. I may not have seen a single episode of this show, but I am veteran enough in the “way business is conducted” to know this firing is a PR ploy with NO teeth. Firing him and then airing episodes with him at start of the year does what exactly? He’ll STILL be on the new season! It’s taped and ready to go.

      There is no evidence that his comments *have* negatively impacted ratings as there are no ratings to measure beyond, perhaps, repeats. There is no evidence that the various branded tshirts, hats, et al are in danger of stale sales. From what I can gather, this was a pre-emptive strike based on an assumption that some folks will demand it and, in fear, A&E went all CYA.

      This isn’t about 1st amendment rights. You have the right to say whatever you want and not get arrested – to a point, by the way. You can’t yell fire in a theater or make terroristic threats. You do not have the right to say whatever you want and expect no consequence for it. Nor, however, is this about a business doing the right thing or the wrong thing. This is about C-level execs sitting with their lawyers in a boardroom sweating a little, loosening the tie, having a few flashbacks to Paula Deen and whoever else has gotten fired for having a big mouth and pushing the panic button.

      Frankly, however, I think everyone on here going the ‘redneck’ and assuming ignorance, etc route aren’t behaving too much better. You may not see the connection but it’s there. it’s still making broad, negative comments based on the fact that you disagree with another person.

  24. sandy says:

    I Agree, Why isn’t he allowed his Opinion, this is getting ridiculous when we aren’t allowed our rights to our own opinion, I hope they go to another Network and I hope A&E gets a lot of Backlash as we don’t have to agree or keep our mouth shut to what we believe or this case how Phil Robertson believes

  25. Shannon says:

    I don’t agree with what Phil said but he has the right to his opinion and beliefs. If people dont like what he has to say or what he believes – turn the channel. Why is it that citizens of this country are always being criticized for their beliefs but people can come from foreign countries and we have to bend over backwards to accommodate
    their beliefs?

    • Shannon says:

      I forgot to add that even though I don’t agree with what he said I will still be watching the show! I can go on watching without agreeing with him. I don’t agree with what the President has to say most of the time so I just turn the channel. I suggest others do the same.

  26. David says:

    I’m really surprised to see the poll at about 50/50. He should have been audiences because regardless of his beliefs his comments were homophobic and just not acceptable. He can have his beliefs but should keep them private. It sucks being a public figure someone’s but it is what it is. It probably won’t end in his dismissal but there should be shine ramifications. Its absolutely shameful that with all the progress being made with accepting people things like this keep happening that sets us all back. He really should be ashamed of himself.

    • mrsdp says:

      Well, by that standard there an awful lot of public figures who should invest in some sort of bedazzled muzzle. I can’t even begin to count the number of times someone famous – liberals as well – say something incredibly stupid and/or offensive to some group or another.

      So now we’re moving to a place where we are free to our opinions but we must keep them to ourselves and be quiet lest someone else find our 2cts offensive? Wow. Just. Wow.

      • Lilly says:

        Your second paragraph is the very definition of “political correctness”. And somehow this makes us better? Have we actually eliminated bigotry or just made the bigots into two-faced fakes?

        We wonder why we have politicians who talk in double-speak. It’s precisely because you can’t link three words together without SOMEONE in this country getting their panties in a wad! So they parse every word so you can interpret anything they say 10 different ways.

        Phil Robertson is not stupid, but he isn’t a smooth speaker either. He is blunt about EVERYthing he talks about, and he does not parse his words. So for the PC-lovers reading this, you have to actually READ the entire article, and perhaps even check out some of Phil’s YouTube stuff in order to take what he says in CONTEXT. You may not agree with him, but you will better understand why he said what he said.

  27. darren says:

    I call BS on the whole thing. A&E is trying to save face by saying they have put him on hiatus, but I don’t believe for one second that they would do that to a guy who has been a HUGE cash cow for them. He showed his ignorance today, but I don’t believe A&E.

  28. Will says:

    I think Phil stands for true Christian values and the liberal media is spinning this way out of control just like the democrats do with anything logical. The man voiced his beliefs and If you watch the show you would deff. Know it’s geared towards a conservative mainly Christian based audience so shame on A&E and more power to you Phil , at least somebody has the balls to speak out against true abominations as spoken in the bible. Our country is turning to garbage because of trash like this and that’s exactly why we aren’t respected amongst the international community any more . I don’t care what you do as a person , that’s your decision but all this stuff I constantly see about lesbian and gay acceptance on television and out in public disgusts me and aggravates me my children are growing up thinking that it’s ok. It’s not a never has been .

    • Nicki says:

      Hey Will as someone who is from the international community I’ll just let you in on a little secret: gay rights has nothing to do with why you’re not respected anymore. The general lack of tolerance that pervades your comment might though.

      As for freedom of speech I’d say he has it: no one stopped the publication or gagged him, he was perfectly entitled to his opinion. But freedom of speech does not guarantee a lack of repercussion, especially if you’re bound by an ethics clause in your tv contract…

      • Emma says:

        Euro here (from a country where marriage equality exists, gasp!), and I cosign your comment Nicki. Typical navel gazing views.

    • Aeol says:

      He doesn’t stand for MY Christian values, and I would appreciate it if he – and you – didn’t speak for all Christians. Many of us interpret God’s message in a very different way. God will let you know on judgement day if you were right or wrong, so if I were you I would be careful about how you “speak for God.”

    • Angela says:

      I think Phil stands for true Christian values and the liberal media is spinning this way out of control just like the democrats do with anything logical.
      Um, no.
      You are right that the rest of the world has issues with us of late. This is not the reason as to why. Not even close. And as for your children learning about gay people and accepting them-so, I guess you’re going to keep them locked up in your house for the rest of their lives? I mean, what are you going to do when they get into the real world and perhaps INTERACT with and become friends with gay people?

  29. Sarah says:

    FREEDOM OF SPEECH: where all people have the right to express their personal and/or religious beliefs without fear or threat
    Phil Robertson said a lot more (shame on you for not publishing the WHOLE of comments). Phil said that he did judge any man because he himself had sinned with substance abuse and adultery. He said all people, including homosexuals, deserved to be treated with love and respect. FORGET TO PRINT THAT PART???

    Phil is a Christian and a fundamentalist, and the Bible and many denominations of Christianity preach that homosexuality is against Christian beliefs, but stresses the fundamental principle of acceptance and tolerance.

    It’s so sad that “liberal” now describes the leading thought makers who are slowly but strongly destroying free speech if it does not agree with mainstream thought. Why do you think books like The Hunger Games and Divergent are so popular? They promote not being bullied by government leaders who are corrupt, and urge readers to think with their own minds. Take that to heart, A&E.

    • LOL says:

      Sadly you are another who does not understand “freedom of speech.” He can say anything he wants. A & E does not have to pay him. He works for them.

    • sd says:

      He’s such a CHRISTIAN isn’t he? That’s why he misses the days when black people didn’t have rights pre civil rights. They were all smiling happy negroes according to him when they were slaving away in the cotton fields singing their songs.

      No one is bullying him. He’s a REALITY TV star. There’s no inalienable right to be a reality TV star. If the network thinks he’s a liability then they can get rid of him. Bunch of trash calling themselves Christians when they really mean they get to look down upon other people. You want to find Sin start looking at yourself.

  30. Guest says:

    The truth is that Phil could care less if he is filmed or not. He has said this was his last season anyway. He wants to hunt ducks and live the simple life. The Robertsons are and have been multi millioniares. They don’t need A&E or the show. Duck Dynasty has been the biggest hit the network has ever had. Phil has a right to say what he believes (and he does) and A&E has the right to choose what they put on their network. I think though the network will find out that this doesn’t exactly play out the way they are hoping.

    • sd says:

      Not one person has stopped him from having an opinion and if he could care less about being filmed then he just got his Christmas wish.

  31. MTB says:

    GQ completely set him up with this question. Knowing damn well how he would answer this question. To that, he has a right to his own opinion and should not be punished for it. And I’m sure this man could give 2 craps about it. I stand behind him.

  32. James R. says:

    I think whatever they decide to do with their own TV show is the right move. It doesn’t matter what he says, or how he said it. What does matter is that it’s A&E’s show, and if they decide that his comments affect their image then they can do what they want. Although I do believe ratings wise this was probably a bad idea, but then again the show is probably more scripted than Top Gear so who cares…

  33. he does have a right to his beliefs, but he also has to face the consequences of his statement. You can not be arrested for speech, but for-profit companies can decided to fire people for public statements that damage the company. His statements could also lead to a hostile work environment.
    What if said interracial relationships were sinful? it was not long ago that Southern churches held that opinion, or that slavery was in accordance with the bible. No one would be saying A&E went to far in that case. People have no more control of their sexual orientation than their skin color. Homosexuality has nothing to do with bestiality.

    • Exactly. All these morons everywhere keep talking about freedom of speech or religious protection. Idiots. That has to do with the government and a private company has the right to protect their brand. I have been trying to explain this everywhere. It’s really not that difficult. I could care less either way about this guy and A&E’s decision. I just know no laws were broken and A&E has done nothing wrong. It’s up to them.

    • mikayla says:

      Race is never a sin and those churches that were racist were obviously not following the bible. There are tons of hypocrites out there, Race and sexuality are TOTALLY different things. One is sin , one isn’t. It is that simple. Homosexuality is a sin according to the New Testament. Read 1 Corinthian 6:9 and Romans 2. Your words are in direct opposition to the Word of God. So you are not speaking truth. Homosexuals will not go to heaven unless they repent is what the scripture CLEARLY states so even though you have your nice and dandy wishful thinking, it doesn’t matter. Thankfully, some homosexuals do repent and change their ways. I have met them! They are choosing God over their sexual desire. I personally do not fornicate anymore because I choose to obey God over my own sexuality. Of course it is a natural desire for me to want to fornicate , just like you say it is a natural desire for gays to want to be gay, yet I choose to deny myself for Christ. .That is part of repentance. Agreeing with God and sacrificing things for him. The truth is the truth whether you believe it or not. Homosexuality is a PERVERSION. It is not right. It doesn’t even make sense biologically. And I understand people are born with a tendency sometimes….but that doesn’t change the fact that it is sin. Some humans are born with a tendency to murder animals or play with fire , that doesn’t make it right. And some men are into little kids and they can’t help it. They are called pedophiles. And they can’t control it , according to your logic, cause it is their sexual preference. Sex is a sacred thing meant for a woman and man in marriage. That is God’s word, not my opinion. If you don’t agree, then that is your choice, but I just told you the truth. I choose to agree with God over your analysis although it sounds nice on the surface, especially for someone who has never read the truth out there. I used to say the same things before I encountered Christ and got the Holy Spirit leading me to read the Word. You see, God is HOLY. Homosexual sex is not holy. It is perverse and wrong. Look up Sodom and Gomorrah. Sexuality is meant to be sacred and holy. Not perverse and twisted. God says it is wrong to even have HETEROSEXUAL sex without being married. That doesn’t sound so natural either, but its God’s word and those who are his will obey Him. We can choose our own desires or we can choose righteousness.

  34. Tina says:

    While his comment was insensitive and in manus opinion outlandish he has the right to believe and say what he wants. I think his intolerance is offensive but hey the only reason I can say whatever I want and get away with it is because I am not on tv. If I was a celebrity I am sure I would have been caught by now saying something that offended someone.

  35. mk says:

    Yes, what he said is offensive, but the truth of the matter is that this is not at all surprising. He’s from an older generation who can be more rigid in their views, especially in this part of the country (I know, I’m from here). That being said, I’ll still watch the show, if he’s in it or not.

  36. SushiGal says:

    An ignorant fool has the right to spout his ignorance, but A&E has the right NOT to like that ignorance. The idiot actually insinuated that all gays practice bestiality!! He’s an ignorant fool.

  37. Babygate says:

    What I find disturbing about all this is how a person is no longer allowed to have an opinion outside of what is considered politically correct or whatever Hollywood endorses. I don’t care for that show and cannot understand the appeal, but this man did not attack anyone. He gave an opinion based on his religious beliefs which last I heard, we have a right to do. Along with a right to free speech. Wilson Cruz’ comments are more outrageous because he pretends to know how Christians think. This is just so much nonsense.

    • Alex says:

      Of course he’s allowed to have his opinions. He spouted them in a national magazine, for crying out loud. No one has stopped him from having his opinions or voicing them. By the same token, other people are allowed to react to those opinions, which in this case includes suspending the idiot. If you insist that he should not be suspended, you’re actually saying that A&E does not have a right to its action, which is ridiculous.

      • Babygate says:

        People reacting to his comments and A&E reacting to his comments are not the same thing. People do not employ him, A&E does and unless Phil violated a clause in his contract that prohibits him from expressing this opinion in such a manner as to offend others, or anything similar, they do not have a right to suspend him. However, if such a clause does exist, then the suspension is well-deserved.

    • sd says:

      Were you oh so disturbed when Bashir from MSNBC was fired for his remarks about Sarah Palin? Did you go on about how he had a right to his opinion and shouldn’t be politically correct? I bet not. Hypocrites. You want to be able to say as ugly a thing as possible and when called on it you blame it on our Christianity. That’s a lot of BS–you’re just saying ugly, mean disgusting things about a group of people, you’re not being a Christian.. And if a network doesn’t want to employ you because of it, that’s the free market at work. That’s a consequence that most of us face. Why don’t you try spouting off ugly racist things on your job and see how quickly you get called down to human resources and suspended yourself.

      • Angela says:

        I’m not a fan of Palin by any stretch and yet I found Bashir’s comments about her horrible and out of line. There’s no reason for any pundit, regardless of political affiliation, to speak so unprofessionally on the air like that.

        • sd says:

          Then you understand why A&E suspended Phil Robertson. His remarks were very offensive to a group of people.

          • Angela says:

            Oh, absolutely. I’m not disagreeing with you on that at all. Just stating that I personally would feel the same way about this issue regardless of the political stance of the person, was all. You are right, though, that some of the very people who demanded Bashir’s resignation would be willing to overlook this.

      • mrsdp says:

        Bashir was not immediately fired and ultimately resigned about three weeks after his original comments (although no doubt encouraged thoroughly by his bosses.) On the very day Martin made his comments about Palin the SAME network suspended Baldwin for his anti-gay comments. Bashir made his comments on air (aka ON THE JOB), gave some (I’m sure network exec encouraged) apology and weeks later stepped-down in a swirl of controversy. At the same time, Baldwin lets loose with a slur aimed at some photographer he’s got an issue with and gets a two show suspension without a blink of the eye. You want to talk hypocrisy? MSNBC suspends one guy for using an anti-gay slur outside of work and the guy who suggests on air that a (very) conservative woman have someone urinate and defecate in her mouth gets a slap on the wrist and asked to give a public apology.

        Yeah, there’s a double standard – but it’s not the way you’re suggesting.

        • mrsdp says:

          For what it’s worth, I think a network ought to let ratings dictate the response. . . which I don’t think is what happened with Bashir any more than it is with Phil here. MSNBC’s ratings have been sagging. As much as I hate to make a generalized assumption, if demographic commentary is to be believed, the network’s primary audience trends more liberal and while they may not all (and some may but may not openly admit to it) agree with the original sentiments or the anger/frustration/whatever that was behind them, they are also not likely to drop the network like a hot potato when said about Palin. A nice apology and then let’s move on. This, however, is the same thing I have said about folks like Don Imus, Baldwin and others who have stuck their foot in their own mouths. If people are offended, let the remote control or radio dial convey that. IF the network sees these opinions are impacting ratings they can act accordingly – but to preempt the audience’s decision whether to be offended into oblivion is about reacting out of fear of bad PR. What stinks, is that networks (or some anyway) are apparently more afraid of certain groups responding to such than others.

      • Babygate says:

        Are you comparing Bashir, who used his own platform to express an unsolicited opinion to this guy who was just answering questions? And are you comparing Bashir’s clear intent to insult, demean and demonize someone with Robertson who just allowed his religious beliefs to frame a response and inform his opinion? Really?

        • sd says:

          Phil Robertson intended to demean a group. He started off by tittering about how he can’t understand why everyone don’t prefer vagina to anus and then proceeded to call them sinners like the prostitutes and beastiality. He very intentionally intended to demean gay people so please don’t act like he’s being misunderstood. And hiding behind religion while insulting a group of people is still very much intending to demean and especially ‘demonize’ gay people.

          • mrsdp says:

            Which is still beside the primary point – There is a blatant double standard at play. Both men in question here may have *meant* to demean. One kept his job for 3 weeks and resigned in a firestorm of ranting. The other got canned before most of America realized he even said anything.

          • sd says:

            Two different networks with different ways of dealing with their problems. That’s the free market at work.

          • mrsdp says:

            SD – I’d buy the “Two different networks” theory EXCEPT MSNBC suspended Alec Baldwin for anti-gay slurs made off-air the same day Bashir made his comments about Palin. THAT network clearly has a different standard at play – who you offend matters more than the fact that you offended at all.

  38. Pinkman says:

    Most of the people in the comment’s here that “disagree with him”, are worse than you’re making him out to be…

  39. allie says:

    You know what I am curious about? How much of a cut does A&E get on all that Duck Dynasty merchandise? I have been shocked at how much DD junk is out there right now in the stores. Doesn’t it seem a bit coincidental that a huge “scandal” occurs right at peak buying season? Sales soar, Christmas ends, head DD guy is hired back and all is well. Just saying….

  40. K. Adams says:

    If you don’t like Phil than don’t watch. If you don’t like what he says than don’t listen. It’s that simple. Everyone posting seems to have an opinion. Yet Phil gets hammered by some for voicing his. You are welcome to your opinion – Phil and the majority are welcome to ours. A&E is the big looser not Phil.

  41. Elizabeth says:

    The first amendment is awesome, but there are always restrictions. For example, you can’t yell “fire!” in a crowded theater. He is within his rights to say whatever he wants. However, being a representative of A&E, A&E can have their input as well. He’s representing A&E, if they don’t like it, it’s within their rights to say so and reprimand him. It would be the same thing if I were to spout the same nonsense within my place of employment with customers within earshot. The caveat is that I wouldn’t be suspended, I would be flat out fired.

    I heard during the media coverage of the story tonight that the family has money without the show, so they could very well just pick up and leave without the show continuing.

    • Justice Holmes says:

      I do agree with your comment, except for one thing my former journalism law professor drilled into my head: You can’t FALSELY yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater. You can yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater if there’s actually a fire.

  42. Robby Horine says:

    If Phil’s relgious beliefs that being gay is a sin was news to A&E executives, they are the dumbest people running a network (not THE dumbest maybe, but top 10).

    As for Phil, he should have had his inner Admiral Akbar saying “IT’S A TRAP!” GQ is know for interviewing the young, hip and left wing demo. Not Duck Dynastys biggest audience. They wanted something to put heat on the Robersons and they found it.

    I’m sure once A&E sees how much money the Phil firing is going to cost them, they’ll changer their minds quick.

  43. There should be no shock here. The Robertsons are Evangelicals and Phil just said what Evangelicals believe about homosexuals. I hope he keeps quacking because it will show how bigoted and homophobic Evangelicals are.

    • Lilly says:

      So because I am an Evangelical Christian, that automatically means I hate (and fear) gay people? Now who’s the narrow-minded bigot who judges without absolutely NO knowledge?

    • Robby Horine says:

      So to you, they can’t be people of faith? Do you think the Robersons string up gay people on a daily basis? Do you think that they don’t believe “Hate the sin, love the sinner”?

      To you it’s just as simple as “Since they don’t agree with me, they must be evil and destroyed.” So if they’re ‘intolerant’ does that give you license to be ‘intolerant’ well? Or can you act like the bigger person as just say “I don’t believe the same as they do, and I don’t care” or do we have to engage in ‘groupthink’?

      Food for thought.

  44. Robbie says:

    Just to be clear, a Christian is a follower of Christ Jesus, not necessarily someone who follows the Bible. Yes the teachings of Jesus are generally Bible stories, but it’s not always the same. So saying a Christian is someone who believes or follows the bible is not entirely true. For example, Jewish people follow the Bible, but they are not Christians. Not all Christians agree with everything in the bible, and not all of Jesus’s teachings supported stuff in the Old Testament of the Bible.

    The “rules” of the Old Testament is where you will find people pulling out what is right and wrong in terms of sins, but a Christian follows Jesus, and would follow his teachings of love and peace to all, especially sinners.

    • Mikayla says:

      Jesus teachings are about love and peace, which is shown by God forgiving sins if we REPENT. Jesus said “REPENT OR YOU WILL PERISH. Warning people is part of love.

  45. Rook says:

    Did anyone think that he has a integrity clause in his contract (or something like that).

  46. googly eyes says:

    He’s allowed to speak his mind, but why do so many straight people always equate gays with the anus?

  47. cjeffery7 says:

    well… this is supposed to be a reality show, right? if this is something the A&E execs would “suspend” somebody for, don’t you think they’d maybe have at least screened for this opinion before? i feel like it’s a little unfair to the duck dynasty cast to all of a sudden condemn an opinion they’ve potentially/very likely held all along, NOT TO MENTION it’s considerably short-sighted of A&E to not consider that somebody they are promoting might hold an opinion that they do not endorse… what exactly makes this a “suspension-able” offense? “oh! they don’t share the exact same core values as we do?! WE COULD HAVE NEVER PREDICTED SUCH A THING EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD. we need to censor that ASAP!” —> if dude has negative views on homosexuality, either you air it or you don’t. is your “reality show” legit if you don’t? this is the same sh*t that Big Brother faced this past summer. it brings into MY mind a whole lot or questions about the definition of reality TV, which is to say, they are for the most part NOT that realistic. they are censored, they are edited to create a certain impression that under ideal circumstances garners millions of viewers who find themselves relating to “characters” that essentially don’t exist in real life. this whole series of events/scenario makes very little sense to me, as i can’t believe this opinion hasn’t been expressed before on camera. whether it’s made it to air or not is merely a matter of semantics.

    • S. says:

      You’re a joke if you think anything about reality shows is “real” and if you want things depicted as they happen on those shows, you should pretty much stop watching all of them cuz it’ll never ever happen. These shows were never “legit” as you put it. Holding a view is different from trying to tell everybody in the press that black people were happy being kept down and none of them had a problem with it. News flash, a private company can absolutely censor the speech of their employees and he signed a contract that almost certainly covers the kind of thing he did. It’s legal, pumpkin. They’ve undoubtedly been editing the stuffing out of it. He’s said in the past that he thought they did it a bit too much. They were doing you a favor, Phil. People want to be able to hold their hands to their ears and go “la la la” about views they don’t like that they kinda think you don’t have, and sure it’s wrong to stick their head in the metaphorical sand about stuff like this, but when you confront people with your bigotry, they’re gonna react. Now it’s about what the sponsors are gonna do.

    • sd says:

      His opinions were not on the show. The opinions he had were made in an interview with GQ magazine so it had nothing to do with preserving the integrity of reality TV. He said offensive things about gay people and black people. A/E took exception to that. Maybe they had something in their contract about their behavior outside the show. Whatever. It’s not the end of the world if one less Duck Dynasty guy is on TV.

      • Terry says:

        He didn’t say offensive things about black people, all he said was he didn’t witness it in his town in the 60’s. I love how people just tweak the story to say what they want it to say.

  48. Mike R. says:

    He represents A&Es brand, so while he has the right to say whatever he wants no matter how much I think his comments are disgusting, but at the same time A&E has the right to suspend him, so I while I agree with their decision, at the end of the day if A&E does not agree with their comments while he represents their brand, they have the right to suspend him no matter what everyone else thinks.

  49. Dj says:

    I understand why A&E did what they did at the sometime this doesn’t hurt Phil. He has said he is tired of doing the show and he wasnt going to do it for much longer. Right now he might be happy happy happy that he doesn’t have to film.

  50. Justin says:

    Apparently free speech only works one way. This could be and should be a PR nightmare for A&E. Dumb knee-jerk reaction. Freedom > Agenda. Shoulda left it at “his opinions are not those of the network. He doesn’t speak for A&E” type statement. Don’t bite the hand that feeds you A&E. #SupportPhil

    • LOL says:

      Phil Robertson has every right to say whatever he wants, just as A&E has every right to decide who they allow on their broadcasts.