Anti-PC people making a mistake on the Duck Dynasty story

[OODA_Loop]

Staph, a lady I used to work with in 2000 was fired for being gay.

Worked there for 14 years. Then she brought her life partner to the company holiday party.

And they fired her two weeks later.

I'll take Joe is full of shit for $500, Alex.

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, it's a valid question, Mac.

What have the PC police prevented you from saying that you think is so important to the debate?

Never, not once, because I don't allow them to.

There, I answered your question. Are you going to answer mine?

How am I a bigot, Joe? Get specific.

You used the word, back it up.

.

Then what is the motherfucking problem?

And how does anyone know "how" you are a bigot Mac? It just "feels" that way when people try and communicate with you.

But it's ok to be a bigot Mac. The PC police won't shut you up. Because you won't let them.

Carry on worrying about a multi millionaire that pulled this shit with A&E knowing about it and knowing that this kind of bullshit would bump ratings and increase viewership.

And people like you Mac, a true bigot, think this shit means something real. LMAO.

I'm sure Mac's sensitivities are upset because he said something rude at work once and they had a talking to in human resources about how that's inappropriate for work.

That's what I'm guessing.

And this happened fairly recently, because Mac wasn't this much of a douchebag before the election.

 

[Mac1958]

[

What you folks either don't see or won't see is that I want to see bigotry stopped, too. I just don't like the way you're trying to go about it.

Joe, yesterday, you called me a "bigot" twice, and then refused to tell me against whom I am bigoted. Let me try to help. I'll get the list started, and you just provide the last two:

1. Liars
2. Bigots
3.
4.

Okay, bring it home, thanks.

.

Apparently, we could include, "People who call rude assholes on their rudeness."

This is not a FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUE. They did not cart Phil off to Tolerance Camp to show him the error of his ways.

They merely asked a network if they thought his positions were appropriate.

And a business decision was made.

Now, if you want to fight for the right of bigots to be bigots, have at it, but at least admit that's what you're doing.

Joe, in the original post of this thread, I pointed out clearly that this is not a First Amendment issue.

And since you cannot list the people against whom I am bigoted -- we both know damn well that you meant blacks & gays -- I'll accept your non-apology.

I can see you playing these games with hardcore rightwingers - that's the stuff partisan ideologues do -- but why you play them with me is inexplicable.

.

 

[Seawytch]

What you folks either don't see or won't see is that I want to see bigotry stopped, too. I just don't like the way you're trying to go about it.

And how would you do it?

Here you go:

Someone makes a statement found offensive to a group of people. What do YOU think that offended group of people should do so as not to be considered "too PC"?

 

[Mac1958]

I'm sure Mac's sensitivities are upset because he said something rude at work once and they had a talking to in human resources about how that's inappropriate for work.

That's what I'm guessing.

And this happened fairly recently, because Mac wasn't this much of a douchebag before the election.

Joe, I tried to explain this in post 333. If you care to read that, perhaps it will help.

.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Someone makes a statement found offensive to a group of people. What do YOU think that offended group of people should do so as not to be considered "too PC"?

Ignore it and move on?

But I learned that when I was 3

 

[JoeB131]

Staph, a lady I used to work with in 2000 was fired for being gay.

Worked there for 14 years. Then she brought her life partner to the company holiday party.

And they fired her two weeks later.

I'll take Joe is full of shit for $500, Alex.

And Cleetus is back to, "I don't want to believe you've actually existed for the last 52 years..."

Hey, you know, in 52 years, I'll admit, I've encountered a lot of gay people.

There was my Aunt, who lived a lie for 70 years.
There was my aforementioned co-worker, who got fired.
There was a previous supervisor, who despite being a very successful person really couldn't talk about her private life while her team all had pictures of their families on their desks.

We've made a lot of progress in the last few decades, but we still have a long way to go.

Holding people like Robertson accountable for their bigotry is a step in the right direction.

 

[Stephanie]

This is a first Amendment issue people

Hell yesterday joey wanted to send people to (re-education camps for mental treatment) just for speaking about homosexuals...

you all better wake up in this country before you right to speak is taken away

the left is just all over the place as usual, they wail about BIG CORPORTIONS blah blah blah, then take their side in this situation

do they ever stick with anything on PRINCIBLES and for others in this country? If it's about something they don't like, they don't

 

[Seawytch]

[

omg, they are the butt of jokes
and rednecks aren't I guess
They get fired for being homosexual, what a lie...I don't find that leftwingers MUST LIE amusing
wow, this post is nothing but IRONY
GOOD GRIEF

Staph, a lady I used to work with in 2000 was fired for being gay.

Worked there for 14 years. Then she brought her life partner to the company holiday party.

And they fired her two weeks later.

yeah, people get fired for being gay. IN most of the country, it isn't even illegal to do so.

It's truly ironic. Many of the RW morons think Phil was fired for his religious beliefs (he wasn't even suspended) when that couldn't be further from the truth and yet most of them would support firing me for being gay...not something I said or did, but just for being gay.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Someone firing a 14 year employee because they showed up with another female at a holiday party doesn't reconcile with reality.

 

[Seawytch]

Someone makes a statement found offensive to a group of people. What do YOU think that offended group of people should do so as not to be considered "too PC"?

Ignore it and move on?

But I learned that when I was 3

If we "ignored it and moved on", we would still be calling people the n word in polite conversation. I'm glad we don't anymore, aren't you?

 

[JoeB131]

I'm sure Mac's sensitivities are upset because he said something rude at work once and they had a talking to in human resources about how that's inappropriate for work.

That's what I'm guessing.

And this happened fairly recently, because Mac wasn't this much of a douchebag before the election.

Joe, I tried to explain this in post 333. If you care to read that, perhaps it will help.

.

I did read it.

It was utterly stupid.

Freedom of speech does not just mean you can say what you want, it also means you have to live with the consequences of what you say.

Phil is encountering consequences. Tough for him.

 

[Mac1958]

What you folks either don't see or won't see is that I want to see bigotry stopped, too. I just don't like the way you're trying to go about it.

And how would you do it?

Here you go:

Someone makes a statement found offensive to a group of people. What do YOU think that offended group of people should do so as not to be considered "too PC"?

I've said it many times: When someone says something with which we disagree, we can use that as an opportunity to open communication with them. It's our chance to have a civil, honest, mature debate on any given important issue.

Shine a light on it, nice and bright. If one side is wrong or lying, it will be abundantly clear. If both sides are honest and have good points, perhaps we can find some common ground and create some momentum towards fixing the problem.

Pretty basic stuff. The problem is that people on both ends are so quick to give up and deteriorate to the name-calling, insults, hyperbole threats and lies. We're so narcissistic that we just don't have the ability to do the hard work.

That's all I'm saying.

.

 

[Seawytch]

Someone firing a 14 year employee because they showed up with another female at a holiday party doesn't reconcile with reality.

It's very real for gay people in 29 states where they can be fired ONLY for being gay.

 

[OODA_Loop]

yet most of them would support firing me for being gay...not something I said or did, but just for being gay.

If you don't say or do anything no one knows you're gay.

Your disclosure at inappropriate venues causes your grief.

 

[Bfgrn]

The full statement:



A direct threat to A&E's income stream, i.e. thier sponsors. If they left it at "he's a bad man and we dont like him" then it would be speech against speech, instead an economic threat was included.

I have a feeling you think economic threats are wrong when people like the Catholic League use them, but when your GLAAD buddies use it, its ALL HUNKY DORY.

I think it's fine when anyone uses them. That's what they're for. I don't want legislation, nobody does. We have boycotts.

Except there was no boycott, there was a threat of a boycott. There was no overall public outrage. Phil offended a miniscule part of the population. If you offend most of the population, then OK, you should be in trouble, but when offending a fraction of a percentage of the population, like say, some butthurt interest group, then the proper to response to said interest group should be, "GO **** YOURSELF WITH A TIRE IRON"

I find it sad that you just can't accept people disagreeing with your lifestyle. It must be a sad hateful existance.

Isn't it ironic that you folks on the right jump on the 'majority rule' band wagon when it fits your beliefs?

All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
Thomas Jefferson

 

[Seawytch]

What you folks either don't see or won't see is that I want to see bigotry stopped, too. I just don't like the way you're trying to go about it.

And how would you do it?

Here you go:

Someone makes a statement found offensive to a group of people. What do YOU think that offended group of people should do so as not to be considered "too PC"?

I've said it many times: When someone says something with which we disagree, we can use that as an opportunity to open communication with them. It's our chance to have a civil, honest, mature debate on any given important issue.

Shine a light on it, nice and bright. If one side is wrong or lying, it will be abundantly clear. If both sides are honest and have good points, perhaps we can find some common ground and create some momentum towards fixing the problem.

Pretty basic stuff. The problem is that people on both ends are so quick to give up and deteriorate to the name-calling, insults, hyperbole threats and lies. We're so narcissistic that we just don't have the ability to do the hard work.

That's all I'm saying.

.

And that is EXACTLY what happened here. 1. Offensive statement made 2. Offensive statement called out

Where is the PC?

 

[martybegan]

I think it's fine when anyone uses them. That's what they're for. I don't want legislation, nobody does. We have boycotts.

Except there was no boycott, there was a threat of a boycott. There was no overall public outrage. Phil offended a miniscule part of the population. If you offend most of the population, then OK, you should be in trouble, but when offending a fraction of a percentage of the population, like say, some butthurt interest group, then the proper to response to said interest group should be, "GO **** YOURSELF WITH A TIRE IRON"

I find it sad that you just can't accept people disagreeing with your lifestyle. It must be a sad hateful existance.

Isn't it ironic that you folks on the right jump on the 'majority rule' band wagon when it fits your beliefs?

All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
Thomas Jefferson

Majority rule within the limits of the consitution. I don't see the right to not be offended, or the right of a small group of assholes to dictate policy anywhere in the constitution.

Your issue is people of your ilk are so weak willed that any opposition to how you live your lives cannot be tolerated and must be crushed.

 

[Seawytch]

yet most of them would support firing me for being gay...not something I said or did, but just for being gay.

If you don't say or do anything no one knows you're gay.

Your disclosure at inappropriate venues causes your grief.

Should I be able to fire someone for being Christian?

 

[OODA_Loop]

yet most of them would support firing me for being gay...not something I said or did, but just for being gay.

If you don't say or do anything no one knows you're gay.

Your disclosure at inappropriate venues causes your grief.

Should I be able to fire someone for being Christian?

You can if that person projects their thing on others in the workplace inappropriately.

Sure.