doublegunshop.com - home Forums Duck Dynasty

I've never watched an episode of Duck Dynasty, and probably won't start now. But I am glad to hear that A&E reinstated Phil Robinson based upon the economics of pressure from the majority of Conservatives who, for too long, have allowed a minority to dictate what we see and hear. I hope that 2013 was a turning point in permitting Liberal minorities to have an inordinate amount of power by using lies, intimidation, and hypocrisy. Think of a certain member here who frequently references mythical Republican misogyny, but who has never once lamented Liberal Democrat attacks upon Sarah Palin or any other Conservative woman.

I find myself smiling every time I think of how this recent change by A&E happened AFTER the sleazy race hustler Jesse Jackson weighed in. I would love to have seen his face when he got the news! I'd also like to have seen the look on the face of our gay president Obama!

http://dcclothesline.com/2013/07/07/washington-insider-obama-member-of-chicago-gay-mans-club/

This quote below, from a longer article by Ben Shapiro is the clearest and most concise explanation I am aware of regarding the Christian view and Christian teachings about homosexuality. It adequately refutes the B.S. and outright lies that have been presented by the so-called �Mainstream News Media� on this subject. Their portrayal was an attempt to condemn all Christian conservatives in this country by the far left liberal atheists and actually an attempt to condemn Christianity as well.

My wife and I have both friends and relatives who are Gay and we don�t subscribe to the opinion that they are automatically condemned to Hell.

I also think the left wing (Obamanites) lost far more credibility here. I�m surprised that Obama didn�t stoop to proclaiming that if he had a son he would look nothing like Phil Robertson but that would have been a stretch even for him.

Jim



Quote:
�The attempt by the media to portray Robertson as homophobic is a deliberate misreading of religious Americans. The media set up a dichotomy in which you are either pro-homosexuality or someone who wants to brutalize homosexuals. This is not the view of the Bible, which makes clear that sin is common and ought to be condemned, but that human beings have the capacity for repentance. The left masks its distaste for the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality in a straw man argument that Bible believers are violent bigots. They are not. Citing the Bible doesn't make you a bigot against human beings � it makes you a bigot against sin, which is a good thing. �

Is that why he kinda skips when he walks ?

Citing the Bible on homosexuality doesn't make one a bigot. It may be offensive to some.That's life, isn't it? My guess, Jim, is most members have relatives or friends who are gay and don't condemn them to hell. Many Christians don't believe in heaven and hell anyway. Many Christians, taking different meanings from the Bible, split off to their own houses of worship. One size doesn't fit all, as in most things.

I hear a lot of talk these days among friends of faith about Pope Francis. To say there's "interest" in him is under-statement. His "Who am I to judge?" about homosexuality always seems to segue easily into, "Well, if he isn't to judge, who is? Not me." There's more style than substance to Francis so far concerning Church teaching but he's already proclaimed loving each other---empathy and action particularly toward the poor and disadvantaged---is Christ's message and the Church's mission, and to ease up on all that other stuff that we want to be busy-body about.

He's spot-on to a skeptic like me.

King, re Francis. I couldn't agree more. Especially your last line.

Here's what I know about homosexuality. Having had a cousin who died of AIDS in the eighties, having gone to school, worked with and had friends who were gay, I know there is no one who CHOOSES that life and that attraction. It is too hard an existence to imagine people do this if it were possible they could take an alternate road.

I going to make the statement here that we appear to be in agreement. The Bible calls homosexuality an abomination. However the Bible also states that while you can as an individual or group condemn homosexuals as sinners it is up to God to pass judgment on those that practice it.
I have only the vaguest of notions regarding what the new Pope has stated but I get the impression he is not ready to pass judgment on homosexuals either. If this is the case it's a major shift within the Catholic church.
Jim

CAUTION: Know that some here are skeptical about the meaning and purpose of our Second Amendment, and would intentionally attempt to LULL others into complacency. Therefore we can make judgements about their veracity and credibility on other subjects based upon their propensity to use lies and hypocrisy to disseminate the Libtard agenda.

Pope Francis has merely stated the obvious. He is not God and he does not have the final say in judgement of any souls. He has not said, in any way, shape, or form, that the Bible is wrong about homosexuality. He has not changed Catholic Church teaching on the subject. He is accepting the sinner, but not the sin. King Brown is reading something into his statement that simply is not there. This comes as no surprise to me.

Note also how King has "segued" this argument into his frequent glib talk on "empathy and action particularly toward the poor and disadvantaged." We often hear of his "generosity of spirit", but so often with Liberals, their outpouring of generosity comes from picking other people's pockets through taxation. It is a proven fact that Conservatives are typically more generous than Liberals when it comes to reaching into their own pockets to donate to charity. Read the recent news about Jane Fonda's charitible trust which gave out zero dollars last year. Compare Mitt Romney's charitible donations, both in dollars and percentage of total income, to Obama's. It is also a proven fact that Capitalism has done more to lift the poor from poverty than any Liberal Socialist system.

Homosexuality may well be entirely an involuntary behavior. But then, so is kleptomania, alcoholism, drug addiction, pedophilia, and many other deviant conditions. But so far, none of those deviant behaviors are being mainstreamed into society and portrayed as normal. None of us would want young impressionable children to see those other deviant behaviors portrayed as normal every time we turn on the TV. The Libtards are ramming this down our throats, and proclaiming that anyone who does not accept their sick agenda is intolerant and deserving of punishment. As usual, they are 100% wrong.

Keith, no argument about Francis merely stating the obvious. However, it is an obviousness that seems to have eluded the entire upper echelons of the Roman Catholic Church for all of my lifetime.

I don't approach this from a distance. Every year I ever went to school I was in a church run / associated school. RC from kindergarten to grade 5, Anglican from then on. Chapel every day. Religious studies, priest and nuns as teachers.

IMHO Francis is turning the RC Church away from what I would call theological navel gazing / corruption to one of service to their fellow man. He has a long way to go, he just started and there are no doubt vested interests of privilege that would like to thwart him. He is a Jesuit....one order within the RC organization that I have the highest regard for.

Not everything King says is part of a leftist plot. His advocacy for helping the poor is fine and as it should be, as long as no one, and I haven't heard it from King, is suggesting that the left do more than the right in the area of charity.

A stopped clock is right twice a day. So may it be with King now and again.

IMHO, completely correct as well.

I don't agree....only behavior that's "totally involuntary" is insanity.

For someone to choose to be queer means there's something bad wrong inside their head.