DUUUUUUUCK...

My Granny's maiden name is Robertson - no relation to the infamous Duck Dynasty clan. Speaking of which, Phil ain't doin' so hot right now. But, I can't totally blame Phil for his ignorant, racist, homophobic, or more thoroughly, xenophobic rant to GQ. He's a product of his environment. He was literally raised in a swamp. His young life epitomized the redneck culture of the South. (This includes his "salvation" experience.) And, with no repose from this environment for his 67 years, Phil can't be expected to hold any other opinions than he expressed to GQ.

But.

 Let's review this from another angle. "Alex" my fictional example, is gay. Apparently, he/she grew up in an environment of abuse and neglect of some sort. Over time, this abuse and neglect led him/her to so miss the guidance of someone of the same sex that he/she developed an uncontrollable mental and physical attraction to the same sex. Their desire may be offensive, but we can't judge. They are simple a product of their environment.

Phil vs. Leslie...

Rednecks...

With very different

outcomes

I digress...


I am going to do this as a list, because it might make more sense that way.

1) Freedom of speech is NOT the issue. (And if you contend this, you don't understand A1.)
I refuse to cite a couple-dozen constitutional scholars on the definition and history of free speech, because the majority of those reading this won't accept the facts anyway.) Suffice to say, freedom of speech means not going to jail or being executed for expressing your opinion - under most circumstances. Freedom of speech does not give you the right to say whatever you want without repercussion (i.e. Suppose, I work for FedEx. I don't like Catholic people. So, I decide one night just outside my building to tell James, a devout Southern Baptist, that I think all Catholic people are going to hell, because they lead people into sin and represent a drag on society. My boss overhears this conversation.) More than likely, I am going to be fired. Why? I demonstrated a blatant disregard for the company policy on discrimination against religion. [ A+E's non-discrimination policy includes sexual orientation and race, both of which Phil Robertson discriminated against in his interview. Since, Phil is an employee of A+E, he violated their non-discrimination policy. ]

2) You CAN'T support Phil's comments and support equality for all people.
My number two leads from my number one. To support Phil's statements means one and two things. First, you MAY not understand the first amendment to our constitution. Two, you agree with Phil's statements in a way you don't understand is implicitly prejudice to a number of fellow persons.

3) You may not lose your job BUT...
You won't lose your life because you don't support gay people. You won't lose your family because you don't support gay people. You won't lose your house because you don't support gay people. You won't lose your {insert item here} because you don't support gay people. But, if you're gay, you could lose all of this, and the lose could be perfectly legal.

Even at this hour, the Robertsons remain unapologetic for Phil's comments and ignorant of Phil's expression of the ramifications of his expressing personal beliefs. I can only hope a few things for the Robertson clan. Initially, I hope none of the younger Robertsons are dealing with issues of sexual orientation or identity. Also, I hope A+E will pull-the-plug on Duck Dynasty, as Phil will never recant of his position, and his bigotry does not warrant the support of a cable network. With no just ratings but lives at stake, my ultimate hope is for A+E to disavow Phil's comments; state their support for equality across the board; and place Duck Dynasty into the dustbin of history.