Who Was Intolerant in ‘Duck Dynasty’ Flap?

Member Group : Jerry Shenk

Americans, including conservatives and Christians, freely tolerate, even admire and patronize openly-gay entertainers like Ellen DeGeneres and k.d. lang who, as a result, enjoy lavish lifestyles. DeGeneres needn’t fear retribution for being who she is, how she lives or what she believes.

So, why should Phil Robertson?

Robertson, patriarch of A&E’s "Duck Dynasty" family, was attacked by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) organization for faith-inspired public comments about sinfulness, including homosexuality, and temporarily suspended by A&E.

DeGeneres’ freedom is a testament to how tolerant we’ve become as a society. Unfortunately, militant gays aren’t content with tolerance. They expect — demand — nothing less than enthusiastic expressions of lifestyle approval from everyone. No exceptions.

Real intolerance is seen among the segment of gay activists and their ideological sympathizers who attempt to bully Christians like Phil Robertson into suppressing their core beliefs. However inelegantly Robertson may have expressed them, they remain his beliefs — supported by scripture in portions of the Bible GLAAD and A&E executives clearly overlooked – or reject.

Lee Habeeb observed: "The Robertsons take their faith seriously, and one of the more important elements of that faith involves putting no god before theirs. Not even the suits at the big network. … The Ten Commandments are…important rules for followers of Christ. And for Jews, too. The first four commandments are all about man’s relationship to God… Those commandments are the reason dictators throughout history haven’t much cared for Christians and Jews."

Bullies at GLAAD don’t care for them either, unless, of course, the faithful have renounced their faith and signed on to the progressive notion that, unlike Ellen DeGeneres, people like Robertson should be punished and boycotted for who they are and what they think.

The same gay activists who were once punished, fired, boycotted, excluded or marginalized for their lifestyle now view their own intolerance as social "progress."

Mark Steyn wrote, "By taking out TV’s leading cable star, [GLAAD] would teach an important lesson…that espousing conventional Christian morality, even off-air, is incompatible with American celebrity. … [G]roups like GLAAD increasingly oppose the right of Christians even to argue… It’s quicker and more effective to silence them."

One is reminded of the old schoolyard retort, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me."

Not anymore.

In modern American society, minority thought police have unilaterally fashioned certain words and the thoughts and beliefs they express as "harmful" and "hurtful. " In their minds, preventing the imagined "hurtfulness" of common words to their tender sensitivities should trump everyone’s right to dissenting beliefs and speech.

A free society can’t survive that.

A&E has the right to air or cancel whatever it wishes, so, in a strict legal sense, their original decision wasn’t a violation of Phil Robertson’s First Amendment rights.

But censorship and violations of free speech don’t require government action to be real. If successful, efforts like GLAAD’s to get people fired, vilified and shunned from public life without regard for their targets’ arguments and fundamental beliefs amount to the same thing.

Combatting the arbitrary application of law is only one part of an ideological battle over free speech. Indeed, in many cases, including Phil Robertson’s, the law is subordinate to the culture.

To liberalize our society, militant minorities like GLAAD – and others — use threats, derision and condescension to marginalize and discredit traditional values and beliefs. In this way, minorities immorally suppress speech and discourage the free exchange of ideas which conflict with their own.

When GLAAD escalated their demands — ""We believe the next step is to use this as an opportunity for Phil to sit down with gay families in Louisiana and learn about their lives and the values they share." — Steyn commented : "Actually, ‘the next step’ is for you thugs to push off and stop targeting, threatening and making demands of those who happen to disagree with you. Personally, I think this would be a wonderful opportunity for the GLAAD executive board to sit down with half-a-dozen fire-breathing imams and learn about their values…"

A little perspective, please: How "hurtful" can a reality show, off-camera, Corinthians-quoting duck hunter really be?

In their attempt to marginalize Phil Robertson over so trivial a matter, GLAAD and militant gays only marginalized themselves.

http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/12/post_22.html#incart_flyout_opinion