Thursday, December 19, 2013

Flying Ducks

There has been a recent uproar in the social media community over Duck Dynasty. You've most likely heard of the show, and if not, here's the gist.
The Robertsons are a southern family based in Louisiana. Phil Robertson is the father of Willie and Jase. They own a Duck call empire, known as Duck Commander. The show, to say the least, is gargantuanly popular. Especially for younger audiences. The family is well known for being funny, weird, incredibly down to earth, and being a good Christian family. Now, they are even more well-known as first amendment enforcers.
Phil recently expressed his opinions on homosexuality:
"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 mean, come on, dudes! You know what I'm saying? But hey, sin: It's not logical, my man. It's just not logical."

I completely agree and understand the statement, and to be honest, I don't how I would have worded it any other way. That being said, it did come off as rather brash, and A&E has put Phil on "indefinite hiatus" at the moment. This has caused that aforementioned uproar.
Phil's face has been plastered all over the internet, comparing him to the likes of Barack Obama, Oprah, and some random congressman I've never heard of.

He's the new face of Constitutionalism.

A&E has responded to his outrage with this:
"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."

This is supposedly in violation of the First Amendment. I believe that is true. But does the government have the right to intervene with a show because they express their freedom of speech and religion? I don't know enough about the situation nor the show to say. But I must ask, What do you think? Leave some insights in the comments section below.


2 comments:

  1. What does "constitutionalism" have to do with this situation? It seems to me that you are not thinking logically about what you are writing. Whether his constitutional rights are being violated or not, he is in a contract with the show, and they can choose to kick him out if they desire. If he is making claims that make him seem like a bigot, then it's only logical that they would drop him out of the show to make sure they score more views and lose less. It's silly to bring up the constitution in this situation, as Phil's rights have not at all been encroached on. In the end, it's A&E's choice, not congress'.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That comment may have come off as rash and prestigious. I didn't mean to challenge your beliefs in anyway. I myself am not for gay rights, and I agree with you wholeheartedly on that. Keep up the good work, and be proud for standing for what you believe in!

    ReplyDelete