Phil Robertson Calls it Like He Sees it, Hurts Feewings of Most Insecure Lot of Whiners I've Ever Seen

Okay, so I’m not really that religious.  I think I’ve established that before on this blog.  I think I’ve also said that my lack of religion isn’t a result of my being anti-religion or atheist or whatever, it’s just that I don’t feel it like some people do.  I don’t really feel the need for there to be a God.  I don’t really feel like there IS one, and I can’t bring myself to worship or believe “falsely” just to fulfill a social obligation that I pray to one deity or another.  In fact, were I God, I’d be more angry at the guy who “faked it” than I would at the guy who stayed true to himself.

Some people have felt God.  Some people believe in him with every ounce of their soul.  They KNOW that he, exists, and therefore, they KNOW that there is purpose in life and reward after death for a life well lived. 

I don’t scoff at those people like some non-believers do: I envy them.  I wish I was that sure.  I wish I was that content, and that certain that there is a cosmic referee to make sure everything is going to plan.  I’d like to think that there was a higher reason and a better purpose to my friend’s daughter dying in August.  I’d like to think that she lives on in Heaven, watching down on us and enjoying paradise until the day that we come to see her again. 

I just don’t.  No matter how much I’d LIKE to believe those things, I just don’t.  Or can’t.  Or won’t.  Whatever the reason. 

But if I had to pick a religion, I’d probably choose Christianity.  The real kind, not the made-up bullshit that a lot of churches call Christianity these days, because of the message of love and hope it portrays. 

So if some day, a Muslim man walked up to me and said:

“Goober, I disagree with the way that you are living your life.  I think that you have chosen the wrong God, and are living by the wrong Commandments, and that God will judge you accordingly when you go meet him on the day of your judgment.  It isn’t MY place to judge you, but my opinion is that you are making bad choices and sinning against Allah, and I think that’s a bad thing.  I love you, Goober, and it is not my place to hate and cast judgment, but my God will judge you, and according to his word, you will be judged poorly and face the consequences of that.”

Do you know what I’d do? 

I’d feel nothing.  I don’t think that there is such a thing as Allah.  I don’t believe that I’ll ever face him, and I don’t think that there is any chance that not living my life according to the book that he supposedly dictated to Muhammed is going to come back to haunt me in any way.  So I wouldn’t really care. 

I wouldn’t be angry, because this man is simply giving me his opinion on what his religion, which I don’t ascribe to, thinks of my choices.  I’m secure in my choices.  I believe I’ve lived a good life.  Any God that would take issue with me and what I’ve done is no God I’d be interested in worshipping, anyhow. 

I wouldn’t hate the Muslim man.  In fact, I’d maybe gain some respect for him for being such a straight shooter and telling it like he saw it.  How can you hold that against a man? 

All in all, the entire incident would have very little effect on me, at all, and if it changed my attitude towards the man who said it, it would be that I respected him more. 

So what am I to make of the reaction from some people in the homosexual community to Phil Robertson’s (of Duck Dynasty fame) comments regarding homosexuality? 

First, because several of the news networks have picked and chosen his remarks to make it seem like he compared homosexuality to bestiality (he did not), I am going to post Phil’s entire comment here.  Read it, and then you tell me: was anything he said hateful?  Or was it just the cantankerous, disagreeable opinion of a man notorious for calling it like he sees it? 

“Everything is blurred on what’s right and what’s wrong. Sin becomes fine… …Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men ... Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers -- they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

About the bestiality comparison:

Notice how he says homosexuality is a sin, and then lists other sins, including bestiality, and the homosexual movement says “ZoMG! He just compared homosexuality to bestiality!” but they totally miss out on the entire message.  By that metric, he compared adultery to bestiality.  Or drunkenness.  Or theft.  Because all he did was list off a bunch of sins, and called them all sin.  He didn’t compare homosexuality to bestiality, and to make that claim is specious at best, and downright dishonest at worst; which is  sin, just like bestiality…  ZoMG!  Now I’M doing it!  I just compared dishonesty to bestiality! 

Oh, wait, no I didn’t.  Anyone who isn’t an idiot can see that all I did was say that they are both sins.  So that argument for making it hateful falls flat.

So, let’s check behind door #2 and see if there is any hate in there.  The claim that Robertson was being a hateful asshole, like all southern redneck flyover idiots:

 "I love all men and women. I am a lover of humanity, not a hater… …I am just reading what was written over 2,000 years ago. Those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom. All I did was quote from the scriptures, but they just didn’t know it. Whether I said it, or they read it, what’s the difference? The sins are the same, humans haven’t changed… …If you give them the bad news, they’ll start kicking and screaming. But you love them more than you fear them, so you tell them."

Oops…  Nothing there.  So why then, did A&E drop Robertson like a hot potato after his comments, despite the fact that Duck Dynasty is the most popular cable TV show, well, ever? 

It's because the show backfired on them.

This was a case of coastal elites making a show to make fun of ignorant flyover rednecks, who were shocked at the following that these people got, not to mock and lampoon them, but because so many people identified with them and thought "huh, those fellers are kind of like my family!" 

A&E never wanted the show they got, but were making too much money to try and stop it. That is why their knee-jerk reaction was to kill the show when the first bad thing happened, instead of protecting it like they should have.

As for the homosexual community that got all outraged and pearl-clutchey about this, I’ve a message for you, too:

If y’all are actually working to make yourselves look like petty crybabies that must have the unconditional approval of every single person on planet Earth or else you'll pitch a whiney crybaby fit until you get your way, then you’re doing a bang-up job. If that isn’t your intent or goal, might I suggest a different tact? 

Otherwise, you’re sort of proving the point of all those nut-jobs who said back in the 90’s that giving homosexuals special rights would result in people getting fired over publicly stating their religious beliefs.  You really want that?  Really? 

I don't really get it. It is one of three things, as far as I can see:

1.) The worst case of narcissism I've ever seen - literally being totally unable to accept the fact that anyone could possibly ever disagree with you, and seeing it as a personal attack and an affront if they do;

2.) The worst case of low self-esteem I've ever seen - a self-loathing so full and complete that the person possessing it is literally incapable of dealing with any disagreement or criticism without melting down into a steaming pile;

3.) A supremacist movement - a group of people that think that they are better than everyone else, and should have the right to crush or destroy any dissent to their message, whatsoever. 

My guess is that in a group so broad and varied as the homosexual community, it is some of all three, adding up to create the most childish and silly backlash against the opinions of a public figure ever.

Alec Baldwin, however, continues to get a pass, it seems, for actually, you know, spouting hateful rhetoric (because he is a coastal elite, and therefore part of the "in" crowd) while Phil Robertson gets assaulted for stating his opinion in a non-hateful manner, qualified to make sure no one mistook what he said as being hate, and also qualified to ensure that everyone knew it was just his opinion.

I would note that there is a large segment of the homosexual population that sees this in the same way I do, and are angry that they're being dragged along into this childish tantrum.

If I were gay, I’d be fucking pissed at you fuckers, and I’d be doing everything I could to distance myself from your petty, crybaby asses.