20 Homophobic Twitter Reactions to Phil Robertson’s Suspension

Posted in Entertainment
Wed, Dec 18 - 11:27 pm EDT | 4 months ago by
Comments: 116
Share This Post:
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Tumblr
  • Reddit
  • Twitter

The future of Duck Dynasty is now up in the air after Phil Robertson got suspended by A&E. The channel says the reality star made insensitive remarks about homosexuals and gay marriage in a recent interview with GQ. It’s unclear how long his hiatus will last.

Look below for a gallery of 20 twitter reactions to this news that are definitely homophobic. This is just a small sampling of the many on social media who are backing Phil Robertson for his stance.

Many people are angry that the Duck Dynasty star basically got suspended for believing in the bible. Personally, I think he should have known to be more careful with his words — especially since it’s regarding such a hot button issue in today’s world.

Here are the aforementioned images. Go ahead and click the right arrow to view the entire album:


Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Phil Robertson

Share This Post:
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Tumblr
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • martino

    I don’t get why what he said was so bad. Homosexuality is a sin. Just like robbery. Using the Lord’s name in vain, etc. Just because he’s a public figure doesn’t mean he can’t speak the truth.

    • Garan J. Stitt

      Holy shit, Come out of the stone ages you fucking self centered fuckthroat

    • LC

      Garan, shut the fuck up. Thank you.

    • Josh Daoust

      only to people who follow the bible. most of those people think the earth is 5000 years old. so that says a lot

    • Josh Flagg

      No they don’t. That’s just what uneducated people like you think Christians think. The Bible says nothing about the age of the earth. Moron.

    • Josh Daoust

      how out of any of this did you get that i am Christian

    • What?

      How out of any of his comment did you get that he called you a Christian? He called you an uneducated person that does not know anything about what Christians actually think. Read much? Didn’t you accuse someone earlier of being uneducated? LOL.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      You have to prove its true before you start treating it like fact. Otherwise, you are forcing your delusion on other people.

  • Fabiano

    Though the people on Twitter are going wild about this (on both sides) .. Phil Robertson did nothing wrong. Just because it’s “trendy” to be gay these days, doesn’t mean it’s right

    • Garan J. Stitt

      STFU you uneducated piece of shit.

    • Gayran J Stiffy

      Maybe you should STFU.

    • Ryan Abernathy

      Fighting hate with hate. Classy. Guess you are all just cavemen chasing witches in Salem with internet access.

    • Josh Daoust

      wtf are you talking about “trendy” you sound like an uneducated pos

    • Dan Foust

      Dang Josh. Don’t get your pink panties all wadded up. If you want to be gay then go be gay. Just don’t expect everyone to respect you for it, because it is disgusting.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      you don’t “go and be gay”, how stupid are you?

  • adam

    Let the man back on the damn TV show

  • teach

    boo hoo you people don’t like what you have rad on twitter? tough shit. I agree with all of em. Get back in the closet ya fags.

    • Josh Daoust

      lol i hope u get raped

    • Fred Sanford

      I’ll bet you pay some dude to rape you every night.

    • Josh Daoust

      not really rape then is it?

    • howdy neighbor

      That’s funny, i said the same thing to your mom last night.

  • golem22

    People call hatred of homosexuality homophobia, its not as
    phobia is a fear. Its quite possible to hate something and have no fear of it for real.

    • LC

      Precisely.

    • Josh Daoust

      keep telling yourself that chump. guarantee you have atleast one gay friend that is not telling you for fear of how you will act, you will think they are the best kinda person and nothing will change when you find out but then you will hate them

    • OBAMASUXD!K

      I bet you have a friend that also thinks of having sex with kids but if they told you Josh, what would you think. Josh you are to damn dumb to be aloud to even breathe. Hurry make a quick comeback pee-wee herman.

    • Josh Daoust

      lol so big behind your internet.

    • Duncan Myers

      Oh. Sound like Josh the “straight as can be” guy is really a closet homo that had a bad experience when he told one of his guy friends that he wanted to suck his cock. Shame on you Josh. You filthy homo.

  • Nick Vargas

    Fear is just lack of understanding. People who are straight and KNOW they are straight KNOW that they arent gay, and they arent afraid of gay people.

    It really shouldnt matter, let them have as equal rights as possible!! “Here, have all the same problems as everyone else” like its a favor (last parts a joke :P)

    • Ted Williams

      You are soooo gay.

    • alex

      So do you think his comments are weird or do you think he is actually gay? Or both? I don’t think his comments are weird at all. Soooo. Why do care if he is gay? Afraid you might accidentally ask him out?

    • Paul Allen

      Nick aint gay! You’re gay. Nick’s a nerd, and we all know…NERDS RULE!!!!! You’re soooo stupid. Have fun working the drive thru for the rest of your life.

  • Ryan Abernathy

    Proof that the human population is just as backwards as it ever was. Gay haters are just the reincarnation of any bigot that walked the world before them.

    • jimmy falon

      filthy cock sucker.

    • Ryan Abernathy

      Thanks for proving my point. How thoughtful of you.

    • HaHa

      I’m pretty sure that was a joke. Tasteless joke though, i’ll give you that. Anywhooo, Phil never said that he hated gay people. He disagrees with the lifestyle and there is a large population of people that love gay people just as much as anyone else, they just think that what they are doing is wrong and i think nature itself will testify to that. And i got some news for you, if you don’t like those people…then that makes YOU a bigot. So I guess you proved your own point, huh?

    • Ryan Abernathy

      Where did I say I hate people that dislike gays? Where? I do not wish harm on them. I do not want to hurt, kill, or restrict their rights in any way. I simply stated that homophobia is the exact same as racism and sexism, just in a new package.

      I do not believe the Duck Dynasty guy was in the wrong. My comment about bigots was to the people talking shit on Twitter, but apparently you did not read the title. He should not be put on hiatus. He gave his opinion, and stated that gays should not be disrespected. You calling me a bigot is hilarious, since you missed my point entirely.

      The next time you try to make me look stupid, make sure you understand what you are saying.

    • HaHa

      Touché…i must now retreat to my castle and lick my wounds. Please excuse me if you will good sir.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      No, nature does not support that. Homosexuality is present in dozens of species other than humans. It is natural, and there is no moral consequence associated with it.

    • Albert Einstein

      You have no idea what you are talking about. There is NO evidence whatsoever of exclusively homosexual behaviour among animals, i.e. they are not born constitutionally homosexual. Homosexual behaviour in the animal kingdom occurs…under conditions of
      unavailability of other-sex sexual partners, or under such stressors as
      crowding. No mammal in its natural state
      seeks and prefers same-sex sexual gratification. This is found uniquely among
      human homosexuals. Current “scientific” analysis of animal homosexuality rests on faulty
      observations…on confusions with heterosexual mating rituals and attempts to
      identify a sexual partner. Genes have a much smaller effect on human behaviour
      than they do on animals, and therefore conclusions drawn from genetic
      experiments on animals cannot therefore be extrapolated to explain human
      behaviour. In any case, animals are not morally responsible; they behave instinctively, whereas humans choose their behaviour. It is impossible to reliably extrapolate from animals to humans regarding sexuality.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      First of all, the fact that animals practice homosexual behavior in any form is sufficient to disprove the claim that homosexuality is unnatural and “an abomination” as it is written in the Bible. My point was that it occurs in nature, so the “unnatural”, “sin of man” argument is useless because of that. “No mammal in its natural state seeks and prefers same-sex sexual gratification.” Wrong. Among domesticated sheep, 10% of rams will refuse to mate with female sheep, but will readily mate with other rams. You can check Wikipedia for the source. Dolphins have also exhibited extended periods of exclusive homosexuality. Perhaps sexual orientation is an exclusively human trait, and we are all bisexual underneath. Regardless, the point is that we should not condemn fellow human beings for exhibiting homosexual behavior if they are not hurting anyone. On its own, the act of being with the same sex has no moral consequence.

    • Paul

      Oh man, what a coincidence! I worked with sheep for several years and NO i did not have sex with them so leave those jokes in your heads all you bastards (not you Faraaz). I’ve seen as much as 50% of rams fail and eventually flat out refuse to mount a ewe because of the other dominant rams aggression. I’ve seen the less dominant rams mount each other out of sheer desperation and I have even seen dominant rams mount the less dominant when all the rams are isolated from the ewes. Most rams are isolated from the ewes for three and sometimes nine months out of the year. Yes, under certain conditions rams will exhibit homosexual behavior, but it is out of desperation and so very obviously not what they would prefer. The less dominant rams will continue to exhibit homosexual behavior so long as they are around the dominant rams. They have to be sold to another rancher at which point they can breed or simply slaughtered becuase they become useless to own at some point. The dynamics will them resume when the rams are introduced into the new flock. The less dominant rams can, and usually do, become a dominant ram when introduced into a new flock. (It’s kind of like when we go from middle school to high school. The dynamics change and pecking orders are disrupted). Sheep are weird, but fun animals to work with. Their behavior is eerily human sometimes. I know nothing about dolphins, but perhaps similar circumstances apply? Dominant males in nature can be unrelenting to the less dominant (I don’t have to tell you that about humans). I’ve never seen a ram kill another ram but I think they would if they could. I’ve seen one break his neck when trying to headbutt another ram but instead hit a wooden beam because the other ram moved over at the last second. Hilarious and kind of sad at the same time. To this day I still wonder if that other ram had that all planned out. But on a moral level, we know for a fact that lions will kill other male lions, lioness cubs and even lionesses and they are not doing it for food. So does that mean that I can kill my neighbor for mowing his lawn at 7am just because it’s ok to murder in the animal kingdom? Obviously not. You simply cannot apply the same sexual or moral conditions to humans as applies to the animal kingdom. I appreciate your ferver and willingness to stand up for what you believe in, as that is in short suppy these days, but try and consider that maybe you are wrong about some things that you currently believe to be true. Sorry for writing a book here and once again, I sincerely and absolutely mean no offense to you.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      You have completely missed my point. I am not saying that we should model our behavior after what happens in the wild. I am saying that we should not hate people who are gay or call them wrong or an abomination, because what they are stems from a completely natural phenomenon. No, you cannot apply the same conditions to humans, but if you are aware of the connection humans have to animals, you begin to realize that their instincts are within us too, only they have been tempered by our intelligence. It’s not two different worlds, animals and humans, we are all animals, only we can talk and are a bit smarter.

  • Jordan

    I cannot believe this is real. I thank god I live in Los Angeles where educated people realize that there’s nothing wrong with being gay. And that this is not a “freedom of speech” issue. Phil wasn’t arrested… FYI if you watch TV then you should know only Fox News would be tolerant of hate, the rest of us are liberals :-) and we have more money than you horrific excuses for human beings!

    • Lady’s are meant for men

      Just don’t be a queer…. It’s not normal and disgusting….

    • Garan J. Stitt

      Have you ever thought that maybe gay individuals think that A man and a woman having intercourse is not normal and disgusting? I think that you are a disgusting excuse for a human being.

    • Mike P. Fluffingham

      A man and a woman having intercorse is normal and disgusting. A man and a man having intercouse is just disgusting. I hope that clears things up for you….sorry that you are gay and all. Try and not be. Good luck.

    • Ryan Abernathy

      “A man and a woman having intercorse is normal and disgusting.” You misspelled INTERCOURSE and screwed up your own point.

    • alex

      Oh, thankx intranet coments section spel cheker guuy, becuse if yu hadnt caught that then evry one wood have tottaly mised the point. Wat wouuld we doo whithout yu?

    • Samuel

      Man..you are one stupid individual.

  • Mike

    I feel so sorry for all those homophobic morons

    • Lady’s are meant for men

      You must be a queer… So disgusting

    • Josh Daoust

      i agree with him, and i am straight as can be, you are just uneducated

    • Bill Gates

      Mike and Josh, you’re just brainwashed morons…ie, educated idiots. The duck dude has every right to his opinion and if you don’t like it, to bad. Politically correct is just a fancy word for coward.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      He does, but when he exhibits his ignorance and stupidity like that, don’t expect a television network to keep paying him.

    • Alex

      He’s neither ignorant or stupid and they are still paying him.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      If someone believes homosexuality is a choice, they are ignorant. If someone believes homosexuality is a behavior that can be changed, they are basking in their ignorance, they are stupid. I guess the network took him bad, surprising move. But in my opinion they shouldn’t endorse a homophobe on national television.

    • Paul

      Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly. As they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting. Who, knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do those things, but have pleasure in them.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      Your bible is useless, if this is your idea of truth.

    • Paul

      Your opinion is useless, if it’s your idea of truth.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      Actually, it’s not. My opinion inspires me to help people in this world and be compassionate. Yours inspires you to discriminate, hate, and practice bigotry over people because of their sexual orientation. You are the one wasting space, with your superstituois nonsense.

    • Paul

      Sorry I offended you. Just please, put your ego aside and consider that maybe you don’t know half as much as you think you do. If you really want to know why the world is the way it is…read the Bible. Try a 1599 Geneva Bible or a King James Version. Stay away from new translations at first and by all means stay away from churches and people that claim to be Christian until you have read it all. Most people that call themselves Christian are no such thing and should be avoided, but there are some that you will find to be quite helpful and compassionate. If you wish to ignore me that’s fine to. All I was offering was the truth, I meant no offense.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      Yea, I’ll consider it. The problem is, your certainty of truth comes from faith in a book that has not been proved true, while mine comes from empirical evidence and reason. I have read the Bible, and though there were some poetic, pretty passages, there were also horrid passages that either have a direct message of hate or intolerance, or an implied one. Reading the Bible made me more of an Atheist. The morality that Christianity posits is hypocritical, unnatural, and absolute, which is not a good thing. The offense lies in your assumption that the Bible is absolute truth. You can believe it if you want, but when you start citing verses like they are infallible, it really angers me.

    • Paul

      I assure you, my intent is not to offend you. In spite of the various translation errors, the Bible is infallible and it is the absolute truth. It took me three years to read it for the first time and I, like you, was appalled at much of what I read. I had to put my opinion and ego aside to even allow myself to continue. To say that was difficult, is an understatement. It was not until I got more than halfway through that I started to recognize the reasons for much of what I considered offensive behavior on the part of God and His people. God’s actions in the old testament are like those of a father to a young son. They needed constant correction as well as constant protection. As a parent we correct our children regardless of what they think and we protect our children regardless of what others think. The new testament on the other hand, is much like the relationship between a father and an adult son. Just read it without personal opinions or ego intact as it will be impossible to understand otherwise. I know that it can be difficult to read, difficult to accept and at times monotonous, but in the end, it is well worth it. Peace.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      You cannot claim a doctrine is infallible and absolutely true, when that doctrine requires faith. It is completely contradictory. If you believe with faith, you can never hope to say the Bible is infallible, only that you have faith that it is. Like I said before, I have read the Bible, and there is no justifying those disgusting passages. If God is real and the Old Testament is his idea of law and order and morality, then we live in a celestial dictatorship, a prospect that is more terrifying than a godless universe.

    • Paul

      You have read parts of the Bible, but you have obviously not read the entire Bible and you seem to understand very little if any of what you have read. You must remember that the god(s) of this current world we live in are very powerful and very malevolent fallen angles and you can find their handy work in every culture throughout recorded history. Life on this planet is disgusting so why should the Bible be full of sunshine and butterflies. You’re part of God’s plan whether you like it or not and you can be sure that His ways are better than our ways. Whether you currently understand or agree with His actions is of little relevance. Does the vessel say to the potter, “why have you made me this way?”

    • james

      Dear Paul,

      The bible is a book. There is no way to know if what is written is true or not. To say that it is the absolute truth is to ignore the centuries of men and women who have pursued knowledge and tried to understand the world around them. Besides, if there is a god then his work is seen through us rather than through a book. You can choose to be a good person rather than being good through the fear of hell and damnation. That is true goodness. I would defend the rights of gay men and women to be treated the same as everyone else. You must realise that descriminating against someone because of their sexuality is wrong. You can choose to be good, in keeping with the definition of the word rather than according to a bible that promotes hatred in many passages. I hope you can use both your faith and your head.

    • Paul

      I certainly agree that discriminating against someone because of their sexuality is most definitely wrong. Jesus treated everyone the same and left us with instructions to treat others as we would like to be treated. As for the rest of your comments, I mostly agree with you. I agree, The Bible is 66 books and their absolute truth requires absolute faith and many centuries have been spent in the pursuit of knowledge by both believers and unbelievers and to ignore any of them is illogical indeed. I agree, God works through all of us at His pleasure and according to His will; some to honor and some to shame. The question you have to ask yourself is, “who’s good?” We can and should do good, but if you think for one second that your good deeds makes you good…well then, review if you will, your life from your first memories until today…take a long look in the mirror…none of us are “good”. Lastly, I absolutely disagree with your statement that the Bible promotes hatred in many passages. You make a statement like that then I expect verse examples given in context. You can make the Bible say anything you want it to say if you quote it out of context. Don’t rely on other people to tell you what the Bible teaches or promotes. You have a functioning brain. Read it for yourself. There is only one way to be wise as a serpent and gentle as a dove, and that is by using the God given gifts of reason AND faith. Happy New Year.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      The fact that you think it is “obvious” that I have not read the Bible because I don’t praise its words speaks to your narrow mindedness. ONCE AGAIN, yes, I have read it, multiple versions. It was a requirement when I studied Philosophy at Berkeley. I have also read the Quran, Torah, Bhagavad Gita, as well as Confucian and Taoist philosophies. “You’re part of God’s plan whether you like it or not” THIS statement illustrates your ignorance better than anything I have said. You assume the truth of your God’s existence, and refuse any dissension in respect to it. You then go on to include me in your delusion, and then call my understanding and opinion irrelevant. (All the while saying you mean no offense, HA!) You’ve managed to be arrogant, ignorant, condescending, self-righteous, deluded, and dogmatic in your statements, all in a couple of lines. There is no evidence for God, there will never be evidence for God, if you continue to define God as you do in the Bible. That definition is vague, a non-falsifiable hypothesis (NOT a strength, mind you) and more supernatural than scientific. Cling to your verses and prophecies all you want, and babble about your God and his plans. Just don’t pretend like you know shit about me, and DON’T shove your beliefs down my throat as if they are fact. I know what Christianity believes, and I have a reason not to believe it. But your infantile mind cannot comprehend a dissenting, rational opinion when it comes to your absolute world view. There are only believers and non-believers, saved and damned, god-fearing and heathens. A child’s attempt at morality; an absolute, rigid moral system that came into existence by desert folk who had no knowledge of the world or its ways. And I am supposed to believe the rantings of ignorant tribesmen who existed a thousand years ago ago? I am no vessel, and I was made by no potter. You have no rational sense, no humility, and no perspective. I pity you.

    • Paul

      Well damn then, I guess you have read it. This can mean only one of two things: you have limited comprehension skills (possible, but highly unlikely) or the reader has to believe what is written in the Bible in order to comprehend it. For the sake of kindness i’m going to propose that the latter is the case, because you DO NOT understand what you have read. So we shall agree to disagree. Such is the nature of debate. All my comments are based on the belief that the Bible is factual while all your comments are based on the belief that the Bible is fiction. Your world view is as absolute as mine. By default our competing comments will be considered ignorant and arrogant from the recipients point of view. I assure you that your comments are just as offensive to me as mine are to you. No need for the additional name calling on your part as it is as useful to me as the Bible apparently is to you. When unbelievers stop shoving their beliefs down Christians’ throats as if they were fact then we will return the favor. Never gonna happen is it? So get used to. Happy New Year.

    • Faraaz Akbar

      Your arrogance is baffling. What about what I have said makes you think I do not comprehend the Bible? What specifically did I say that made you think that I have completely misunderstood it? Like I said earlier, I am pretty sure that in your eyes, anyone who is not a devout believer and has read the Bible must not understand it, no matter how intelligent they are. That is incredibly ridiculous. No, my comments are made with the belief that the Bible is NOT PROVEN TO BE TRUE, which is different from the belief that the Bible is false. Got that distinction through your head? If there is evidence for the Bible’s truth, REAL, empirical evidence, that is testable and verifiable, I will gladly change my opinion. If there is evidence against Christianity, you will not change your opinion. So how am I absolute in my worldview? Lol what a joke. You are taking all my criticisms of your worldview and projecting them onto mine, completely false accusations. YOU are projecting your absolute mindset on to me, because that is how you view the world. The reality is, I am open to evidence, debate, discussion, but when you start saying “your opinion is irrelevant because God exists and he doesn’t care what you think and that’s a fact”, well, that is the POSTER CHILD of unwarranted certainty and an absolute mindset. LOL nonbelievers are shoving beliefs down Christians throats? HAHAHA! This is coming from the guy that responded to my comment about homosexuality (not Christianity mind you, homosexuality) with a verse from the Bible. If you don’t think that constitutes shoving your beliefs down someones throat, you are more deluded than I originally believed.

    • Paul

      I’m telling you the truth according to the Bible and you interpret that as arrogance. Have you considered that just maybe you come off just as arrogant to me? Of course you haven’t. You assert that homosexuality is perfectly normal and that anyone who refuses to accept that is “ignorant and stupid.” Who’s the one who is arrogant? If you don’t think that constitutes shoving your beliefs down Christians throats then YOU are the one who is deluded. Additionally, you made the first comments, not me. You ask me what specifically did you say that makes me think that you do not comprehend the Bible. I’m sorry, but everything you have said makes it very clear to me that you do not understand what you have read. The simple fact that you demand “REAL, empirical evidence, that is testable and verifiable” in order to change you opinion of the truth of the Bible speaks volumes to the fact that you do not understand it at all. As concerning unbelievers lack of understanding, that is certainly addressed in the Bible. The book of Acts 28:24-27 states, “Some believed the things which were spoken and some believed not…Well spoke the Holy Ghost through Isaiah the prophet saying, ‘Go to these people and say, Hearing you shall hear and shall not understand and seeing you shall see and not perceive. For the hearts of this people have grown cold, their ears are hard of hearing and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their hearts and should return that I might heal them.’” You’re like a person driving down the road and you come to a sign that says, “Bridge Out Ahead.” You see the sign, you read the sign, but you don’t believe what it says so you keep on driving. That is a lack of understanding, a lack of comprehension if you like. You are correct that my mindset is absolute and certain. Not only do I not apologize for that, I thank God for that! You either believe the Bible or not, there is no maybe. If your opinion is that maybe the Bible is true, but I will wait for the evidence to prove that, then you will be waiting until judgment day. My opinions about the Bible are absolute indeed and according to your own previous comments so are yours, but you seem to be backpedaling on that now by saying that you are “open to evidence, debate or discussion.” I wonder why? Are you concerned that you might be wrong? I think you are smart enough to realize that you should be concerned. Just a heads up, you don’t “debate” God, the Bible or Christianity, you either adhere to it or you don’t, you either believe or you don’t. You ask me, “how am I absolute in my worldview?” Here are your own comments: “Your Bible is USELESS, if this is your idea of truth, “Reading the Bible made me more of an Atheist” (genuine Atheism is an absolute), “I have read the Bible, and there is NO justifying those disgusting passages,” “I know what Christianity believes, and I have a reason NOT to believe it.” and finally “There is NO evidence for God, there will NEVER be evidence for God, if you continue to define God as you do in the Bible.” Well sir, I hate to break it to you, but your worldview as concerning your belief that the Bible is false is (was?) as absolute as it can be, yet you now try and pretend otherwise. And you say that I am deluded? HA! I hope that I am mistaking your comments as delusional, as a change of heart on your part would also explain the contradictory comments. Also, I never said “your opinion is irrelevant because God exists and he doesn’t care what you think.” You are misquoting me while attempting to paraphrase my comments so I will give you the original quotes. What I said was, “Your opinion is useless, if it’s your idea of truth” (Rom 1:22 and Col 2:8), and “You’re part of God’s plan whether you like it or not and you can be sure that His ways are better than are ways” (Isa 55:8-9), and “Whether you currently understand or agree with His actions is of little relevance” (Rom 14:1). Those statements are all in line with the teachings in the Bible, but I guess you skipped over those parts. Why would any of that bother you anyway? You don’t seem to believe that the Bible is factual so why do you care what it says? Perhaps you are simply angry that the Bible message is not in line with your own beliefs? Well I’m sorry. As a believer one has to conform to the Bible, not the other way around. Our beliefs are polar opposites (or as you apparently now believe, only 90 degrees off or so?) so naturally we are going to offend each other, but that is not my intention. I can’t help that you don’t like hearing the truth according to the Bible. I don’t like hearing the truth according to unbelievers, but there is nothing that I can do about it except voice my opinion in return. You are smart, no doubt (I’m having a hard time keeping up with you), but that does not mean that you automatically understand the Bible just by reading it. The Bible itself says that an unbeliever will not understand it (John 16:13, Acts 28:24-27, 1Cor 2:14, 2Cor 4:3-4). You say that is ridiculous, but that is what the Bible says, like it or not. This seems to have bothered you more than anything I have said. I would think that concept would be way down on the list of things that you consider ridiculous about the Bible. But not being able to understand it seems to bother you quite a bit. Perhaps there is hope for you after all?

    • Faraaz Akbar

      You never said “according to the Bible” once, you acted as if it was absolute truth to EVERYONE, not just Christians. Saying “according to the Bible” at least tells me that you are aware that your belief in God and Christianity cannot be proved without a doubt. But you didn’t say that, you said many things that implied you thought the opposite, that the truth of Jesus’ divinity is self-evident and that is the end of it. You may have been getting those ideas from the Bible passages you listed (I was aware those ideas were in the Bible, I didn’t “skip those parts”) but you presented them as your own ideas. Doesn’t matter though, the fact that those ideas come from the Bible does not give them credibility or authority in an argument.

      Yes, I am arrogant at times, when I have to deal with narrow minded people. But being arrogant does not equate to shoving my beliefs down anyones throat. But nice try to turn my own words against me. Yes, I made the first comments, but the point that I raised in my last posting was that you replied to my comment about the nature of homosexuality and turned it into a discussion about theology by posting a bible verse. THAT is shoving your beliefs down other peoples throats, almost by definition.

      So you chose not to list any specific reasons (ignoring my request) as to why I do not understand the Bible based on what I have said in this conversation.Instead, you bring up a Bible verse that tells me about how I do not understand. Useless. A bible verse can be applied to anyone who doesn’t believe. I wanted specifics from this conversation, since I assumed you were concluding I did not comprehend the Bible because of what I said here, but it seems you will conclude that about anyone who isn’t on the Jesus train. Moving on.

      None of those comments listed are “absolute”. Those are the beliefs I currently hold, after reading the Bible, studying science and philosophy, and observing the nature of the world around me and its creatures. Just because I am very emphatic about my opinions and hold my beliefs very strongly does NOT mean that I am absolute in them. ALL of my beliefs can never be absolute, because if you believe in something, there is evidence for it but not enough to say it is fact. If I was absolute in my beliefs or my worldview, I would say THERE IS NO GOD. Not, “I don’t believe there is a God based on the evidence available.” Which is my actual opinion. Also, when I said there is no evidence for god and never will be if you define it that way, I was right, but it doesnt speak to the truth of God’s existence, it was simply speaking to the vague parameters you set for God’s existence. If you do not define something, it is impossible to know if it exists or not.

      P.S. Atheism is an absolute? Uh, no. Atheism is the belief that there are no Gods. I believe that, but if Jesus rose tomorrow and revealed himself as undeniably divine, I would not be an Atheist anymore. So if my Atheism can be changed, it is not absolute. Understand?

      So as I have explained, my opinion and views are flexible, you simply take my conviction and fervor to equal absolutism. There you are wrong. However, you on the other hand admitted to your absolute certainty and are proud of it. Being strong of faith is one thing, but being ABSOLUTELY certain of the existence of God? Either you are deluded, ignorant, uneducated, or your definitions of belief, faith, and knowledge are completely wrong.

      Even religious people that I speak to that are educated concede that there is no conclusive evidence for God, and that their belief is based either on some evidence that convinces them to take a leap of faith or complete blind faith. How can I argue with you about the truth of God when you deny that any discussion should be made? That is the intellectual impasse that religion has made in your mind.

      You seem to believe that every opinion is equal. It is not. If I say, “I think it will be sunny tomorrow” in Summer, that opinion is of higher value than “I think it will be sunny in two hours” at 9 p.m. (in most parts of the world anyway). So when you say, oh your opinion my opinion, it isn’t like that. If you have evidence, support, an argument with your opinion, it is immediately of higher value than an opinion that has none. And please don’t regurgitate what I just said and project it as some elitist comment, I am quite sick of being accused as the religious persecutor by someone because they are losing an argument.

      See, I have evidence. I have science. I have arguments. I have support. You have, the Bible. A book whose words are true to you by default, without testing, evidence, or arguments. And if you are going to condemn testing, evidence, and arguments, please save yourself some typing and condemn education.

      Looks like I was right about how you view believers and unbelievers in regards to understanding the Bible. In your eyes, you only comprehend the Bible if you are a believer. This assumes the Bible is absolutely true. You have to prove the Bible is true BEFORE you start using its verses as evidence. Establish its truth, and THEN use the verses. But the truth of the Bible has never been established. That’s not an insult, it’s a fact. If the Bible had been proven without a doubt, the world would be a very different place. Here’s what is really happening. Your criteria of knowledge and belief are badly defined. A lot of people think they “know” something when they don’t. Will the sun come up tomorrow? Yes. Do I know this? Most people will say yes, if they are philosophical neophytes. But you DONT know. You believe, with good reason. Even with Science telling us of orbits, we don’t know, not with CERTAINTY. I hope that illustrates for you what certainty REALLY means.

      Oh, one last thing.

      “You’re like a person driving down the road and you come to a sign that says, “Bridge Out Ahead.” You see the sign, you read the sign, but you don’t believe what it says so you keep on driving. That is a lack of understanding, a lack of comprehension if you like.”

      So many things wrong with this. First of all, a sign on the side of the road is not a good analogy for a book whose message has not been proven. Maybe if the sign was put up by someone other than the government, and written crudely by hand, so that we don’t know if its a trick or if there really is a bridge. Then it is a good analogy. Also, not believing that God is real, considering it is a belief that is life changing and carries with it a long list of duties and rules, is a bit more understandable than not believing a bridge is out when a sign is up that says it. Just a bad analogy overall.

      But besides that, if I don’t believe what the sign says, it is not a lack of understanding or a lack of comprehension. I understand and comprehend it, but if I choose not to believe it then I must have a reason. Why else would I drive down a road where the bridge is out if I did not have reason to believe the sign was either false or inaccurate? There is a connection here. You assume the truth of the message in both instances. The Bible, you assume its truth, just like the road sign. Consider that the road sign is uncertain (your pick of analogy shows your bias, a road sign can hardly be called uncertain unless it is among the conditions I described above).

      I hope my demeanor has been a bit more civil, granted I was frustrated earlier, perhaps in anticipatory defense, I have debated many nasty, narrow minded Christians. For that I apologize. This is the last time I will reply. You can take your time writing out a response if you like, but I have had enough of this dialogue.

    • Paul

      Thanks for sectioning out the subject matter. Much easier to read. I’ll try and do the same. Everything I have said has been according to the Bible. That is the Truth according to me and that is what we were arguing about. Phil’s comments, though crude, were based on his beliefs “according to the Bible.” I never meant to imply that it was absolute truth to everyone. That would be impossible. The Bible does however, apply to everyone whether or not they believe that…and again, that is MY belief in accordance with the Bible. None of these truths I have been presenting are my own ideas, they all come from the Bible and you are correct they have no credibility or authority to an unbeliever. However, that will not stop me from debating unbelievers. I don’t argue or debate with someone who calls themselves a Christian but espouses false doctrine as that is a fruitless endeavor. There is no room for debate within Christianity when it comes to the precepts of the faith. What is the use in debating someone that knows the truth but refuses to follow it (e.g. Catholicism)? There is no use in it because to debate such fools is to become a fool yourself. People like that are to be rebuked, reproved, reprimanded, etc., but never debated. However, I can debate you until I am blue in the face. Fortunately though, we can only agree to disagree so many times. As a Christian I am to proclaim the truth to unbelievers. I’m sure that I am not as good at that as I could be though and when it comes to shoving beliefs down throats, I suppose each of us perceives the other of being guilty of that. I guess each of us is guilty of that and I guess neither one of us should have to apologize for it.
      I did not ignore your request to list specific reasons as to why I think you do not understand the Bible. I am indeed concluding that you do not comprehend the Bible and I am basing that on what you have said. I stated that EVERYTHING you have said in this conversation so far makes it clear to me that you do not understand it and the fact that you demand “REAL, empirical evidence, that is testable and verifiable” in order to change your opinion of the truth of the Bible speaks volumes to the fact that you do not understand it. Those are your own words, so I have given specific reasons based on what YOU HAVE SAID during this conversation. The Bible verses given attest to your lack of understanding as well but since you are not on the Jesus train then they mean nothing to you right now. Fair enough?
      Your earlier comments regarding the validity of the Bible seem absolute to me. How is Atheism not an absolute? It is the rejection of the existence of God(s). I can see how Agnosticism is not an absolute and seems much more intellectually suited for a nonbeliever if you ask me. Atheism seems an absolute and your earlier comments seem absolute. You stated, “There is NO evidence for God, there will NEVER be evidence for God, if you continue to define God as you do in the Bible.” That is an absolute declaration. You can try and damage control that statement all you want by crafty elucidation but I ain’t buying that BS. Nice try though. Your last couple of postings you sound much more like and Agnostic to me. I say, GOOD! I think you are way to intelligent to be an Atheist.
      I’m not “proud” of my absolute mindset regarding the Bible. I am “thankful” for that. BIG difference! Call me deluded, ignorant, uneducated (really?) all you want. Say that my definitions of faith and knowledge are completely wrong. If that’s what makes you feel better about your own worldview then I say that you are in dire need of faith concerning your own beliefs.
      You ask me, “how can I argue with you about the truth of God when you deny that any discussion should be made?” What?!? I never said that discussion was forbidden. In addition, I don’t believe that every secular opinion is equal. That’s impossible. Opinions contradictory to the Bible on the other hand are all equally useless from the perspective of the believer. If that is what you were getting at then yes, those opinions are equal, but that has not stopped you from arguing with me. You also seem to think that I accused you of being a religious persecutor. When did I call you a religious persecutor? Where are you getting that from? You have not shunned me or fired me from a job or set me on fire because of my religious beliefs. I hardly consider that you arguing with me substantiates religious persecution. By the way, from my point of view, you lost the argument before it even began.
      I think what you are attempting to do is get me to give you evidence to support my beliefs. I could do that, but you would simply reject it as non-repeatable and non-verifiable. Additionally, there is plenty of archeological and historical evidence to support the Bible, but none of that will ever prove Christianity as valid. Do you love your mom or your friends or your spouse? Prove it. Christianity is based on faith, hope and love not the scientific method. We are not arguing a scientific theory we are arguing Christianity. If Christianity’s lack of CERTAINTY bothers you…so what. Don’t be one.
      My “Bridge Out Ahead” analogy made my point and if you can’t comprehend an analogy as simple as that then your IQ must be even higher than I originally thought. Thoroughly enjoyed the rebuttal though. Beautifully crafted from the standpoint of reason. Thank you for that. You are certainly a smart individual. I think you might enjoy listening to someone like John Lennox. He’s a Cambridge educated mathematician and a Christian. He debates and gives lectures as well. If you follow people like Richard Dawkins or Peter Singer then you already know who I am referring to. Thanks for the more even-keeled demeanor this time and I apologize as well for not tempering my responses. Hopefully I did better this time.

    • GFRF

      Your opinion vs the Bible?
      Ha

    • Faraaz Akbar

      The Bible is opinion as well.

    • Atheist

      You’re really going to bring God into this? What the fuck does he have to do with Duck Dynasty? Religion doesn’t really have much leverage in the conversation, especially when you consider the fact that a lot of priests tend to somehow find their dicks in under aged boys’ asses .

    • Paul

      Pretty sure Phil’s comments, though crude in nature, are based on his religious beliefs so religion has everything to do with this conversation. Unless you have no common sense at all, I think it is pretty obvious that those priests committing such horrible acts are not Christian. Additionally, in case you didn’t know, Catholicism is not Christianity. Actions speak louder than words and in this world, hypocrisy abounds.

    • GFRF

      It is a choice.
      Examine the the statics on childhood sexual abuse.
      Examine the stats on childhood abuse and neglect.
      You’ll see that it is most definitely a choice.
      A person chooses to act upon a disposition!

    • Faraaz Akbar

      Did you choose to be straight? Is being heterosexual a “disposition”? No, and it is the same with gays. There have been both hetero and homo people who abuse children. A shitty person is a shitty person, gay or straight. If you just talk to one gay person, you can find out that they are attracted to the same sex with as little control over it as a straight man would when a hot woman walks past him.

    • Straight Atheist Scientist

      Actually, homosexuallity is a sort of genetic mutation that evolved over time to help the human race slow down its rapidly growing population. Sorry, but social sciences just don’t measure up to good ol’-fashioned genetics. ;)

    • Faraaz Akbar

      we can’t really say the evolutionary purpose of the homosexual phenomenon can we? Though population control is the most logical choice

    • SUPPORTPHIL

      Ya he does’t need that pitty money from a&e

    • Julia

      Tough talk for someone who can’t even use proper grammar. So all gays are disgusting? I think then it’s fair to say all homophobes are inbred hillbillies.

    • Steve

      You should feel sorry for yourself. BIGOT.

  • Matt

    It seems like every redneck is homophobic, but they’re perfectly fine with inbreeding. It’s good to see that they’re at least using computers now.

    • Nancy Grace

      He’s not afraid of homos…he just doen’t like the lifestyle. Why should he? It’s filthy. Their family is not inbred and not only do they know how to use computers they know how to make a living. They have alot more money than you. BIGOT!

    • Read before talking.

      so wait a second, because he’s a redneck and not gay that makes Matt a bigot? maybe you should look up the definition of Bigot, because Phil is one. Sure he has freedom of speech, but if you read in the constitution, it only applies to GOVERNMENT. Morons. A&E was fully right in suspending him, and it wasn’t just for homophobic comments. He also was suspended for making comments on how African Americans were HAPPY about Jim Crow laws in the 1950′s. Perhaps if you dumbasses actually read the entire article, you’d realize how wrong his statements really are..

    • insert foot in mouth

      wow. you are stupid. bigot – a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc.. phil is NOT a bigot and matt is a bigot and you are a moron. phil said blacks that he interacted with were happy despite the Jim Crow laws, not because of them. can you even read???? you also said that freedom of speech only applies to the government. you can’t be that stupid! There is no sense in even talking to you. I feel dumber just for having responded to you. please start reading books or magazines or cereal boxes or something, as it appears the constitution is to complex for you to begin there. man! you are stupid!

    • Ryan Abernathy

      They are not inbred. You can stop ‘defending’ gays now. Just sit down.

    • SUPPORTPHIL

      You are fucking moronic

    • ezeggs

      So your reaction to seeming prejudice is to use bigotry? Are you trying to be funny?

  • rick

    i fucking hate that show in general, everytime i watch it i feel as though i am losing brain cells. so to me if whoever the fuck this guy is got fired GOOD then mabey the rest will go down with them!!! but i do agree with him except for his whole jesus freak thing he believes in with it… fags are not a part of nature that should not be allowed

    • Garan J. Stitt

      Dude, before you can say anything about anyone, define nature. You fucking pleb.

  • Garan J. Stitt

    Holy fucking shit some fucking idiots use this site, Idk how i stumbled across it, but i think i found the whole state of texas in one site.

    • LC

      You. Yes you the homosexual dunce, go be a fag somewhere else. We have people who aren’t a crime against nature here, your just polluting our chat.

  • casanova the straight

    homophobic people are mostly scared of their own homosexual tendencies. i am straight, i don’t give a f*** what others are, as long as they leave me alone. gays don’t hurt me and they don’t hurt each other. you homophobisc are just narrow minded, probably dumb or uneducated and simply intolerant. love to read your insults here now…go ahead dumbos :))

    • Mongo

      Mongo hate homophobs. Mongo straight but like the gays just so long as the gays don’t try to rape Mongo. Mongo not have narrow mind. Mongo very tolerant. Mongo very smart and have big education.

    • Mongo

      Ok. Mongo leave insult now. Mongo no like you. Mongo think you mindless and behave in way that education system and TV tell you to.

    • Mongo

      Oh, wait…Mongo accuse others of being the thing that Mongo is. Mongo very confused. Maybe Mongo gay? Mongo need your feedback. Mongo love to read insults.

  • EveryJoe shoots self in foot

    What up with you everyjoe? Is it everyjoe or everygayjoe? I came here for boobs, sports and crime stories. Real joes don’t like gay people. We are not afraid of them, we just don’t like them. Putting a story (especially with the title the way it is) like this on your site is like telling all of your visitors to F off. So I will. You’re off my favorites. One more thing, F you too.

    • Josh Daoust

      and the rest of the world went about its business, seems no one gives a shit.

  • Dominic Mahoney

    I think Phils comments were pretty mild. He didnt say he hated Homo’s. But all the people leaving comments that say “Fuck Fags” and stuff like that are way off track. God, and jesus dont want you to hate on people.

    • alex

      Well said.

  • Ryan Abernathy

    Sad that this is more focused on than the fact that Obamacare is screwing up our rights. If one person can actually explain Obamacare, I would be thoroughly surprised.

    • Dr. No

      OK, i will try. Obamacare is a government power grabbing scheme created to collect more revenue for the federal government while at the same time allowing them to subtly kill off people that they consider useless eaters. Are you thoroughly suprised?

  • James Synkgar

    SO people are angry that a man was wrongfully suspended? my god how dare they

  • Dylan Fairbairn

    If you’re in a relationship with someone weather you’re gay/straight and you’re happy….what’s it got to do with anyone else?

  • Ruben

    Just as freedom of speech is a constitutional right, it’s also A&E’s right not wanting to be involved with certain personal opinions, like Robertson’s, in this case.

  • Sharkneesha

    @shanemichaeltb should sue you assholes for defamation.

  • jakobus

    Lol, at the term homophobe, it’s a bullshit term made up by gays and there whiney idiot supporters. No one is afraid of them or there lifestyle , people just find there lifestyle offensive and gross, and find there constant whining pathetic and the idiots in the government bending over backwards to appease these people, instead of focusing on relevant issues that affect most of the country, who “gasp” are not gay, sickening.

  • ScoobyDooFTW

    I respect Phil Robertson’s opinion and all; he’s entitled to what he believes. However, this entire incident just goes to show that there are still some incredibly ignorant homophobes out there.

  • GFRF

    It’s free speech people!
    You don’t like it?
    Too bad!

  • Churyl Minne

    Seems like all you elitists are “heterophobic.” Clue in, NOBODY cares… Live and let live.

  • SUPPORTPHIL

    Why do people care so much about what he said. He stated what he believes, so people are getting all butt hurt about it, cry a river build a bridge and get over it, guess what he doesn’t need any of the money a&e is paying him, he was already a millionaire before the show, and i hate to break it to you but people are still going to buy his brand if you don’t like it tough shit grow up and get the fuck over it

  • ezeggs

    Okay, I’ve heard this sort of crap enough I think. “Anti-Gay” is NOT remotely the same as “Homophobic” You who assert that the two are interchangeable make yourselves sound incredibly dumb. “I disagree” does not equate to “I hate” which is not equal to “I fear”. Yes you have a right to your opinions, preferences, and ideas….but SO DO WE.

  • Wind

    Trendy to be gay? It’s a way of nature for some people. It just disgust me that people actually disallow it