Phil Robertson returns to A&E Duck Dynasty

Status
Not open for further replies.
Except A&E cannot dismiss Phil for expressing his rights to freedom of religious expression. That is a Federal Violation. Even in right to work States, that is still a Federal Violation.

Well, that's your opinion, but not possible when come to judge.

It is not reason that why A&E reinstated Phil Robertson into Duck Dynasty.

You can still get fired at private workplace if you make an offensive comment, regardless on religious belief, so you may not learn until you lose the court case over discrimination, BUT federal law ONLY prevented you from discrimination for just being simply Christian, peaceful praying at meal, read bible book but it doesn't prevent you when you make an offensive comment.

There are other networks fired actors for made an offensive comment.
 
He voted against Eisehower's Civil Rights Act of 1957 when he was a Senator.

Well, he voted Yes for final version of Civil Rights Act of 1957.

but he didn't take side with southerners and he felt that original proposal of Civil Rights Act wasn't enough, so that why we have Civil Rights Act of 1964 - more stronger.
 
My prediction is correct because I know Phil Robertson's suspension was temporarily as A&E tried to workout with their families, so A&E probably felt that Phil's statement isn't offensive to be justified for permanent suspension and canceling Duck Dynasty. Phil admitted that is his belief and doesn't pass on everyone, unless they choose to agree with him, even the child marriage is part of his belief too. I don't agree about Phil's statement but again, it is his belief so no need to hate him. Robertson family said that they will improving the tolerance and acceptance. A&E made corporate decision to reinstate Phil after workout with Robertson's family.
 
Well, he voted Yes for final version of Civil Rights Act of 1957.

but he didn't take side with southerners and he felt that original proposal of Civil Rights Act wasn't enough, so that why we have Civil Rights Act of 1964 - more stronger.

Here is something you left out Foxrac (yes, I was waiting). The Civil Rights Act of 1875. Passed by Republicans (because they won the Civil War and freed the slaves). The US Supreme Court, with a Democrat presiding, found the law to be unconstitutional in 1883.

There was already a Civil Rights Act ... passed by Republicans, that Democrats ignored. They developed the Jim Crow laws instead (Republicans were not segregationists, the Democrats were). The Civil Rights Act of 1957 (The Act JFK voted against) was intended to end segregation ... just like the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was intended.

The Democrats tried to block every attempt to pass it ... for nearly 100 years.

And it was a Democratic Senator that gave our nation's longest filibuster in an attempt to block the Civil Rights Act of 1964 from passing.
 
Here is something you left out Foxrac (yes, I was waiting). The Civil Rights Act of 1875. Passed by Republicans (because they won the Civil War and freed the slaves). The US Supreme Court, with a Democrat presiding, found the law to be unconstitutional in 1883.

There was already a Civil Rights Act ... passed by Republicans, that Democrats ignored. They developed the Jim Crow laws instead (Republicans were not segregationists, the Democrats were). The Civil Rights Act of 1957 (The Act JFK voted against) was intended to end segregation ... just like the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was intended.

The Democrats tried to block every attempt to pass it ... for nearly 100 years.

And it was a Democratic Senator that gave our nation's longest filibuster in an attempt to block the Civil Rights Act of 1964 from passing.

There were two factions in Democratic Party - northern democrats and southern democrats. Are you trying to say that ALL democrats, including northerners were segregationists? Southern republicans in 1950s/1960s were segregationists too.

Republican Party in 19th Century and 20th Century weren't same as today.

There is note for you - I'm not stupid about history and I already know about between political parties and geographical difference. I learned based on real, non-parstian history, not left or right wing propaganda. The history professors agreed with my historic statement about civil rights era in US. The segregation wasn't part of left wing or liberal idea, but if you label southern democrats as left wing so they would support communist or socialist in southern states. There were a lot of misconception about communist and socialist so I feel bad for anyone who support communist or socialist under democratically elected government, so that's not same as Cuba, North Korea, China and Vietnam.

US Supreme Court was strongly conservative or libertarian so that why they declared Civil Rights Act of 1875 as unconstitutional, so old conservative principle didn't support civil rights or anti-discrimination as modern conservative principle does.

It looks like you are trying to broaden the history to blame on northern democrats for not support Civil Rights of 1957/1964, but I made clearly explanation about geographical difference. It is not hard for you to understand about difference between northern democrats and southern democrats.

Today, you wonder about why overwhelming number of African Americans support democrat politicians and most of them don't vote republicans anymore, unlike in before 1950s. The ugly history about southern democrats didn't make damage to national Democratic Party, however many southern democrats switched to Republican Party in range from 1970s to 2000s because disagreement with tax policies and progressivism under national Democratic Party.

Do you accept the fact about JFK did voted YES for final version of Civil Rights of 1957? Yes or No
 
Didn't you read my post?

As long as you guys don't bring deep religion and political discussions here and I know that you guys were joking around but I'd remind you guys to think twice and take it easy when you post because such things can get carried away and get threads locked up.

Thanks.

What you both discussing is related to political, and didn't I warn you guys to take it in PMland to discuss freely?

I have to close this up to be fair with everyone here that we can't allow political discussions until further notice.

Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top