Duck dynasty

[Scarlett]

Did anyone see that one of the men on DD was fired by A&E?

 

I have never watched that show.....not my cup of tea....but it seems to be a huge hit, so I find the whole thing very interesting.

[Murphy101]

He was suspended actually?

 

I read the article in question and think it was really stupid of A&E.

[sunflowerlady]

Ha, I just posted about this show on the unpopular opinion thread.

[AlmiraGulch]

It's no secret that the cast members of that show are devoutly Christian.  They talk about it openly on the show.  But when one of the primary cast members goes on record in a publication stating an opinion that the owner of the show, A&E, believes will be detrimental to its overall brand, they are well within their rights to suspend that cast member.

 

It's a matter of business, and no different than if a Victoria's Secret model gained a bunch of weight.  It's not in line with the overall brand that the company is trying to promote, and so she'd be out.  Same thing happened here.

[Scrub Jay]

He was suspended.  Great move on A&E's part, IMO.  My mouth dropped open a few times reading his opinions. 

 

ETA: It is possible to be Christian your entire life and have it a huge part of who you are but not actually have those opinions.  One of those types of people raised me...

[NicAnn]

The thing I never understand, is that we are always so shocked that people have those opinions. Now, I'm going to make a judgement here....but just by looking at the guy, knowing the area of the country he lives in, and how he makes his living (hunting related)...I can be fairly certain he's made a slur or two in his life.

[Murphy101]

It's no secret that the cast members of that show are devoutly Christian. They talk about it openly on the show. But when one of the primary cast members goes on record in a publication stating an opinion that the owner of the show, A&E, believes will be detrimental to its overall brand, they are well within their rights to suspend that cast member.

 

It's a matter of business, and no different than if a Victoria's Secret model gained a bunch of weight. It's not in line with the overall brand that the company is trying to promote, and so she'd be out. Same thing happened here.

Which might be a valid argument if A&E had anything more decent on their network, much less most of their shows. However they don't. If anything DD as is was a notable change in branding style from the typical stuff A&E shows.

[AlmiraGulch]

The thing I never understand, is what we are always so shocks that people have those opinions. Now, I'm going to make a judgement here....but just by looking at the guy, knowing the area of the country he lives in, and how he makes his living (hunting related)...I can be fairly certain he's made a slur or two in his life.

 

Yeah, I don't know that anyone is shocked that he has those opinions.  It's the manner and mechanism in which he stated them that got him into this mess.  

 

I'm not the thought police. People can think whatever they want to think regardless of whether or not anyone else agrees with them.  But when he decided to go on record with those points of view, which he absolutely has the right to do, he opened himself up to consequences.  In this case, those consequences came quickly, and from his employer, which they are well within their rights to extend.  

 

P.S.   I know I responded beyond what you stated.  I just couldn't stop typing once I started.  

[*Lulu*]

He was suspended. Great move on A&E's part, IMO. My mouth dropped open a few times reading his opinions.

 

ETA: It is possible to be Christian your entire life and have it a huge part of who you are but not actually have those opinions. One of those types of people raised me...

I am guessing his comments on his religious views are not what prompted A&E's action as much as his views on the segregated south.

[NicAnn]

Yeah, I don't know that anyone is shocked that he has those opinions. It's the manner and mechanism in which he stated them that got him into this mess.

 

I'm not the thought police. People can think whatever they want to think regardless of whether or not anyone else agrees with them. But when he decided to go on record with those points of view, which he absolutely has the right to do, he opened himself up to consequences. In this case, those consequences came quickly, and from his employer, which they are well within their rights to extend.

 

P.S. I know I responded beyond what you stated. I just couldn't stop typing once I started.

Oh. That makes sense. Having one of those days when I don't think things through.

[AlmiraGulch]

He was suspended.  Great move on A&E's part, IMO.  My mouth dropped open a few times reading his opinions. 

 

ETA: It is possible to be Christian your entire life and have it a huge part of who you are but not actually have those opinions.  One of those types of people raised me...

 

I completely agree.   

 

What I'm seeing online is outrage by many that his right to free speech is being trampled on, and how it's another example of how Christianity is being so unfairly discriminated against.  Neither of those is the case here.

 

He has the right to say whatever he wants, but not necessarily without consequence.  It's not his religion that his employer took issue with, but rather those specific points of view that he openly disclosed in a manner that A&E decided was contrary to their overall brand messaging.  I don't understand why people can't see that. 

[Murphy101]

Riiight.

 

It's not his religious beliefs that A&E suspended him for.

 

Just actually voicing those beliefs.

 

What bull.

[BigMamaBird]

The thing I can't understand though is that this fella, and the guy in the whole Chick-fil-a kerfluffle, we're pretty straight forward with their beliefs in how they lived their lives.  Neither of them came out and said all this stuff unsolicited, they were asked very pointed questions in interviews.  When they answer truthfully everyone gets their knickers in a twist and acts all surprised.  

[Ann.without.an.e]

It is a situation that everyone will come to with a strong bias.  He was point blank asked a question and he answered it.....should there be a consequence for his opinion?  Let's say that I was not "for" the gay rights movement, I loved a particular show, and then a leading actor on said show was asked if he was gay and he said yes.  If that was the case, I would not expect for the network to suspend him.  I would think, "that is his opinion/thought/lifestyle, no harm done".  I think the same rule should apply to the DD guy (sorry, don't watch the show, can't remember the name).  I think we are all too touchy, we are so worried that someone will think/feel/believe something different than ourselves.  We need to put our big boy/big girl pants on and accept that everyone has different thoughts and opinions on a plethora of subjects.  Logic says that opinions are opinions.  You don't have to agree with someone else's opinions, but you should respect that their opinion is, indeed, their opinion.  I even believe (gasp) that you have the right to state why you think their opinion is not correct. That is the premise of good logic.  We can't even use the techniques of good logic and good argument in our society.  We are all too touchy and disrespectful of each other.  It is sad.

[Scarlett]

He was suspended actually?

 

I read the article in question and think it was really stupid of A&E.

Oh yes you are correct. Not fired.

[Mandylubug]

I'm not a fan of the show. Complete boredom comes to mind. However, what struck me as odd is the blunt question from his interviewer to define sin in his opinion. I have to wonder if questions were not preapproved before the interview by A&E. To me, no matter how he answered, the question set him up to answer unpolitically correct and cause drama.

[*Lulu*]

I'm not a fan of the show. Complete boredom comes to mind. However, what struck me as odd is the blunt question from his interviewer to define sin in his opinion. I have to wonder if questions were not preapproved before the interview by A&E. To me, no matter how he answered, the question set him up to answer unpolitically correct and cause drama.

I agree. I don't think his views on homosexuality were a surprise at all to A&E. It is partially why I think the part of the interview where he discusses racial issues is what really prompted the suspension.

[Miss Marple]

He was suspended actually?

 

I read the article in question and think it was really stupid of A&E.

I agree!

 

It seems to me that A&E needs Phil Robertson more than Phil Robertson needs A&E. Pat Robertson can walk away...he has plenty of money. A&E? Well, if they weren't hard up why would they have carried the show in the first place? It definitely goes against their usual stance.

[Scarlett]

Seems like a total set up to me.......is anyone surprised he has that opinion?

 

As far as the old south.....again his opinion. I Am sure many blacks of that time period would not agree with him...but it is HIS memory and his Truth.

[AlmiraGulch]

Riiight.

 

It's not his religious beliefs that A&E suspended him for.

 

Just actually voicing those beliefs.

 

What bull.

 

It's not bull.  It's business.  As he's in the entertainment industry, his employer has every right to protect their brand.  They perceived that this threatens their brand, so he has been suspended.  It's really pretty straightforward.

 

If there were going to suspend him for his religious beliefs, the show would never have been on the air in the first place.  Not everyone who claims that religion as their own shares his same beliefs about the topics in question.  

[hillfarm]

Freedom of speech is a double edged sword. We are free to voice our sincerely held opinions, but so are those whose opinions we find objectionable. Whether or not I agree with Phil Robertson's opinions, I strongly support his freedom to express them. A&E has the freedom to determine whether to continue to employ him in their programming. And viewers have the freedom to decide whether or not to watch the A&E shows.

 

As I have told my 15yo dd until I am blue in the face, actions have consequences. It will be interesting to see what the consequences will be from all of the above decisions, how well the initiators bear up under them and how well they own their choices.

 

I am quite accustomed to holding many unpopular, non politically correct opinions. I have been a bit surprised to see how groups and individuals who most stridently demand their freedom of speech seem the most incensed when I lay claim to the same freedoms and voice my beliefs. It seems we have become a nation of terribly sensitive people and some seem to think that they have some sort of "right" to live without ever being offended. We live in strange times.

[zoobie]

Riiight.

 

It's not his religious beliefs that A&E suspended him for.

 

Just actually voicing those beliefs.

 

What bull.

If he'd just said, I believe gay marriage is against the Bible's teaching, I don't believe there would be an issue. He chose to describe anal intercourse and how it's not as good as the other, compare homosexuality to beastiality, etc. It was gross.

 

Chick-fil-A's president spoke out against gay marriage, but he didn't get nasty about it. If he had gone to that extreme, he'd be out on his ear, no matter what his last name!

 

I have the first amendment right of freedom of speech to go tell my boss he's a nasty weasel, but I really shouldn't be surprised or feign outrage when I get fired.

[Scarlett]

It's not bull. It's business. As he's in the entertainment industry, his employer has every right to protect their brand. They perceived that this threatens their brand, so he has been suspended. It's really pretty straightforward.

 

If there were going to suspend him for his religious beliefs, the show would never have been on the air in the first place. Not everyone who claims that religion as their own shares his same beliefs about the topics in question.

I am pretty certain that the target audience shares his religious views.

[AlmiraGulch]

The thing I can't understand though is that this fella, and the guy in the whole Chick-fil-a kerfluffle, we're pretty straight forward with their beliefs in how they lived their lives.  Neither of them came out and said all this stuff unsolicited, they were asked very pointed questions in interviews.  When they answer truthfully everyone gets their knickers in a twist and acts all surprised.  

 

It's not about being surprised or not.   It's about representing and supporting a business enterprise.  

 

the Chick-fil-a issue was not about the owner's personal beliefs; rather, it was about the corporation's decision to funnel money directly to organizations that actively lobby against equal rights for gays.  As a consumer, we can choose how our money is spent.  I for one stopped eating there as long as they continued those contributions because I chose not to contribute to a BUSINESS that used money for that purpose.  I don't care one way or another about any single Board member's personal beliefs.

 

A&E has the right to protect their business.  If they believe they will lose revenue because of this man's statements, they have the right to suspend them.  It was the right business move.  And by the way, just because someone claims Christianity as their faith it is not a foregone conclusion that they will share the same beliefs of the Duck Dynasty guy.  

[AlmiraGulch]

I am pretty certain that the target audience shares his religious views.

 

For that show, to some extent, maybe. But again I'll say that being a Christian does not automatically mean that you share his beliefs on these specific views.  And regardless, the network has interests to protect beyond that one show. 

[AlmiraGulch]

It is a situation that everyone will come to with a strong bias.  He was point blank asked a question and he answered it.....should there be a consequence for his opinion?  Let's say that I was not "for" the gay rights movement, I loved a particular show, and then a leading actor on said show was asked if he was gay and he said yes.  If that was the case, I would not expect for the network to suspend him.  I would think, "that is his opinion/thought/lifestyle, no harm done".  I think the same rule should apply to the DD guy (sorry, don't watch the show, can't remember the name).  I think we are all too touchy, we are so worried that someone will think/feel/believe something different than ourselves.  We need to put our big boy/big girl pants on and accept that everyone has different thoughts and opinions on a plethora of subjects.  Logic says that opinions are opinions..............there is no right or wrong concerning opinions.  That is the premise of good logic.

 

It's about the money.  That's it.  This was a business decision, not a personal one.  The network clearly believed they would lose advertising revenue, and that's what they based their decision on.  

[AlmiraGulch]

I'm not a fan of the show. Complete boredom comes to mind. However, what struck me as odd is the blunt question from his interviewer to define sin in his opinion. I have to wonder if questions were not preapproved before the interview by A&E. To me, no matter how he answered, the question set him up to answer unpolitically correct and cause drama.

 

I agree with this.  Even if A&E didn't pre-approve questions, he could have been savvy enough to temper his responses.   Should he have done that?  I don't know.  He has the right to his opinion and the right to express it.  He does not have the right, nor do any of us, to express them without the fear of any sort of consequence.  That's just life. 

[Pawz4me]

I don't think it matters what his employer took offense to.  Although in a way it rubs me wrong (free speech and all that), I do understand that in many instances an employer has the right to fire/suspend/whatever an employee for any reason or no reason.  So while I don't agree with any of the views he expressed, I do respect his right to free speech.  And I also respect the fact that his employer probably has the legal right to terminate/suspend him at will.  How's that for being on the fence and NOT really having a strong opinion one way or another?  :laugh:

 

I also think we need to remember that we don't know any of the specifics about what may or may not be in his contract with A&E.  It could very well be that something he said was a clear violation (in A&E's opinion, anyway) of his contract.

[zoobie]

It's not about being surprised or not. It's about representing and supporting a business enterprise.

 

the Chick-fil-a issue was not about the owner's personal beliefs; rather, it was about the corporation's decision to funnel money directly to organizations that actively lobby against equal rights for gays. As a consumer, we can choose how our money is spent. I for one stopped eating there as long as they continued those contributions because I chose not to contribute to a BUSINESS that used money for that purpose. I don't care one way or another about any single Board member's personal beliefs.

 

A&E has the right to protect their business. If they believe they will lose revenue because of this man's statements, they have the right to suspend them. It was the right business move. And by the way, just because someone claims Christianity as their faith it is not a foregone conclusion that they will share the same beliefs of the Duck Dynasty guy.

A&E might even know they're going to take a revenue hit and decide it's ultimately the right thing to do. I really believe it was the vulgarity of the interview (which again, really, y'all were surprised?!?!) that tipped the decision. They probably had a contract clause to avoid non-approved press engagements to try to keep the unedited crazy out of public view while the show's on the air. They should be only mildly shocking to be cute, entertaining rednecks! Think Mater from Cars vs the real Larry the Cable Guy comedy act.

[AlmiraGulch]

I am quite accustomed to holding many unpopular, non politically correct opinions. I have been a bit surprised to see how groups and individuals who most stridently demand their freedom of speech seem the most incensed when I lay claim to the same freedoms and voice my beliefs. It seems we have become a nation of terribly sensitive people and some seem to think that they have some sort of "right" to live without ever being offended. We live in strange times.

 

Right, but I think you're still missing the point.  This isn't at all about someone's feelings being hurt.  It's about a business anticipating a debilitating financial impact.  That's it.  It's all about the money.  For all we know the people that made this decision agree personally with what he said, but that's irrelevant.  

[alisoncooks]

I agree!

 

It seems to me that A&E needs Pat Robertson more than Pat Robertson needs A&E. Pat Robertson can walk away...he has plenty of money. A&E? Well, if they weren't hard up why would they have carried the show in the first place? It definitely goes against their usual stance.

 

Phil ;)

 

(Pat Robertson is the oldish CBN dude, yeah?)

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

I wonder if that show falls under "Arts" or "Entertainment."  Remember when A&E was the cultured channel, and TLC had educational stuff, and the History Channel was all about history?  Now it's all side show all the time.   Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

 

[Murphy101]

It is a situation that everyone will come to with a strong bias. He was point blank asked a question and he answered it.....should there be a consequence for his opinion? Let's say that I was not "for" the gay rights movement, I loved a particular show, and then a leading actor on said show was asked if he was gay and he said yes. If that was the case, I would not expect for the network to suspend him. I would think, "that is his opinion/thought/lifestyle, no harm done". I think the same rule should apply to the DD guy (sorry, don't watch the show, can't remember the name). I think we are all too touchy, we are so worried that someone will think/feel/believe something different than ourselves. We need to put our big boy/big girl pants on and accept that everyone has different thoughts and opinions on a plethora of subjects. Logic says that opinions are opinions..............there is no right or wrong concerning opinions. That is the premise of good logic.

Darn. I was nodding in agreement until that last bit. I disagree. There are right and wrong opinions. No amount of opinion that I'm a flamingo will make it so. ;)

 

However, the rest I agree with.

 

We watch How I Met You Mother and the whole family knows Dr Horrible's SongALong Blog. I know Neal Patrick Harris is homosexual. So what. I'm not sleeping with the man. I'm just enjoying the show. I can have a very strong disagreement about things he does/thinks and still enjoy his professional work. It wouldn't even occur to me that he should be suspended from work bc of his personal opinions/lifestyle.

 

Same goes for Robert Downy Jr. Love some of his movies but his life is a hot cluster mess. Well I'm not living his life, I'm watching his movies.

 

Now if the show itself started catholic bashing or having SSA scenes, I'd turn it off and stop watching. I still wouldn't shout for anyone's job. I'd stop watching it and presume others who feel likewise probably would too.

 

There's exceptions that make total sense.

 

For example, I could see a catholic station removing someone who was promoting SSA or abortion.

 

So if A&E is actually saying they are branded as a homosexual channel or an anti hunting channel or an atheist channel - then it would make sense to not have DD on their network and I'd not disagree with them at all for removing Phil/DD. I'd also likely never watch anything from A&E again bc I'm not interested in that branding. Which is a perspective many could take and the big risk they are taking here.

[Carrie12345]

The thing I never understand, is that we are always so shocked that people have those opinions. Now, I'm going to make a judgement here....but just by looking at the guy, knowing the area of the country he lives in, and how he makes his living (hunting related)...I can be fairly certain he's made a slur or two in his life.

I heard this argument in another venue, and it saddens me that people are shocked that others don't buy into the stereotypes of "rednecks". I would think that most of the people upset with his interview are exactly the opposite of narrow minded bigots.

[Miss Marple]

Phil ;)

 

(Pat Robertson is the oldish CBN dude, yeah?)

LOL! You're right! Verbal kerfluffles involving Robertsons are usually of the "Pat" variety. Can I claim "head injury"? I'm sporting a nice concussion right now.

[MomtoCandJ]

I don't get what the uproar is all about. I understand he said somethings that will offend people but doesn't everyone? I don't see that Justin beiber brat being suspended for his rude, obnoxious actions, or Miley Cyrus. I kind of think he was set up for it. We as a family watch Duck Dynasty, we don't agree with everything they say and do though.

[Scarlett]

I heard this argument in another venue, and it saddens me that people are shocked that others don't buy into the stereotypes of "rednecks". I would think that most of the people upset with his interview are exactly the opposite of narrow minded bigots.

What do you mean people don't buy into the stereotype?

[Ann.without.an.e]

Darn. I was nodding in agreement until that last bit. I disagree. There are right and wrong opinions. No amount of opinion that I'm a flamingo will make it so. ;)

 

However, the rest I agree with.

 

We watch How I Met You Mother and the whole family knows Dr Horrible's SongALong Blog. I know Neal Patrick Harris is homosexual. So what. I'm not sleeping with the man. I'm just enjoying the show. I can have a very strong disagreement about things he does/thinks and still enjoy his professional work. It wouldn't even occur to me that he should be suspended from work bc of his personal opinions/lifestyle.

 

Same goes for Robert Downy Jr. Love some of his movies but his life is a hot cluster mess. Well I'm not living his life, I'm watching his movies.

 

Now if the show itself started catholic bashing or having SSA scenes, I'd turn it off and stop watching. I still wouldn't shout for anyone's job. I'd stop watching it and presume others who feel likewise probably would too.

 

There's exceptions that make total sense.

 

For example, I could see a catholic station removing someone who was promoting SSA or abortion.

 

So if A&E is actually saying they are branded as a homosexual channel or an anti hunting channel or an atheist channel - then it would make sense to not have DD on their network and I'd not disagree with them at all for removing Phil/DD. I'd also likely never watch anything from A&E again bc I'm not interested in that branding. Which is a perspective many could take and the big risk they are taking here.

 

 

 

It doesn't make the opinion correct or true, but when someone says "I believe...." then you can't argue with it from the premise that they can't believe it.  All you can do is say that you do not believe it and state your reasons.  You can say that you believe you are a flamingo and I can't logically argue that you don't believe that you are a pink flamingo, but I can say that I in no way believe that you are a pink flamingo and state the reasons why I do not believe.  clear as mud?  lol  Also, I changed my post to reflect more of what I meant.  I am not sure it came out exactly how I was thinking.

[Miss Marple]

....but just by looking at the guy, knowing the area of the country he lives in, and how he makes his living (hunting related)...I can be fairly certain he's made a slur or two in his life.

Seriously?!? This sounds a bit like "profiling". Kinda mean-spirited, IMO ;)

 

Not everyone holds that opinion about bearded southern hunters. But I support your right to say it :)

[Murphy101]

In brief and paraphrasing:

 

Basically saying he is a redneck therefore of course he's a bigoted religious nut IS rather a pot meeting kettle kind of comment.

 

I don't buy into the redneck stereotype or think it has anything to do with being religious or not agreeing with homosexuality.

[fairfarmhand]

Yeah, I don't know that anyone is shocked that he has those opinions.  It's the manner and mechanism in which he stated them that got him into this mess.  

 

I'm not the thought police. People can think whatever they want to think regardless of whether or not anyone else agrees with them.  But when he decided to go on record with those points of view, which he absolutely has the right to do, he opened himself up to consequences.  In this case, those consequences came quickly, and from his employer, which they are well within their rights to extend.  

 

P.S.   I know I responded beyond what you stated.  I just couldn't stop typing once I started.  

 

he was crude and unkind. He's entitled to his own views but he was crude and unkind.

[zoobie]

I don't get what the uproar is all about. I understand he said somethings that will offend people but doesn't everyone? I don't see that Justin beiber brat being suspended for his rude, obnoxious actions, or Miley Cyrus. I kind of think he was set up for it. We as a family watch Duck Dynasty, we don't agree with everything they say and do though.

Those celebrities aren't under contract with a television network. Miley wouldn't be humping foam fingers if she were still on Mickey Mouse's payroll.

[Lady Florida.]

To those who keep bringing up free speech, I'd like to remind you that freedom of speech means the government cannot (with exceptions involving public safety) restrict your right to free speech. A&E is not the government, and they can most certainly restrict their employees' speech. They can also fire/suspend those who express opinions that will affect advertising revenue.

[Scrub Jay]

To those who keep bringing up free speech, I'd like to remind you that freedom of speech means the government cannot (with exceptions involving public safety) restrict your right to free speech. A&E is not the government, and they can most certainly restrict their employees' speech. They can also fire/suspend those who express opinions that will affect advertising revenue.

 

Thank you.  It is a huge pet peeve when people cry out that stuff like this is a violation.

 

[hillfarm]

Right, but I think you're still missing the point.  This isn't at all about someone's feelings being hurt.  It's about a business anticipating a debilitating financial impact.  That's it.  It's all about the money.  For all we know the people that made this decision agree personally with what he said, but that's irrelevant.  

 

That's exactly what I was referring to when I mentioned wanting to see what consequences would shake out and how courageous the players would be about owning up to their actions. I already saw one petition pro Robertson/against A&E being circulated. It has over 80,000 electronic signatures. I wonder if A&E anticipated just how much of their audience feels committed to Phil.

[Scarlett]

In brief and paraphrasing:

 

Basically saying he is a redneck therefore of course he's a bigoted religious nut IS rather a pot meeting kettle kind of comment.

 

I don't buy into the redneck stereotype or think it has anything to do with being religious or not agreeing with homosexuality.

Yes this is true. And yet A&E surely knew that this particular man, bearded or not, is religious and does believe homosexual actions are sinful.

[Miss Marple]

To those who keep bringing up free speech, I'd like to remind you that freedom of speech means the government cannot (with exceptions involving public safety) restrict your right to free speech. A&E is not the government, and they can most certainly restrict their employees' speech. They can also fire/suspend those who express opinions that will affect advertising revenue.

I certainly don't hold it as a Free Speech issue. I do, however, think A&E are hypocritical in their stance and think they are just pandering to a certain part of the population that they don't want to offend. Certainly that is their right. People on this board complain and bash WalMart for their practices; I think it's fair to do the same with A&E.

 

Good grief! You can't tell me they didn't know what the Robertsons were before this. It is no surprise to them. Everyone really should read what he really said...it's vastly different from what GLADD and others in the media are representing it to be. Of course, they have an agenda to protect.

[ChiMomNP]

I think it is all about boosting ratings and boosting sales of DD stuff. I read an article a few months ago that Phil was planning on leaving the show. I think this is about publicity and fanning the flames of outrage to get the season 5 off to a "hot" start. Phil has made these type of comments before in other articles. 

 

The Robertsons are shrewd business people. You don't build a multi-million dollar company (before the show even started) not being shrewd and smart. I think they knew and know exactly what they are doing.

 

I'm a fan from a business perspective. I like and enjoy the show. They have built an amazing company from nothing (the duck call and hunting related business, not the TV show) and their base customers don't care about their religious views. They just want to go out and hunt. I'm betting sales soar on this. 

 

If the show went away tomorrow, they would still be running a multi-million dollar company. They would still be growing and expanding the company. 

 

The show is in season 5, they knew the show didn't have a long life span. So now they have a big controversy going into season 5.... one week before Christmas? When the stores are filled with DD stuff? They will sell out of Phil stuff and probably lots of other stuff. Maybe I am just cynical, but it all seems a little too perfectly timed. 

 

I don't fault the Robertson family for that. That's business.

 

I think A&E has created a lot more interest in the show, the network and the merchandise with this.

 

 

 

 

 

[Carrie12345]

What do you mean people don't buy into the stereotype?

I don't believe that most people who take offense (for lack of a better word) to comments like his are narrow minded enough to assume that scruffy, religious southerners automatically believe gay people will burn in hell and racism didn't exist in the 60s.

[MomtoCandJ]

I feel that if people are that upset over what he said, they should quit watching the show and buying their products am let it die a natural death. Or A&E should have quietly canceled the show and call it good. It seems as if its all one big publicity stunt.