Duck Dynasty Actor Delivers Hate Filled Speech - Polidicks

[QUOTE=TestECull;47390739]I don't know what's worse: Phil's speech or the comments on the news article.[/QUOTE] It's Phil's speech, in case it was hard to tell.

People who think this way scare me, their mentality is "I do good because I will be judged otherwise"

[QUOTE=Hamaflavian;47390862]That still frames atheism as the source of the problem[/QUOTE] Is that hate? I mean people here seem to have no trouble framing Christianity or Islam as the source of various problems without being accused of hate speech against Christians or Muslims. [QUOTE=Hamaflavian;47390862]Phil Robertson could have made that point about how atheism lets lunatics run amok by having the victims be any creed at all, or even had their religion go completely unmentioned, but he [I]chose[/I] to make the victims atheists[/QUOTE] Yeah, because his narrow-minded point is right at the end where he says that an atheist experiencing this would say 'That's not right' and spontaneously convert or whatever bullshit he's peddling. The stupid scenario is specifically what an atheist would say and think put in this situation. I think it's dumb as hell but calling it a hate filled speech because he's regurgitating the old 'no atheists in foxholes' line is seriously blowing it out of proportion.

[QUOTE=J!NX;47390738]to add You can't change your religion like a switch. You can pretend to be baptist all you want, but your brain doesn't magically decide not to be atheist / jewish / muslim. It's just built into your wiring as you grow. And this is why atheists who bitch about religion are dick heads, but I never really see atheists say anything nearly this bad, at least not NEARLY as much. I never really ever see atheists trying to scare people into religion.[/QUOTE] You could say the same about any idea. "You can't change your political party like a switch." "And this is why progressives who bitch about conservatism are dick heads." Nobody is born with any particular idea in their heads. Everything we believe comes to us at some point in our lives and is "built into your wiring as you grow." That doesn't make it somehow immune to criticism. The majority of atheists were at some point religious, and many were convinced by hearing other people "bash" their religion until they could no longer believe it themselves. That's the only way anyone has ever changed their minds on any subject.

[QUOTE=Explosions;47391827]You could say the same about any idea. "You can't change your political party like a switch." "And this is why progressives who bitch about conservatism are dick heads." Nobody is born with any particular idea in their heads. Everything we believe comes to us at some point in our lives and is "built into your wiring as you grow." That doesn't make it somehow immune to criticism. The majority of atheists were at some point religious, and many were convinced by hearing other people "bash" their religion until they could no longer believe it themselves. [B]That's the only way anyone has ever changed their minds on any subject.[/B][/QUOTE] Right, because no one ever thought over an idea on their own and come to the conclusion "I was wrong"...

[QUOTE=Hamaflavian;47391129]Again, but [I]why did he choose to make the victims atheists themselves?[/I] And to top it all off, the whole scene ends with the murderers giving a little speech about the moral failings of atheism to their mutilated victim. The story passes no judgement onto the murderers--the murderers are never struck down by God, proven wrong about their disbelief, and then sent to burn in Hell for eternity--only the family is judged, only the family is pontificated to, and ultimately, only the family is punished.[/QUOTE] You're reading way too much into this. Neither party in that story needed to be judged by God because it's irrelevant to the (ignorant) points he was trying to make. He was trying to make it seem like not only will people not have a reason to be moral if they don't believe in God (false), but that it will also hurt atheists because they chose not to be of faith and help bring everyone into the faith (which is also false). He was trying to say that being atheist will have real world negative effects, which is false. Well, I guess you are right that he is, in part, blaming the victims in that story for not being of faith and trying to make more people be of faith. I will secede that point. But as to why he chose atheists in particular, well that's fairly easy to explain. He was at a Christian event. The one thing basically all regligions can agree upon is "atheism is bad!!!" It's the same attitude atheists have toward religious people's beliefs. You're looking at it as an attack on atheist people as people, when in reality, he's attacking atheism as a (non)belief. In other words, he's attacking the system, not necessarily the people who believe in it. It's the same thing as an atheist attacking Christianity as a belief, but not the people who believe in it. He just chose a poor way of going about it, which is kind of expected from someone from the back woods.

[QUOTE=AlexConnor;47391948]Right, because no one ever thought over an idea on their own and come to the conclusion "I was wrong"...[/QUOTE] This does not happen if someone has never been presented with an alternative viewpoint.

[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;47390641]I followed this really Christian man from my gym on Twitter and most of his tweets end with #repsforjesus[/QUOTE] Dom?

[QUOTE=G71tc4;47391146]this shitlord is preaching a sermon in-town (i live in duck dynasty town) on easter sunday, i wonder if they'll cancel after this. i should go and ask him how often he thinks about kids getting fucked lol also for context about these guys for people who think reality tv is real, where the Duck Dynasty people live is a literal shithole. the Duck Commander place from the show is like across the street from a quick lube. they live a little further into the country than the place this Urban Dictionary phrase is talking about: [url]http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bawcomite[/url]. Si's house is literally next door to an abandoned home with tinfoil over every opening lmao. if it's a surprise that this shitlord has some twisted views, just look into his environment a tiny bit[/QUOTE] I actually wonder if that definition was made around these people before they got money and a TV show. Seems about right considering you said he lives next to a house all patched with tinfoil, and the definition actually mentions "compulsion to cover windows with tinfoil". Holy shit.

I think I posted this before but the first time I watched Duck Dynasty I thought it was a mockumentary taking the piss of rednecks. I guess I was wrong.

[QUOTE=woolio1;47390483]... Again? You'd think he would have learned his lesson the first time he did this. Guess not.[/QUOTE] He DID learn a lesson. He learned that some people [I]actually have the same thoughts and ideas as he does.[/I]

[QUOTE=Shadowfirelan;47390992]Something I think everyone might be missing, or I might just be blind, is that while Humans believe we have "Morality", if we didn't have laws and civilization, we'd act just like that. If we didn't have structure and such, again, we would behave very much like animals. Morality is something that people have innate only because they are taught it. (And also personal beliefs but Im keeping that out for the sake of argument.)[/QUOTE] Here's what I think about that. WHY do we teach morality? I think it's because for the vast majority of human existence we did live as animals. We were hunter/gatherers. We roamed in search of food and water. This means humans were forced to live in small groups, since it takes a regular supply of food and water to grow a population. Then things changed, humans learned agriculture and how to keep animals. That allowed an explosion in population. Humans could settle and build communities. Okay, but how do people who lived by the violent law of the jungle now live together peacefully in towns and villages, with people who aren't family or friends? Rules, otherwise known as morality, are developed. That's where religion comes in. How do you get everyone onboard with following the same rules? Incorporate the rules into your religion, which you then spread. With everyone in your community sharing the same religion they are also following the same code, which makes it easier to control them. This has gone on for so long that some people now equate morality with religion. Morality is just a mechanism that allows a society to function, it has nothing to do with religion itself. You don't need a god telling you Thou Shall Not Kill when you realize that a society full of people running around killing each other isn't going to thrive for long.

Its funny how religious people use religion as a crutch and say atheists are a bunch of morality free savages, and then turn around and tell their kids sanitized stories of how god used biological warfare against the Egyptians and committed infanticide. Or how god genocided the entire planet with water, can't forget to make a children's picture book of how millions of innocents were murdered.

[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;47394320]Here's what I think about that. WHY do we teach morality? I think it's because for the vast majority of human existence we did live as animals. We were hunter/gatherers. We roamed in search of food and water. This means humans were forced to live in small groups, since it takes a regular supply of food and water to grow a population. Then things changed, humans learned agriculture and how to keep animals. That allowed an explosion in population. Humans could settle and build communities. Okay, but how do people who lived by the violent law of the jungle now live together peacefully in towns and villages, with people who aren't family or friends? Rules, otherwise known as morality, are developed. That's where religion comes in. How do you get everyone onboard with following the same rules? Incorporate the rules into your religion, which you then spread. With everyone in your community sharing the same religion they are also following the same code, which makes it easier to control them. This has gone on for so long that some people now equate morality with religion. Morality is just a mechanism that allows a society to function, it has nothing to do with religion itself. You don't need a god telling you Thou Shall Not Kill when you realize that a society full of people running around killing each other isn't going to thrive for long.[/QUOTE] Well, even early humans had morality. There was never a "law of the jungle" type scenario where life was just a free for all and anything was acceptable. Humans (most primates, really) have always lived in cooperative communities and this necessitated some type of moral system for survival. The first humans who lived on the African savanna didn't just murder and rob from each other or we would have died out a long time ago.

[QUOTE=Explosions;47390671]Well a significant portion of Christians would disagree with you, probably this hillbilly in the article along with them.[/QUOTE] Most of us actually don't think rape, murder, and torture is cool like kooky actor Albert Fish 2.0 here.

[QUOTE=matt000024;47394811]Most of us actually don't think rape, murder, and torture is cool like kooky actor Albert Fish 2.0 here.[/QUOTE] I never said that. A huge portions of Christians profess that nothing in the Bible is immoral.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47390702]Do you really not get the part where he says this horrible scenario happens to an atheist family, NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE ATHEIST, but because everyone has dropped all religions, and therefore nobody has any sense of morals? Meaning the perpetrators wouldn't have done it if they had "religion" and "morals"?[/QUOTE] Don't tell me you agree with this nutjob.

[QUOTE=archangel125;47395903]Don't tell me you agree with this nutjob.[/QUOTE] It'd be nice if you guys read all the words and didn't immediately create a false dichotomy wherein anyone who doesn't fully agree with you must fully agree with Phil.

You can take the redneck out of the trailer park but apparently no amount of money can take the trailer park out of the redneck. What a shithead.

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;47396235]You can take the redneck out of the trailer park but apparently no amount of money can take the trailer park out of the redneck. What a shithead.[/QUOTE] you can take one man's trash to another man's treasure but you can't make it drink

[QUOTE=archangel125;47395903]Don't tell me you agree with this nutjob.[/QUOTE] I don't agree with him at all. But it's still wrong to try and make it look like he's saying or implying things he isn't just to demonize him.

[QUOTE=archangel125;47390454]Rich rednecks with more money than brains. No surprises there.[/QUOTE] It's funny, when you tell some deeply religious folks you're an atheist they go ballistic but if you tell them that you don't believe in god they just shrug it off. I think atheism has given itself a bad name.

[QUOTE=ultra_bright;47398243]It's funny, when you tell some deeply religious folks you're an atheist they go ballistic but if you tell them that you don't believe in god they just shrug it off. I think atheism has given itself a bad name.[/QUOTE] The problem atheism has is not atheism, but the anti-theists who fly under the banner of atheism. It's the people who believe in freedom FROM religion instead of freedom OF religion. The type of people who try and get nativity scenes banned or taken down even though it doesn't affect them whatsoever. These people are seen as enemies by religious people because they are actively attacking anything religious. It causes religious people to farther intrench themselves, which causes anti-theists to do the same. Both sides are guilty of this. I'm a Diest, which is a belief in a god, but not religion, miracles, or any of that nonsense. I believe that natural laws and such can rationally explain everything, and in rational thought, but there still is a god. I get shit on by both atheists AND religious folk. But it's never by people who are just "atheist" or "(x) religion", but by the people who use their (non)belief as a defining characteristic of who they are.

[QUOTE=archangel125;47395903]Don't tell me you agree with this nutjob.[/QUOTE] He's right. This nutjob didn't say anything hateful. Whether or not he meant to is debatable but no where does he say "atheists deserve to get murdered and raped because they see nothing wrong with it".

[img]http://media.salon.com/2013/10/duck_dynasty_beards.jpg[/img] they all look like chechen jihadists

It's not hate speech if atheists are doing it.

God is probably in heaven wondering why the hell this guy is rich [editline]26th March 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;47398651]The problem atheism has is not atheism, but the anti-theists who fly under the banner of atheism. It's the people who believe in freedom FROM religion instead of freedom OF religion. The type of people who try and get nativity scenes banned or taken down even though it doesn't affect them whatsoever. These people are seen as enemies by religious people because they are actively attacking anything religious. It causes religious people to farther intrench themselves, which causes anti-theists to do the same. Both sides are guilty of this. I'm a Diest, which is a belief in a god, but not religion, miracles, or any of that nonsense. I believe that natural laws and such can rationally explain everything, and in rational thought, but there still is a god. I get shit on by both atheists AND religious folk. But it's never by people who are just "atheist" or "(x) religion", but by the people who use their (non)belief as a defining characteristic of who they are.[/QUOTE] At least that make sense

To be honest, I am a "Christian" who believes in the Bible. But I still think this is pretty fucked up. I say "Christian" because the majority of "Christians" are just hateful idiots. Those who "represent" us today are mostly retards who are not capable of anything other than hate speech. I always go out of my way to study other people's opinions and take other sides into consideration, and agree to disagree. But these people who claim to be "Christian" or whatever just go full-on apeshit and say, "You heathens should all go die in a ditch."

[QUOTE=Killjoy;47400929]To be honest, I am a "Christian" who believes in the Bible.[/QUOTE] Im curious, since you believe in the bible, did you actually read it? If its not too rude, I'd really like to hear what made you a believer? Sure there is historic facts in most religious texts, but those bits are rarely what people care about. I find that not many believers actually read the thing completely, but rather takes verses out of their context and regurgitate them according to their own agenda. I confess that my views on religion has become more anti-religious as time goes by, I see it as a growing problem in society when it comes to integration, worldpeace and unity as a species. I know that there will always be something else to fight about, but why not make it one less thing by embracing realism and the world today, instead of hanging on to a >1400 year old belief?

[QUOTE=reeferdk;47401100]Im curious, since you believe in the bible, did you actually read it? If its not too rude, I'd really like to hear what made you a believer? Sure there is historic facts in most religious texts, but those bits are rarely what people care about. I find that not many believers actually read the thing completely, but rather takes verses out of their context and regurgitate them according to their own agenda. I confess that my views on religion has become more anti-religious as time goes by, I see it as a growing problem in society when it comes to integration, worldpeace and unity as a species. I know that there will always be something else to fight about, but why not make it one less thing by embracing realism and the world today, instead of hanging on to a >1400 year old belief?[/QUOTE] I do read it, although I am starting to get out of the habit, I am trying to read it more. I am a believer because I have seen a lot in my life to lead me to that conclusion. I have seen a lot of miraculous things happen not only in my own life but in others. The historical parts of the Bible are actually my favorite. While I find meaning in all of it, the historical information is... "fun" to read. I hate it when people take verses out of context for an agenda. People should read the Bible and see what a verse is really about before using it for their own reasons. A lot of people who bash the Bible also take it completely out of context, talking about horrible things done by people in the Bible. And that is true, they did, that is for us to see the wrong things that these people did. And about throwing out religion entirely, I would not know about "religion" in that sense. I care more about God, not a "religion". It is our purpose to better ourselves and to better each other. In my opinion this is a God-given purpose. Also I do not see my belief as a >1400 y/o unrealistic thing. It holds relevance at any time, and it still will far into the future. Just because its events take place in the past, that does not mean it is not relevant. I do not plan to elaborate further here because someone is bound to start flaming and derail the thread. PM me if you seriously want my complete opinion. :v: