Phil Robertson on Homosexuality: A Conservative Christian’s Response

Preston Sprinkle —  December 19, 2013 — 42 Comments

As most of you probably know, Phil Robertson of the uber popular reality TV program “Duck Dynasty” made some news-stirring comments yesterday about phil robertsonhomosexuality. To quote the most cited comment, Robertson said:

“It seems to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”

He goes on to talk about the effects of homosexuality:

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

Robertson’s flippant comments have produced a vitriolic response from people of all moral leanings. Conservative Christians are ticked that a Robertson has been condemned for being honest, while the LGBT community and its sympathizers are outraged at the crudeness of his rhetoric.

Now, many people would consider me a conservative Christian. I believe the Bible is true. I believe Jesus Christ is Lord over all things. And I believe that Jesus is the only way to salvation. If this makes me conservative, then I’m conservative.

However, while many conservatives probably line up with Phil Robertson and his remarks—perhaps wondering what the problem is and bemoaning our secular culture for hanging a man for being honest—I want to say that I was offended and discouraged at Phil’s remarks. (Probably more so by his comments about African Americans during the Jim Crow era, but that’s for another blog.)

First of all, I’m disappointed that homosexuality was reduced to sex. I know a lot of gay people who think in terms of companionship, intimacy, and friendship when they reflect on their attraction to the same gender. So, Robertson’s comments about a vagina vs. an anus is naïve, offensive, and misses the point of the whole debate over homosexuality; yes, even to me—a straight Christian who is a conservative Christian.

Second, Roberston doesn’t show any desire to empathize with people who are attracted to the same sex. I want to ask Roberston: “What about the 15 year old Awana champ, who through no desire of his own is attracted to guys? Or what about those women, who were raped respectively by their fathers and therefore are committed to finding companionship in lesbian relationships that have little to do with sex?” Homosexuality is much more complicated than what the A & E star has made it out to be. Now, like Roberston, I’m straight. I will always be straight. And even though I can only identify with those who struggle with heterosexual sins, I desire to empathize with those whose who are attracted to the same gender. Contrary to Robertson’s off-handed comments, there are many people who have unwanted same sex attraction, and Robertson’s comments will do nothing to minister to these people.

Third, I’m disappointed that many millions of Americans will take Robertson’s views as typical of conservative Christians. They’re not. I’m a conservative Christian. And I’m not homophobic. I’m not anti-gay. I’m not even creeped out when I see two dudes holding hands, or two girls kissing. I’m just not. Now, I still believe, with Robertson, that homoeroticism is contrary to God’s will, and I’ve written 20 previous blogs exploring this question. However, this does not mean that I hate gay people (quite the opposite), or that I think gay and lesbians are sick and twisted—I don’t. I have no animosity, hatred, disgust, or disdain toward people attracted to other beautiful humans of the same gender. So I therefore would never make comments about a vagina vs. an anus as Roberston did, even though I believe, with Roberston, that acting on homoerotic desires is prohibited in the Bible. In short, even though Roberston and I share similar beliefs, I’m terribly disappointed at his comments about homosexuality.

Fourth—get over it. Phil Robertson is one human being who expressed views shared by many millions of humans—billions, actually—around the world. The buzz created by his comments is fueled by an idolatrous American culture that considers authoritative the comments and opinions of movie stars over experts in the field. And this is sad. The fact that Robertson’s comments—the opinion of one human being—has created such a stir is proof, if proof were needed, that America places on a pedestal the opinions of ordinary people who found their way in front of a camera.

So, to my LGBT friends: “Please don’t consider Phil Robertson’s comments as representative of all conservative Christians. They’re not. Take it with a grain of salt and try to befriend a local Christian. You may be surprised.”

And to my conservative Christian friends: “Try befriending someone who is gay or lesbian and you’ll discover a reservoir of creational, image-bearing ingenuity and creativity that can be delighted in. And you will see that the gay vs. straight question is much more than a debate about a vagina vs. a man’s anus.”

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Preston Sprinkle

Preston Sprinkle

Posts

I'm married to a beautiful wife and we have four kids (3 girls and a boy). I've been teaching college level Bible and Theology classes for a few years now (since 2007), and enjoy hanging out with my family, running, surfing, and life in SoCal. Before I became a teacher, I was in school. Lots and lots of school. I did a B.A. and M.Div here in SoCal, and then did a Ph.D. in Scotland in NT studies. Before coming to EBC, I taught at Nottingham University for a semester, and Cedarville University for a couple of years. Along with surfing, I also love to research and write, and I've written a few things on Paul, Early Judaism, and Hell.
  • Phyte_On

    Preston, You are a God-send! I have been entrenched in this issue for about 10 years now devouring everything I can read, go to workshops, discussion groups, and even joined GCN to understand this issue first hand. I am straight but fascinated with the masculine journey – understanding masculinity at a soul level made in the image of God. Christian men who have faced the issue of SSA have some of the most beautiful insights and wisdom to offer the body of Christ.

    Just finished reading your 20 blogs. Nailed it. Riveting and thought provoking.

    I know this is outside the scope of your teaching but my only comment is that there is a strategic move by the anti-Christ spirit (all under the sovereignty of God) to use this issue as a “Trojan Horse” to morph culture and world civilizations toward the deconstruction of Biblical truth and in particular to marginalize Christianity as socially pathological. Our conservative brethren seem to fall into the traps being set to further the cause of the anti-Christ spirit due to our lack of understanding of what the Bible teaches and the offer and invitation of the good news of Jesus Christ.

  • Joe

    First, Phil Robertson is 67 years old and raised as a conservative Christian. Growing up in the 50’s through 70’s attitudes toward homosexuals and the way people expressed their feelings with slang ,e.g. faggot, queer, butch etc. is not politically correct in 2014. If one says they are conservative Christian and believes the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin then that is more important than the way you express it or that people find it offensive. The language of the Bible for violent acts is very graphic but for sexual sins not graphic however the meaning is clear. Clearly the media in the past 25 has done much to change peoples attitudes toward homosexuality. If a politician in the 50’s-70’s tried to propose making gay marriage legal I don’t think their career would last long. Times have changed a lot but if people for moral or religious reasons think homosexuality is a sin they have as much right as homosexuals to express their opinions. I think for most gays homosexuality is not a choice. People can like gay people but not their sexual practices. And even if Phil Robertson’s language was crude and graphic it is more honest than thinking of gay sex as images of 2 people holding hands and running through a field of poppies.

  • Preston

    First of all, my apologies for letting these comments through so late! I’ve been busy with the holidays and didn’t check up on the blog. So, please understand that I genuinely want to cultivate dialogue and I was therefore not trying to Stonewall any discussion (pun intended).

    Second, thanks to those who offered encouraging words. They are much needed, and much appreciated.

    Third, to those who offered healthy push back, cordial criticism, or loving disagreement–thanks! Even if I don’t respond to all the comments, I read them with care.

  • http://www.exclusivechurch.com/ Lorenzo Fernandez-Vicente

    Not representative of conservative Christians’ views but ever, ever so frequent.

  • colleenvano

    This is what my heart was feeling but my brain couldn’t tell my mouth to say. You said it well! THANK YOU!!!

  • http://www.plannedpeasanthood.com/ Rick Dawson

    Thank you – for a sane, reasoned response to an overheated issue. I don’t care for TV, whether reality or otherwise, and have long ago figured out that when Jesus said love thy neighbor, He meant it.

  • James

    Very well written, thank you for the clarification and the encouragement.

  • Danielle A.

    Two things. “First of all, I’m disappointed that homosexuality was reduced to sex.”
    This is just confusing. In terms of even defining or explaining homosexuality, if you take away the word “sex” you can’t even define it.
    “Second, Roberston doesn’t show any desire to empathize with people who are attracted to the same sex.”
    Preston, can you please show me in the bible where Jesus tells us to empathize with sin?

  • Wes

    he issue is deeper than his comments. If you read or watch his bio. There is a cultural gap and economical gap It would be very difficult for me to fathom Mr. Robertson to speak politically correct and at times even care about what others may think about him. Whose responsibility would it be to make sure he was always proper? His parents? The church? He spoke his mind whether right or wrong at least we know where his heart is. Lets face it, the secular world will look for anything to crucify anything a Christian has to say in the media and this is biblical.

  • CA

    Peterson, my only fear here is that your article might miss a balance because it engages in Phil’s comments and homosexuality in it’s general sense. However, Phil’s comment is on homosexual behavior. He is not talking about tendency or orientation but the act of it. Would that change the way I should read this article, or…? Would love to hear your say on that.

  • Alexia

    Honestly, why is this all on Robertson? That’s what I get tired of hearing. He’s not a politician, he doesn’t have a speech writer to help him get his views across “nicely”, he’s a backwoods duck call maker and we all know it. How many gay people has he even *met*? While his comments may have been cruel, the world is treating him cruelly for not being able to say what he means with more style. And that? I’m tired of. That goes for more than just Phil too. People say things in the wrong way all the time and we crucify them for it – I see no reason too. Especially when their actions say differently.

  • Pingback: Phil Robertson on Homosexuality: A Conservative...()

  • Pingback: Why I'd Rather Not Stand with Phil Robertson | NeoReformanda()

  • Laura

    Love this thank you!

  • engedi51

    How can someone ‘start the discussion’ when the moderator won’t publish my comment?

  • Pingback: Persons, Not Body Parts | Spiritual Friendship()

  • Thomas

    This was shared on facebook by a friend; the most level-headed response to this whole thing I’ve seen yet. Well reasoned, well written. Thanks.

  • Pingback: Gay Christians and the Robertson Controversy | Spiritual Friendship()

  • Kenny Pierce

    Great, great commentary. Thank you for this and God bless you and yours this Christmas.

  • Pingback: Lipstick on a Duck: The Selective Outrage of Anti-Gay Christians | Ford's Words()

  • Karla Colonnieves

    Beautiful post, Preston. Thanks so much for sharing!

  • http://www.journeyguy.com/ journeyguy

    Preston, thanks for your articulation of some of the responses that you had to Phil’s interview at GQ. I appreciate your ministry and heart.

    I wanted to respond to a few things above since I also linked your article on my blog (http://www.journeyguy.com/the-flap-about-phil/).

    I understand that Phil made a coarse statement. As a fan of the show, that is typical of him and why so many are drawn to the show. He’s very plain spoken and colorful. It doesn’t translate well in print, that’s for sure. However, I don’t think Phil equates homosexuality to simply sex. It was a comment in an article, remember. He was just giving redneck logic about the act of homosexuality.

    Second, since the GQ article wasn’t about homosexuality at all – just had a few quotes in that regard, I don’t think it’s fair to say that Phil doesn’t empathize with people. Let’s please be careful about assigning motive or implying character deficiency to a fellow believer based on a few isolated quotes from a secular magazine?

    One concern I have with your comment about empathizing is when I look at the ministry of the prophets in an overwhelmingly secular society, I don’t see a lot of empathy in their messages. Jesus Himself did weep over Jerusalem, but I sometimes wonder if He did so because He identified with the loss of glory for His Father from them rather than empathizing with them. On the other hand, Hebrews boldly portrays Jesus as one who can “sympathize with our weaknesses.” (Heb 4.15), but there’s a difference between empathy and sympathy. Only Jesus can truly understand the complexities and power of sin over humanity. As His church, we too are called to hold out the word of life in love, but modern day empathy, I’m afraid, doesn’t attempt to speak truth in love and lead people out of darkness into light.

    A final thought I have is your intentional distancing of yourself from Phil’s viewpoints. I think I understand what you’re doing. You want to be able to speak into lives of those who struggle with homosexuality, and so you don’t want to be an extremist. I too want to minister and relate in love towards those who self-identify as homosexuals. However, I grieve when pastors and teachers distance themselves from men and women who take a bold stand on clearly articulated principles in God’s Word (though they may be expressed or edited in a way that seem extreme). I don’t know that it’s truly loving to throw Phil under the bus as the result of an edited interview and its backlash in order to be perceived as diplomatic to a society that needs to hear us “proclaim the excellencies of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.” (1 Peter 2.9)

    Rather, shouldn’t we – in love – articulate that “as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of your flesh, which wage war against your soul?”

    I’m not arguing that Phil may not have been wise to communicate his thoughts to Drew Magary of GQ. I, too, cringed when I read them. However, he is a brother in Christ, and I just thought he deserved more grace from you than you offered in your response.

  • blueyedsoul

    This article makes one good point (the Fourth one, “get over it”- good paragraph). Other than that it suffers from the growing political correctness in the church which rushes to clean up any condemnation of sin as the Bible condemns it. The author seems to miss the simple concept that we can agree with Phil 100% and still lovingly befriend homosexuals (as I do regularly). Feeling disappointed in Phil Robertson for his comments is like being disappointed in a poor spoken preacher who is preaching the truth to the best of his ability. Perhaps it’s embarrassing to the more “enlightened”. The seeker sensitive movement, while somewhat beneficial, has paralyzed us with fear over what sinners think of us. There wasn’t one comment by Phil that was theologically inaccurate or lacked compassion. In fact, he went on to say, ““We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later…”

    Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson#ixzz2o1u2R0KE

    Rick Warren has been attributed this quote: “Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don’t have to compromise convictions to be compassionate.”

    I’m disappointed in Christians who are disappointed in Phil Robertson.

  • jomer2000

    To my friends who deal with same sex attractions, Phil was speaking truth, and not in a flippant manner, either. I believe what he expressed is accurate. Homosexuality is a non-sustainable, aberrant lifestyle that is unnatural. If it weren’t, it would be no different than someone preferring one flavor or aroma over another. It does come down to sex. Phil Robertson expresses himself in a colloquial manner, yes, but flippant, no. He takes seriously his faith.

    But there is hope. It’s never easy to face darkness in ourselves. You do no one any favors by saying otherwise.

  • Pingback: The patriarch and the pope: the real difference between Phil Robertson and Pope Francis « Ben Irwin()

  • Pingback: The Flap about Phil – Duck Dynasty and its future with A&E – Notes from the Trail()

  • http://www.fordswords.net/ Ford1968

    Hi Preston,

    Let me first say thank you for the obvious compassion in this response. I want to honor that even as I push back on the substance.

    When anti-gay Christians hear remarks like these from Phil Robertson, they say “that’s not what we believe”. But taking a critical look at his comments, they are completely aligned with the traditionalist view on homosexuality. Robertson could have said these things with more sensitivity (as you suggest), but that doesn’t make the theology any less offensive or harmful. Contrary to your assertion, traditional theology says that being gay is a pathology (i.e., that we are somehow sick and twisted or “intrinsically disordered”), that the suffering of gay people is necessary for the flourishing of humanity, and therefore gay people and our relationships are inferior and immoral. It diminishes the humanity of people who are gay. There’s no non-harmful way to represent that.

    As we’ve discussed before, confining biblical exegeses to the clobber passages (as you have thus far done in your exploration) does indeed reduce the sexuality of gay humans down to the sex act.

    Further, and this is important, I find it truly offensive that conservative Christians choose this high profile but pretty benign episode to express dismay about how they’re being represented. The Family Research Council, the American Family Association and others have been spreading vile, destructive lies about gay people for years. They suggest that homosexuality is just a depraved choice, that gay people are more likely to be pedophiles, that we are emotionally disturbed, that we are incapable of monogamy, and that we try to turn our children gay (I’d be happy to provide links). Where is the outrage and condemnation of these groups and their lies? To the contrary, these groups are held up as lions of the faith. So forgive me if I find the current objections to Robertson’s crassness as less than sincere or meaningful.

    Thank you in advance for considering this pushback. Please know that my intention is to add perspective to the conversation.

    My sincere best to you
    David

    • Preston

      Thanks David,

      I appreciate your sincere and gracious pushbacks to all my posts! I would love for some of my conservative brothers and sisters to take note.

      In any case, I know we keep getting hung up on this point but I can’t affirm everything you said here:

      “Contrary to your assertion, traditional theology says that being gay is a
      pathology (i.e., that we are somehow sick and twisted or “intrinsically
      disordered”), that the suffering of gay people is necessary for the
      flourishing of humanity, and therefore gay people and our relationships
      are inferior and immoral. It diminishes the humanity of people who are
      gay. There’s no non-harmful way to represent that.”

      Not all traditional theology says that SSA is pathology, and I wouldn’t use the phrase “sick and twisted.” Some traditionalists would, but not all. I believe divorce is a sin, but can I genuinely empathize and grieve with a woman who divorces her unloving, stubborn, prideful husband yet still believe she has committed a sin? And I wouldn’t say that she is sick and twisted, nor would I say that she is “inferior,” even if, I believe, she committed an immoral act.

      And I’m still not convinced that a conservative theology must be viewed as diminishing the humanity of gay people. Again, IF homoeroticism is against God’s created intention, then that is what would be diminishing humanity, right? I mean, I know we disagree on this crucial point, but I’m just thinking of the logic here.

      Again, as a parallel, the divorced woman could think that preventing a divorce would diminish her humanity and hinder true relational flourishing. But if divorce is wrong, then encouraging her to stay committed and embrace such cruciform suffering and pain in order to join with Christ in his suffering–this logically could cultivate humanness, not stifle it.

      All that to say, there’s many layers of assumptions that drive what one thinks would cultivate or hinder ones humanity.

      Thoughts?

      • http://www.fordswords.net/ Ford1968

        Hi Preston.
        Sincere thanks for the response. As always, I appreciate your willingness to engage thoughtfully in this conversation.

        You said that you can’t affirm my summation of traditionalist theology then go on to do exactly that. Your recent exploration of Romans 1 seems to suggest that, to the traditionalist, being attracted to the same sex is a shameful lust and not a natural variation on human sexuality. You said that, like the suffering of the woman in an emotionally abusive marriage is required for human flourishing, so too is the suffering of gay people. It follows that the negative moral judgement of gay relationships means that to the traditionalist, they are inferior and the people in them immoral (as you believe the divorcee is).

        Traditionalist theology says that gay people are not normal and are therefore not morally allowed to live life as the relational human they were created to be. That is a theology that diminishes the humanity of gay people.

        My assertions are confirmed in the comments section of this post. They are also affirmed in the very bitter fruit – including stigmatizing, marginalizing, and ostrisizing

      • http://www.fordswords.net/ Ford1968

        Oops,
        Typing from my phone so hit “post” prematurely. Sorry.

    • Miracleboy

      I am a retired Chaplain in the Dept. of Corrections. I still minister and counsel nouthetically ALL sexual sinners. I not some would judge Mr. Robertson as a “good ole Redneck’ or hick or as some have said, a “local yokel”. Mr. Robertson actually quoted 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and I did not sense any slander, hate or animosity what so ever. The language may have been crude to some but he told the truth and used God’s word. I sometimes use course language in prison. Sometimes, as Paul said, I have learned to be all things to all people in order that some would be saved. I’m certain Mr. Robertson does the same. He actually is an educated man in spite of the unfair judgment who think country is “Dumb”. I lost a brother in law to AIDs in 1980. He was one of the first to die in America from the disease. He was married and had four children. I also lost a nephew to AID’s in 1995. I ministered to both and their families and They came to Christ by telling them the truth. Many in prison are Christians by the same formula. The reason Phil was suspended from the show is because GLAAD immediately demanded that Disney fire him. For those who fail to notice. Disney, Darden Restaurants and other major corporations have banded together with the homosexuals and are now bullying organizations like the Boy Scouts to accept homosexuality. Disney recently elected a new president who is a full practicing homosexual. I consider Phil Robertson and his family to be the second wake up call for Christians to wake up and join the battle now taking place. Their desire to portray all Christians as evil and homosexuals as persecuted . they are attempting to eventually deny our First Amendment rights. One final clarification in a comment. There in no proof, absolutely none, that homosexuals are born with a propensity to homosexuality. There have been several studies by “researchers” trying to proof there is evidence but it was discovered the studies were all falsified by, homosexual researchers. In all my years of counseling, there is a common thread that runs through the lifeline of the overwhelming majority of homosexuals. They have a weak, or non existent father figure. Many were molested at an early age by older relatives or an older schoolmate. They are groomed at an early age by homosexuals who eventually start to grope and touch, advancing until a sexual act is performed. Homosexuals are made that way, not born. My own nephew had 3 older brothers and a weak father. My nephew and his bother started viewing their dad’s pornography while masturbating. When that thrill wore off, one propose that they do one another and eventually we led into full blown homosexuality. No father to tell them the behavior was wrong. When something pleasure and no one corrects, it leads to the acceptance that it must be all right. I suggest studying this sin in detail by using Christian counseling authors materials instead of blindly accepting secular psychiatrists material with is totally untrustworthy. A homosexual is not “born with” a gay gene, no more so than an adulterer is born with an “adulterer’s gene.

      • http://www.fordswords.net/ Ford1968

        Hi Miracleboy,

        I’m not sure how to respond to this; but please know that I just said a prayer for you, the people in your life, and us the Church. May God increase our understanding and compassion for one another.

        I wish you peace.
        David

  • Pingback: Flotsam and jetsam (12/20) | Everyday Theology()

  • Beth

    Well stated, although Phil was crud in his way, the Bible does say that what homosexuals do is too hideous to talk about, so it is no surprise that when Phil said it out loud it does sound bad, really bad. My brother in law left his wife and two adorable kids to “find himself” in the gay lifestyle. It only took 13 years for him to become HIV positive. He is now trying to be chaste… The LGBT community needs a lot of love, patience and respect as they are generally very wounded people. We don’t hear a lot about this, but I believe the majority of people who enter into this lifestyle have been sexually abused or misused in their childhoods, causing so much pain and confusion.

  • jv

    Good perspective, save a a few points…..was phils statement crude and a bit vulgar, yes absolutely. But I have yet to read a response from the lgbt community that says they were upset by the discussion of gentalia etc. The reason they are upset is because he called it a sin and said that people who live that lifestyle cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven…that and equating it with beastiality. Though we do need compassion for others, that doesnt mean when the question is asked we sugarcoat it and call sin anything other than sin. I dont hear any drunkards, idolaters, swindlers or slanderers being defended by glaad or anyone saying we just dont understand the allure of these other sins. Phil didnt elevate homosexuality as being the worst of all these sins (though I believe it could be argued it has some of the worst societal impacts).

  • Jessica Dunn

    I’m so happy find this post. I too am a conservative Christian who is disappointed by Phil Robertson’s statements.

  • engedi51

    There’s the prophet and there’s the pastor. Both proclaim the same
    truth–one usually in a plain unfiltered and a sometimes coarse style of
    declaration and the other while being congruent to the same truth
    declares it with empathy and a shepherd’s guidance toward obedience. You
    have Phil Robertson and Preston Sprinkle. It would be wrong to assume
    Robertson’s remarks were ‘flippant’ just as it would be wrong to assume
    Sprinkle’s to be anemic or compromising. Both must stand for the other in the face of error for either to fully stand for God’s Truth individually. In my opinion.

  • engedi

    There’s the Prophet and there’s the Pastor. Both proclaim the same truth–one usually in a plain unfiltered and a sometimes coarse style of declaration and the other while being congruent to the same truth declares it with empathy and a shepherd’s guidance toward obedience. You have Phil Robertson and Preston Sprinkle. It would be wrong to assume Robertson’s remarks were ‘flippant’ just as it would be wrong to assume Sprinkle’s to be anemic or compromising. Both must stand for the other in the face of error so as to each stand for God’s Truth, in my opinion.

  • Benj

    I hear what you’re saying Preston but the ones who are most outraged by his comments are those waving multi colored flags in front of the Capitol building, not those who want to be straight but have undesired attraction to the same sex. Those who want everybody to think that homosexuality is OK are the ones who are most upset.

    Second, my frustration is with the hypocrisy of the ‘powers that be’ in our culture. It took MSNBC nearly three weeks to fire Martin Bashir for saying that somebody should defecate in Sarah Palins mouth. AND HE SAID THAT ON AIR. Oh, and he’s a ‘journalist’ too. Phil R. Responds to a personal question in a magazine interview and he’s fired within hours.

    Why aren’t any of the left wing movie stars fired for their offensive comments about Christians? Actually, I know why, ’cause then we’d have no more good actors…and no more good movies either.

    -Benj

  • Michael Snow

    “…an idolatrous American culture that considers authoritative the comments
    and opinions of movie stars over experts in the field. And this is sad.”

    That is a key point that we need to hear more about from

    Christian leaders (instead of their mining TV for sermon examples). How many millions of Christians fritter their lives away chasing the latest thing on TV or facebook?

    I’ve never seen Duck Dynasty, but from what little exposure I’ve had, I’d guess that Phil does not consider himself a movie star nor want others to. And as much as I wish that he (and you with the crude ending) had not said somethings, I think “flippant” is mis-reading him.

    Trevin Wax gives a better picture, quoting him: “I myself am a product of the 60s; I centered my life around sex, drugs
    and rock and roll until I hit rock bottom and accepted Jesus as my
    Savior. My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I
    follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching
    is that women and men are meant to be together. However, I would never
    treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We
    are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity.
    We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”

    http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2013/12/19/why-suspending-phil-robertson-will-backfire/

  • lauram

    I also don’t love the delivery of some of his comments, but A&E makes money on the fact he lacks polish, so why should the expression of his views have polish? I believe in treating homosexuals with love and respect, but to say they can’t help it is saying God is unjust. It’s clear in Romans he gives them over to these passions. But don’t blame me, God said it, not me. Romans 1:26 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error

  • Andy Snider

    Excellent, Preston. It’s almost like you’ve been thinking about this lately :-) Thank you for countering Robertson’s hamfisted crudity with some Christ-exalting thoughtfulness and love. May your tribe increase.