So,
"Duck Dynasty" patriarch Phil Robertson expresses his faith, and his biblically based belief in "traditional"
family structure and "normal" sexuality.
And,
he gets suspended from the most popular TV show on the air.
He
also has become the cause
célèbre for
a large, if increasingly reviled segment of American society under an
unrelenting attack from the so-called "tolerant" among us.
Tolerant,
that is, unless someone had the audacity to dispute the mantra now in
vogue by the extreme Left. Tolerant, until someone suggests he or she
views any behavior – let alone sexual behavior – a “sin.”
Everyone
these days seems to want a smiling, laughing, never judgmental God,
and anything – including His purported Word to the contrary – is
swept under the metaphysical carpet, as it were.
The
crudity of Robertson's discussion of sexual preference for vaginas
over anuses makes one wince. It also goes the the heart of the
argument that, for the first time in history, how someone decides to
sate his or her sexual urges has become equated with racial, ethnic,
political and religious minorities and how they were treated in the
past.
It's
the supposed new "civil rights" movement, we're told. But I
wonder how someone's honestly held, indeed once universally held
views that biological construction and purpose point to male-female
unions rather than colonic, same-sex coitus as not only the norm, but
the Design.
That
is essentially what Robertson said, albeit in far more graphic,
earthy terms.
I
grew up during what I dare to call the real Civil Rights era, when
African-Americans and those supporting them literally put their lives
on the line to end institutionalized discrimination in education,
business and at the ballot box.
Sorry, but I do find it difficult to
extrapolate that to the call today to gag the free, albeit unpopular
speech of anyone.
And
yes, that also means the free expression of anyone -- gay, straight,
liberal, conservative, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, agnostic,
atheist -- to say what they think without the fist of political
correctness slamming them into the ground.
Disagree
today with a liberal about the failures of the Obama administration,
or suggest that marriage was and always has been, heretofore, between
males and females, and you are labeled a bigot, thrown into the same
"hate" group as Nazis, the KKK and the Taliban.
Lost
in the rush to PC judgment is the fact that folks like Robertson are
not advocating any form of discrimination against gays, and in fact
have made it clear they strive to treat everyone fairly. The issue,
for them, is a moral one, based on their beliefs.
Other
Christians have differing opinions on any number of issues, including
homosexuality. But they are largely ignored in the rush to throw
anyone with evangelical Christian roots into the same intellectual
gulag.
I,
for one, recognize two things: First, I cherish friends I have who happen to
be gay; to me, if their lifestyle is “sinful,” then so are those
of other friends who cheat on their spouses, their taxes or their
commitment to provide a fair day's work for their wages.
The more strident among us, believers and unbelievers, tend to forget that we are, all
of us, sinners and can only be “saved” through grace.
And
second, that being the case, I am content to love all my friends and
leave judgment to God . . . and I suspect He is and will be far more
compassionate that any of us can comprehend, or deserve.
But
back to Robertson and "Duck Dynasty." A&E's reaction
may have been knee-jerk, a decision driven by reaction to the outrage
of some who seek to muzzle the new dissidents in our society. But it
also is A&E's right to do so. Employees these days are let go for
far less, even no reason, being more and more "at will"
staff.
There
always is a price to pay for standing up for what you believe, and
sometimes -- due to questionable judgment in how that is done -- the
price can be high.
But
given the strongly pro-Robertson reaction thus far -- petitions,
statements of support by celebrities, etc. -- perhaps A&E should
look more to its bottom line.
