[bigbob]

O’Reilly had some silly theory that Robertson’s comments crossed some imaginary line because it was “judgmental”, rather than just a statement of opinion. It reminded me of the meaning of “is” and hanging chads...

[Hugin]

I guess you’re allowed to say you think it’s a sin, as long as there are no consequences.

O’Reilly is never judgmental about anyone of course.

[MissMagnolia]

Bloviator did a really poor job tonight ...... I guess he either didn't read the GQ article, or he didn't get this far:

“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, you see what I’m saying?”

So much for his "Phil is judging" argument.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

O’Reilly had some silly theory that Robertson’s comments crossed some imaginary line because it was “judgmental”, rather than just a statement of opinion.

Did he talk about "Christian philosophy"?

Oy.

[fireman15]

O’Reilly had some silly theory that Robertson’s comments crossed some imaginary line because it was “judgmental”,

I lost all respect for O’Reilly a long time ago. He is about as principled as whoever made the politically correct decision to can Phil Robertson.

[tbw2]

If you cannot judge something as wrong, then there is no right or wrong. Therefore, any opinion - even Bibically based - is equally valid.
Oh, wait, liberals don’t have free speech unless you agree with them.

[bray]

O’Really is a complete weasel. Quoting scripture is judgmental so censorship is fine.

Pray America is Waking