And here is why...
Posted on 03/26/2015 3:03:02 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Phil Robertson is an embarrassment, not a hero, and the socially conservative movement needs to distance itself from him immediately.
Don’t get me wrong — I agree that our culture is experiencing a terrifying shift towards censorship. People have become so easily offended that it’s almost impossible to say anything without someone getting upset about it; and concepts like trigger warnings, safe spaces, and microaggressions are threatening free speech.
But none of this changes the fact that Phil Robertson is an ignorant buffoon, and that many of his comments — despite the fact that he does have every right to make them — are not ones that anyone should ever want to be associated with.
Now, before you start composing your hate mail — think about it. Do you really want a dude who is going to publicly ruminate about the gruesome rape, murder, and castration of a man and his “little atheist wife and two little atheist daughters” to be an official face of your #brand?
And he is an official face. He spoke at this year’s CPAC, where he also received a free-speech award named after conservative legend Andrew Breitbart. As for his most recent controversial comments, he made them during a speech at a prayer breakfast, and the very fact that he was given the role of “speaker” suggests that he’s viewed as a model of the Christian faith. He’s an icon — but why?
After all, let’s be honest: His detailed hypothetical about the brutal rape, murder, and castration of an atheist family was disturbing, and his underlying point that only a Christian could understand why these activities were wrong was ignorant. It provided anyone who might accuse Christians of being intolerant with about the best piece of ammo that I can imagine.
So, Team Robertson — when people meet you and you tell them you’re a Christian, are these comments ones that you would want them to ascribe to your belief system? If not, say so! And if yes, well, good luck out there.
— Katherine Timpf is a reporter for National Review.
[He has a master’s degree, and is worth tens of millions of dollars]
I wonder how many magazines Phil Robertson would sell if he started his own magazine?
.
‘Bout that good, yep.
.
.
Some obviously struggle more than others. Some lose the battle completely as we see in 2Peter 2. But there has to come a point where the struggle ends, one way or the other.
.
If you think about it, Phil has a point ( although it was crudely made ).
Atheists, if they believe that we are all ultimately a by product of mindless chance and evolution from the primordial slime, and are the result of accidental collision of atoms with no Ultimate Creator giving us moral laws to follow, have to ask themselves — is there really and objectively RIGHT or WRONG? GOOD or EVIL?
Or is it simply a societal construct ( and an individual preference )?
In an atheistic worldview, Who decides whether a murderer is REALLY and OBJECTIVELY evil?
An accidental collision of atoms called NAZI’s struck down an an accidental collision of atoms called JEWS.... what of it then? It is simply all atoms in the end...
If you think about it, Phil has a point ( although it was crudely made ).
Atheists, if they believe that we are all ultimately a by product of mindless chance and evolution from the primordial slime, and are the result of accidental collision of atoms with no Ultimate Creator giving us moral laws to follow, have to ask themselves — is there really and objectively RIGHT or WRONG? GOOD or EVIL?
Or is it simply a societal construct ( and an individual preference )?
In an atheistic worldview, Who decides whether a murderer is REALLY and OBJECTIVELY evil?
An accidental collision of atoms called NAZI’s struck down an an accidental collision of atoms called JEWS.... what of it then? It is simply all atoms in the end...
Very true. The great thing is this: The more you struggle to overcome a sinful nature, the easier it gets because of the ever increasing measure of grace and wisdom the Almighty bestows on every true believer and follower.
.
>> “Robertson seemed to be addressing the question of whether atheists, because they don’t believe in God, are unable to distinguish between good and evil acts.” <<
.
And his crudely fashioned anecdote illustrates well that we all know the difference, but for some its “situational.”
.
Nothing that Phil said was that great or that terrible or that interesting or that memorable.
Nothing that Katherine said was that great or that terrible or that interesting or that memorable.
.
What it all comes down to is this:
If you allow yourself to believe that it is impossible, then it is.
.
Phil Robertson is doing nothing but reciting the
words of the New Testament. Gee what a crime!
“No one who voted for 0bama, even once, can embarrass me about anything.”
Love it when you spit nails, son of Colorado patriots.
;-)
You've defined it in terms many of our so-called brightest minds will only accept. To me it's just sad their arrogance and ignorance is so great that they don't even know how much they don't know.
“I have looked into most philosophical systems and I have seen that none will work without God.” - James Maxwell
Yep
Seriously, I've done some mighty humiliating things in my life ... but I didn't vote for 0bama!
The original National Review was chock full of people who actively practiced their religion and of course, lots of veterans, combat & otherwise. I wonder how many of either group remains?
I also subscribe to Chronicles, First Things World Atlantic and a few other periodicals to round things out.
I think that was basically Robertson’s point. He was agreeing with Nietzsche’s conclusions, not his premises. I mean, it was not Robertson who coined the phrase, “If God is dead, everything is permitted.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.