The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

'Duck Dynasty' Under Fire Following Star's Incendiary Anti-Gay Remarks

'

‘Duck Dynasty’ and Quackery

by Charles Blow, NYT 12/21/2013

Source Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/21/opinion/blow-duck-dynasty-and-quackery.html

Then, in 1890, the State Legislature passed the Separate Car Act, which stipulated that all railway companies in the state “shall provide equal but separate accommodations for the white, and colored races” in their coaches. The landmark Plessy v. Ferguson case was a Louisiana case challenging that law. The United States Supreme Court upheld the law, a ruling that provided the underpinning for state-sponsored racial segregation, and Jim Crow laws spread.
Click to expand...
It may be worth noting that Plessy v. Ferguson was repealed by Brown v Board of Education (1954) making "separate by equal" unconstitutional.*

Robertson’s comments conjure the insidious mythology of historical Southern fiction, that of contented slave and benevolent master, of the oppressed and the oppressors gleefully abiding the oppression, happily accepting their wildly variant social stations. This mythology posits that there were two waves of ruination for Southern culture, the Civil War and the civil rights movement*, that made blacks get upset and things go downhill.
Click to expand...
Forcibly removing Blacks from their homeland did not make them upset? Also, public lynchings didn't make them upset either? Certainly he jests.

*Please see "equal protection under law" as stated in the U.S. Constitution.
 
Jack Springer said:
Very similar to how people look at the Target credit card hacking --- a thread here shows sorry and support for Target -- however if the same thing happened at Walmart there would be condemnations of Walmart galore.

We live in a very divided society.
Click to expand...

You really will do literally ANYTHING in an attempt to shift the narrative, won't you?
 
Jack Springer said:
[Quoted Post: Removed]
Click to expand...
I know...by the content of his character. :rotflmao:

Anthropologically speaking, dwellers of the Indian Subcontinent are regarded as Caucasian.
So what's your point? George Hamilton, internationally known actor :lol: has a complexion darker than Payush's. Does that make Hamilton a member of a minority (other than has-been shit actors)?
 
The GOVERNMENT did nothing to curtail his right of free speech. THAT is what the First Amendment is all about - making governmental control of free speech unConstitutional. Corporations are allowed to control speech in the workplace, or speech that may effect the work or the company in any way. If you work for a large defense contractor, try to openly organize a large protest about how that company's drones are killing civilians all over Asia and Africa. See how long you stay employed at that company.

The entire U. S. (and those States involved as well) government is absolutely silent on this controversy, as the First Amendment says. The farthest the government can go toward curtailing free speech would be for President Obama, John Boehner, Harry Reed, Gov. Pat Brown, Ted Cruz, or some other very high profile politician (or aspirant) to make a statement criticizing or condemning Robertson's statements. Such statement has no legal standing whatsoever, unless it were to cross over into slander or libel. Of course, as we know, there are some people on my short list would not have that view, but that's not the point.

It can safely be said that among all those condemning A&E's decision (as violation of "free speech" despite no government involvement), the percentage of Republicans (fully, or leaning toward) is guaranteed to be higher than Democrats. I THOUGHT THAT REPUBLICANS WERE SUPPOSED TO BE *AGAINST* TELLING COMPANIES HOW TO DO BUSINESS.

There may be laws in employment such as ENDA and OSHA guidelines, but there are no laws absolutely guaranteeing free speech without the employer being allowed to exercise the consequences.

chrisrobin said:
Dwight David Eisenhower - racist statement
John Fitzgerald Kennedy - racist statement
Lyndon Baines Johnson - racist statement
Richard Milhaus Nixon - racist statement
Gerald Rudolph Ford - racist statement
James Earl Carter - racist statement
Ronald Wilson Reagan - racist statement
William Jefferson Clinton - racist statement
George Walker Bush - racist statement

We should show more respect to our former presidents. [-X
Click to expand...
Uh...you forgot one. :p Four years between Reagan and Clinton...
 
frankfrank said:
The GOVERNMENT did nothing to curtail his right of free speech. THAT is what the First Amendment is all about - making governmental control of free speech unConstitutional. Corporations are allowed to control speech in the workplace, or speech that may effect the work or the company in any way. If you work for a large defense contractor, try to openly organize a large protest about how that company's drones are killing civilians all over Asia and Africa. See how long you stay employed at that company.

The entire U. S. (and those States involved as well) government is absolutely silent on this controversy, as the First Amendment says. The farthest the government can go toward curtailing free speech would be for President Obama, John Boehner, Harry Reed, Gov. Pat Brown, Ted Cruz, or some other very high profile politician (or aspirant) to make a statement criticizing or condemning Robertson's statements. Such statement has no legal standing whatsoever, unless it were to cross over into slander or libel. Of course, as we know, there are some people on my short list would not have that view, but that's not the point.

It can safely be said that among all those condemning A&E's decision (as violation of "free speech" despite no government involvement), the percentage of Republicans (fully, or leaning toward) is guaranteed to be higher than Democrats. I THOUGHT THAT REPUBLICANS WERE SUPPOSED TO BE *AGAINST* TELLING COMPANIES HOW TO DO BUSINESS.

There may be laws in employment such as ENDA and OSHA guidelines, but there are no laws absolutely guaranteeing free speech without the employer being allowed to exercise the consequences.


Uh...you forgot one. :p Four years between Reagan and Clinton...
Click to expand...
1. I forgot. :confused:
2. I have no idea. :confused:
3. I wasn't in the loop. :confused:
 
SNL's Seth Green got a laugh when he said, looking at Phil Robertson,
"Sometimes you can tell a book by it's cover" :badgrin:
 
chrisrobin said:
I don't know of any benevolent murderers
Click to expand...
Well, lots of people have been killed "for the greater good" (I'm thinking of witch burnings and the like), so I suppose in their own minds they were benevolent murderers.

sonny10305 said:
SNL's Seth Green got a laugh when he said, looking at Phil Robertson,
"Sometimes you can tell a book by it's cover"
Click to expand...

I think you mean Seth Meyers, not Seth Green. :)
 
Well, I started the Family feud this Christmas. A cousin posted a pix of one of the others saying something about loving Jesus. I commented. "False Christian". We'll see what happens.
 
So am I the only one SICK AND TIRED of people saying basically that 'who you are and/or what you do is wrong'...but hey, it's all ok because "I love you", and "i just love all people", and "that doesn't mean I hate you, I don't" .... ??????

I can't be the only one sick and tired of this WILLFULLY IGNORANT bullshit?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top