I think A&E is hypocritical.......I think another network will pick the show up. He was asked questions and was expressing his views and beliefs about what the scriptures say regarding various sins and human condition....and this was to a magazine not on the show. People wanna slam Christians or religious people for their beliefs...Islam and the Koran also speak out against homosexuality yet we don't hear the media or gay rights activist saying anything about this
Manny
PS if people don't like the show change the channel LOL 😉
Originally posted by menace71I believe Bashir officially resigned.
Also that Bashir dude got fired after a long delay and what he said was or can be considered vulgar. The US Media both ways is hypocritical
Manny
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/danieldoherty/2013/12/04/martin-bashir-resigns-n1757620
Originally posted by menace71Do you think their decision to fire him was
Man these stations will show people in all kinds of ways doing all kinds of vice yet this guy did not even say what he said on the show on A&E it was an interview with GQ magazine. It's just retarded.
Manny
morally wrong,
or economically wrong,
or constitutionally wrong?
(I'm trying to help you put together an argument here!)
Yeah I guess it's just a emotional response 🙂 Ahhh I guess morally wrong....and I think it will bite A&E ultimately in the arse so to speak. Ratings will suffer a bit for it also pretty popular show which I guess would have some type of economic impact but people have short memories and in a few weeks it will be mostly forgotten. I don't think gay people should care what the guy believes all they have to do is change the channel. Apparently He drank and did drugs and all of those things in his day but he was saying how his life changed for the better because of his belief in God. I don't think it's that big of a deal. I think it's a knee jerk reaction by A&E to fire the guy and something tells me that he probably does not care either way.
Manny
Originally posted by galveston75You and Robbie seem to be under the impression that I am interested in your views on blood transfusions.
*******************************************************
I am not. I know them and do not need you to explain them to me again.
The question was what would you (hypothetically) do if someone in your employment as the anchor of a (hypothetical) JWTV channel started to preach about the evils of blood transfusions.
Would you (hypothetically) support his/her right to freedom of speech and take no action and allow him/her to continue to preach this message?
I just want to know where you stand. Are you for 'free speech' or just for free speech when it is something you agree with?
You haven't answered this question yet, and it is absolutely to the heart of the OP as you stated it.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by galveston75"This country is supposed to be one that anyone can practise this "freedom of speach" with their own views of life but when they do it, they are penalized."
*************************************************
you have answered the question in the above statement . its clear that you think a presenter on jwtv should be able to say blood transfusions are murder because, as stated above, people should not be penalized for their views on life. you believe in freedom of speech first.
if im incorrect feel free to explain why it is not okay to sack the tv presenter in the first example and fine in the second?