18 December 2013

Has Phil Robertson Crossed the Line?

That sound you heard this morning was the heads of journalists exploding as they read the GQ interview with Phil Robertson right before they dashed off to their computers to tell America of the unbelievable, anti-gay remarks Robertson candidly made.  GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) was quick to respond with what you would expect - with a mixture of outrage, misconception of Christian belief and biblical ignorance.

A spokesman from GLAAD stated, "Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil's lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe...Phil's decision to push vile and extreme stereotypes is a stain on A&E and his sponsors who now need to examine their ties to someone with such public disdain for LGBT people and families."

In the full interview (which I have read) the GQ writer Drew Magary visited with the Robertsons in their home place in Monroe, LA.  He spent the day in Phil's home and out riding in an ATV around the property while they talked.  Magary was perplexed by Phil and his family.  He was taken back by how much Phil genuinely wanted to talk about Jesus and how real his religion was to him.  He was also astonished at his lack of political correctness on the topic of homosexuality.  But this foul-mouthed (or writing) journalist did have this to say about Phil: "He is welcoming and gracious.  He is a man who preaches the gospel of the outdoors and, to my great envy, practices what he preaches."

Magary easily got Phil to reveal his thoughts on homosexuality.  I think one could question Phil's judgment is the overly earthy language he used to make his point, but that just seems to be who he is.  He puts things in such a way that it makes you listen, whether you're aghast or appreciative.

Here is the main quotes that are causing spastic fits among gay activists:

"It seems like, to me, a vagina -as a man- would be more desirable than a man's anus.  That's just me. I'm thinking: There's more there! She's got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes!  You know what I'm saying? But hey, sin: It's not logical, my man.  It's just not logical."

Or how about this one?

"Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there.  Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men...Don't be deceived.  Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers - they won't inherit the kingdom of God.  Don't deceive yourself. It's not right."

To give Magary some credit on the interview, he did also include this quote: "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 homosexual, drunks, terrorists.  We let God sort 'em out later, you see what I'm saying?"

Well, with ammunition like this for GLAAD and others to fire out to the LGBT community, the Robertson family and A&E are going to have to decide to retract and apologize or resist and ignore. 

While GLAAD will describe Phil as using "vile stereotypes" to describe the LGBT community, I find it hard to argue with the logistics of gay sex Phil so vividly reminded us of.  It just doesn't sound so great when he puts it so bluntly. 

So, has Phil Robertson finally crossed the line?  I got to be honest, I reacted with a bit of a cringe on reading the article in GQ, thinking to myself something like, "Really Phil, did you have to go there and say that? Couldn't you have made your point a little more diplomatically?"  However, as a Bible believing Christian, it's impossible to refute the substance of his critique of homosexuality.  As I have stated before, Bible believing Christians are constrained to condemn homosexual behavior because God's Word does.  It's really pretty simple from a Bible believing Christian's point of view.  It's just not popular among non-Christians and among so many self-proclaimed cultural Christians.  Actually, it's down right offensive to the homosexual community and those who support it.

We'll see where this goes for the Robertsons.  My guess is Phil doesn't give a squirrel's tail what anyone thinks or if A&E even cancels the show.  It should be obvious to all that this backwoods, red state, duck hunting, southern Christian really believes what the Bible teaches about homosexuality and if asked a direct question will give you a straight answer. 

It will be interesting if he is afforded the same tolerance to hold his beliefs publicly that those are vilifying him desire for themselves.  Probably not.        


  1. Ha. Drew Magary had an agenda. I don't know why Phil wanted to interview with him anyway. He us a foul mouthed icon of hatred and his condescending comments peppered after every comment throughout his articles show it. If one were to read the comment that GLAAD has latched on to, you can easily see that beastiality is a part of a list, not a description of "himosexual". GLAAD needs a lesson in elementary English composition. They even love to freak on Sarah Palin for the slavery allegory. I think Drew Magary asked questions to taunt, and to convert others who may think like Phil to his way of thinking through the backlash he knew would come. He rides off scott free and unnoticed as the villain while the US is in an uproar.


The Two Sides of a Church's Reputation

There are at least two things that are true about reputations.  First, a good reputation is a source of blessing and favor.  Second, a bad...

More Recent Popular Posts