Duck Dynasty Flap Proves A Lot

And here I thought reality TV had no redeeming value. How wrong I was.

Phil Robertson, star of the A&E hit show Duck Dynasty, expressed a belief on his own time that homosexuals cannot inherit the kingdom of God. A&E retaliated by announcing that it was canceling his contract, and the "tolerant" cohort rushed to A&E's defense by emphasizing that the First Amendment bars only governmental speech restrictions, not the choices of a private business.

The glee with which these people defend private business is refreshing, though a tad insincere. After all, these are the same "tolerant" people who seek to force bakeries to bake cakes against their will (see my previous post); who seek to punish Chick-Fil-A for voicing opposition to same-sex marriage; who seek to eradicate the Boy Scouts for exercising freedom of association; or who champion the Byzantine patchwork of federal laws and regulations forcing businesses to hire particular demographics. The truth of the matter is that the "tolerant" embrace freedom only when convenient; the moment anyone dares contradict their dogma, all bets are off.

Imagine for a moment that a television network canned someone for advocating rather than opposing homosexuality. I wonder if you can. Now imagine the "tolerant" cohort rushing to the defense of such a network. I know you can't.

A trite pronouncement that A&E is free to disassociate itself from Phil Robertson carries no weight, not when voiced by people who attack freedom in every other context. You can sponge off the complacence of middle America for only so long before middle America fights back. Middle America indeed is fighting back, so much so that A&E retreated and allowed Robertson to return. I would have respected A&E if it had stuck to its guns; at least this would have shown an adherence to principle (however skewed). But like so many others today, A&E is an amoral coward that values only money. With the economic collapse continuing apace, you'll have to hitch your wagons to something more meaningful.       

EDIT:

GLAAD and many others on the left are enraged that A&E changed its mind by allowing Phil Robertson to continue the show. Strange how quickly these people abandoned their newfound love of corporate autonomy.

Also, I can't help but notice that most of the people excoriating Phil Robertson reject the very notion of God. If what he's talking about is fantasy and nonsense, where's the harm? I thought that was the modern, crimped metric of morality -- tangible harm. A same-sex marriage is "harmless," so surely the ramblings of a redneck are "harmless" as well, right?

Slavery Is Freedom

Reading an article such as this removes any doubts whether we inhabit Orwellian times. Surely we do, for in the name of "freedom" a business is being forced to bake cakes for certain people against its will, and one of the lead proponents of this slavery is an organization that claims to protect civil liberties. All variants of leftism -- whether feminism, race hustling, gay-rights agitation, or otherwise -- rely on force, and they pervert language to trick themselves into believing that they are pursuing noble objectives. But there is nothing noble about forcing people to associate with you. That is the behavior of self-hating scum, not proud doers and achievers. 

A healthy person would sense a business opportunity to bake cakes for only a homosexual clientele, and a healthy society would allow such a person to do so while also allowing other people to bake only for heterosexuals if they wish. But tyranny is so much less demanding than freedom, and it offers far more opportunities to seize the limelight while claiming the sacred mantle of victimhood on the courthouse steps.