Gay Kid in Louisiana Says ‘Duck Dynasty’ Star Made Him Feel ‘Unsafe’

Here is the nonsense that the media creates with its untrue “reporting” of the “news.” A gay teen in Louisiana now claims that because of Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson, he has been made to feel “unsafe” living as a gay person in Louisiana.

This from a “closeted” gay student in West Monroe, Louisiana who wrote an essay saying how unsafe he feels because of what Robertson said about gays.

After an interview with Robertson went viral, the old media establishment went wild calling his comments “hate speech,” and “anti-gay” and ramping up pressure on the A&E cable network to fire him from his reality show. All this unfair reporting filled with lies impacted this student in a negative way–as one might expect.

The unnamed student wrote his essay, titled “I Can’t Be Gay in Northeast Louisiana,” and had it posted on a blog written by Robert Mann, a columnist for the Times-Picuyne.

The teen absurdly claimed that Robertson’s comments was encouraging “gay bashing.”

The teen went on to say that Robertson “encouraged–hopefully unintentionally–a two-week-long “fag bashing” in Monroe and around the world. He made me feel unsafe in my own home. I can’t count how many times I heard ‘faggot’ over the Christmas visit home.”

This poor, deluded kid then hyperbolically said, “Phil Robertson threatened my life because I had the audacity to be who I am.”

This is, of course, all complete nonsense.

Phil Robertson did none of what this wild-eyed homosexual student accused him of doing. Robertson encouraged no “gay bashing,” he did not personally pass judgment on anyone, nor did he threaten anyone.

All this is a result of the lies the media pushed about Robertson’s comments and people’s reactions to those lie-filled reports.

When the media said that Robertson “compared” homosexuality to terrorism and bestiality, well that was a lie. All Robertson did was paraphrase a list of sins as written in the Bible. A list of things is not a “comparison,” not a “likening,” not saying they are “akin” to each other, and is not saying they are necessarily the same.

A list is just that; a list. If you make a list of crimes, for instance, both murder and petty theft will be on the same list. They are both crimes, of course, but no one would say that murder is “the same” as petty theft.

I know I’ve written this here before but it must be repeated a million times to break through the liberal media’s lies.

MSNBC Ridicules Mitt Romney for Having a Black Grandso
Five ObamaCare bombs waiting to explode
  • http://www.facebook.com/chuck.anziulewicz PolishBear

    And THIS is the sort of thing that worries me most.

    I’m 54 years old, I’ve never watched a single episode of “Duck Dynasty,” I prefer science programming to dopey “reality shows.” Phil Robertson’s pronouncements about Gay people say more about his personal discomforts and prejudices than they do about my value as a human being.

    But I know the show is popular, and I’m sure there are plenty of kids who are fans. Some of those kids are going to come to grips with being Gay later in life, and those are the kids I worry about most. It’s bad enough that Gay youth get rejected by their own families, get bullied in school, and have a greater risk for suicide. We don’t need TV personalities like Phil Robertson telling them they’re going to Hell.

    • warnertoddhuston

      You’re going to hell for just being stupid enough to yap about an incident you never actually looked into.

    • jim_m

      If you had bothered to look into this issue you would have found more than one statement from Robertson that he does not judge people’s salvation. There is a difference between saying that he disapproves of a lifestyle and thinks it is sin, and condemning people to hell.

      I thought liberals were supposed to be good at nuance but every time it comes up they seem to totally fail to grasp it.

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      Why thank you for coming out of hibernation to lecture us on the matter.

      • jim_m

        He’s Polish, he thought it was Spring.

    • http://www.harlemghost.blogspot.com/ HarlemGhost

      your “value as a human being” ? WTF is that ? apparently you are an ignorant human being who has reading comprehension problems … Phil did not judge gays … that is for God in Phil’s religion and he abides by that … he loves the sinner as well …

      your value as a human being ? Good lord … what science programming are you a fan of … CSI Miami or CSI NY ?

    • Commander_Chico

      C’mon, “gay” is not a title or a proper noun, so it should not be capitalized.

    • LiberalNightmare

      Phil Robertson didn’t say that anyone was going to hell.

      He said that he loved everyone, and would let God worry about the rest. Phil’s position is consistent with the Pope’s position.

    • ackwired

      Don’t worry. You will never find any gay bashing on this site.

      • jim_m

        Only when you conflate disagreement and disapproval of their lifestyle with bashing. Like the rest of the gay community you are demanding that everyone approve of their lifestyle and you want to silence anyone who thinks otherwise.

        You will find lots of bashing of people who want to control what other people think.

        • Brucehenry

          Yes wanting to live outside the closet = “demanding that everyone approve of their lifestyle.”

          • jim_m

            My response was to Ackwired, who suggested that there were people here that were bashing gays. And while you will find plenty here that disapprove of that lifestyle choice you don’t find people here making anti gay slurs.

            But apparently, you also believe that disagreeing with that lifestyle choice is somehow making it impossible for gays to “come out”. So yes, you are saying that everyone must approve of the gay lifestyle in order for people to be able to live that lifestyle.

          • Brucehenry

            It’d be fine with me if everyone ignored the “gay lifestyle.” I don’t think anyone should “approve of” or “disapprove of” another person’s lifestyle as long as that lifestyle isn’t hurting anyone else.

            For instance I disapprove and disagree with the habit of Chick-fil-a employees and other Christians of wishing everyone they meet a “blessed day.” I don’t need their blessing and don’t wish to be reminded of their in-your-face piety all the time. It gets on my nerves. But I don’t demand they stop doing it, I just say thanks and go about my day. I don’t demand they keep their “Christian lifestyle” out of my view.

            I don’t like the smell of Indian cooking, and frequently, in my work, visit apartment complexes where the smell of Indian cooking is pervasive. I don’t demand they only cook when and where I can’t smell it. They are free, here in America, to practice their Indian lifestyle openly.

            I don’t like rap music but it doesn’t bother me, much, that young black (and white) kids frequently play it in their cars so loudly that I can’t avoid it. I don’t approve of lots of the lyrics but I don’t demand that it be made so that I never have to hear them. If I have to endure 45 seconds of gangsta rap at a stoplight it ain’t gonna kill me, so, even though I don’t “approve or agree” with the loud playing of obnoxious music by wannabe rappers, they are free to practice their hiphop lifestyle without my approval or agreement.

            Similarly, if a kid wants to go to school and wear fabulous fashions or invite his boyfriend to the prom, it is none of my business or yours. If it irks you, just ignore it, as I ignore the things about others that irk me.

          • jim_m

            The sad thing is that there are many who believe that they have a right to not be offended and that if they offend that their own rights are being suppressed.

            This is what we see with Phil Robertson. He offended gays and they believe that he must go through some thought remediation.Christians and conservatives do not have a right to express their beliefs because gays will be offended, so anyone expressing those beliefs will be punished by the left.

            Additionally, gays believe that they should be able to rub their offensive lifestyle in everyone’s face and never encounter any push back. They expect, and the left backs them up, that everyone must accept and approve of how they live.

            Freedom is only a one way street with the left. They are free and the rest of the world is oppressed.

          • Brucehenry

            Who is “rubbing their offensive lifestyle in everyone’s face”? How is this rubbing being accomplished?

            Is it by demanding that they not be beat up? Or by demanding that they be allowed to marry and have families like everyone else? Or maybe it’s just plain being visible that’s so off-putting to you and the other “Christians” who deem themselves fit to approve or disapprove of another’s life?

            Revealing that you think gay people have an “offensive” lifestyle. If people live as gay individuals how is that “offensive?”

          • jim_m

            It’s by demanding that they receive wedding services from people who have religious objections. It is relatively obvious that people with objections are sought out by certain gays and targeted for lawsuits. This is an attack on religious freedom. No one is stopping them from marrying where it is legal.

            And no matter what you do they will not have families “like everyone else”.

          • Brucehenry

            Just because a couple of activists file a lawsuit against a photographer doesn’t mean the entire gay community is rubbing anything in everyone else’s face.

            You even implicitly admit it by your use of the phrase “certain gays.”

            Just as Rev Jackson’s specious lawsuits and boycott threats are not the fault of the black community as a whole or an attempt by that black community to rub their blackity blackness in the face of white people, so this couple of lawsuits here and there are not the Voice Of the Gay Community demanding that you hold your face still so they can rub their Gay Gayness in it.

            To say that “no one is stopping them from marrying where it is legal” is hilarious, and ignores the fact that bigots and “Christians” have joined forces to TRY AS HARD AS THEY CAN to prevent its legality for years and years. In NC they combined to enshrine their “disapproval and disagreement” in our state constitution. How’s that for “rubbing someone’s face” in a lifestyle they’re not comfortable with? All of us, gay and straight, must live according to a certain interpretation of Biblical precepts that we may not accept as binding, and that’s fine, huh?

          • jim_m

            Certain gays, meaning that the law suits were not filed by activist organizations not that the feeling is not broadly shared within the gay community. I believe those actions are backed by the gay community since there is no call for them to stop, just as Jackson’s shakedowns are supported by the black community.

            Let me be frank. If the gay community wants to be treated like normal people they can stop the gay rights parades with people acting like perverts in public.

            And I agree that there should not be same sex marriage. It could ave been accomplished with civil unions but the fact is that the gay community was less interested in equality as they were in desecrating a Christian religious moral tenet.

          • Brucehenry

            Ah, the butthurt!

            “People acting like perverts” in gay pride parades do so to make a point, genius. If gay people were accepted as normal the gay pride parades, where people “act like perverts” and offend you (that’s so sad!) would stop, as there would be no need.

            Marriage is a civil institution in this country as well as a religious one, as has been explained to willfully ignorant folks time and time again. No one is asking any church to bless any union it doesn’t wish to bless, but the civil benefits of legal “marriage” should not be denied because of sexual orientation. No one is trying to desecrate anything, just asking for equal legal rights.

            Of course, we’re living in Jim’s world, where conservative Christian people DO have a right to not be offended and to be protected by law from offense, while gay people DON’T have that right.

          • jim_m

            I would say that their tactics re the parades are counter productive and always have been.

            I have many times asserted my support for giving gay people the same civil rights as married people.

            I have also said that gays have the right to offend me, they just don’t have the right to do so and not hear about it. But that is what they and the left want. They want to offend and make it illegal to express your opinion.

          • Brucehenry

            Many protests employ tactics that some consider counter-productive. The march on Selma was called counter-productive in 1965 by people we would today call concern trolls. The antiwar marches in the Vietnam era employed what were called counterproductive tactics yet arguably hastened the end of the war.

            “Civil unions,” while better than nothing, will never be a substitute for marriage unless every marriage, gay and straight, is required to be a civil union with a church blessing made legally optional, as in Europe.

            And for the most part, I think gays would agree with your assertion that if one offends one is not shielded from hearing about it or suffering the consequences of it. As Maher did, as Robertson (briefly) did, as Baldwin and Bashir did, and as Jimmy the Greek did back in the day.

          • deltamary

            Bruce–Aren’t you special…Thanks for sharing. Want to hear my essay now?

          • Brucehenry

            Sure everybody’s welcome as far as I’m concerned.

          • Brucehenry

            Wasn’t it just last week that one of the commenters here was referred to as a friend of the “bunghole rangers” by one of the employees of this blog? And in the same thread gay activists were referred to as “halfwitted gays” by a writer here?

          • jim_m

            I have no recollection of that. It wasn’t me and I did not read anything like that.

          • Brucehenry

            Well, they do.

          • Brucehenry

            Also it’s kinda funny that in the same comment you state how sad it is that some people feel they have a right not to be offended and then several sentences later, gripe about having an “offensive lifestyle” rubbed in your face. Which is it?

          • jim_m

            They have the right to offend me. They don’t have the right to demand to be treated like normal people when they are doing some of the things that they do. And that is the problem. Gays want to be treated as normal but they also want to be able to flaunt their deviant sexual fetishes in public. Straight people don’t generally do that and those that do are not considered normal either.

            Go ahead and be offensive. Just don’t ask me to not declare openly that you are a pervert.

          • Brucehenry

            Like “normal people,” huh? “Deviant sexual fetishes,” huh?

            Nah, no gay bashing here!

          • jim_m

            I spoke of specific people under specific circumstances and not about all gays. I also expressed the opinion that straight people doing the same things were held to the same standard.

            So what is your complaint? That I am treating gays the same as heterosexuals and not elevating them on a pedestal. Like I said, you want special rights for gays and something less for everyone else. You just admitted that much here.

            You just admitted that it is gay bashing to treat homosexuals the same as straight people, that gays should have special rights to not be criticized like straights, that gays should have a right to not be offended because to treat them as equals means that you are discriminating against them.

          • Brucehenry

            Pretty broad definition of “specific people.” “Specific people” usually have names. Which “specific people” are we talking about?

            Do you mean “gays want[ing] to be treated as normal people”? Is that, specifically, who you mean? Specifically?

          • Brucehenry

            I admitted no such thing and you pulled that out of your ass, as usual.

          • louis_wheeler

            Bruce, Homosexual activists want their lifestyle to be considered normal, so that they can achieve social acceptance. This cannot be so because there are too few of them. A very through US government study says that exclusive homosexuals comprise between 1 and 2 percent of the population. No group that small can set the rules for the other 98%.

            The problem is that the Left covers for them and says that homosexuals have special privileges because of their sexual practices.

            It is these special privileges which we Conservatives deny. We disagree that their speech trumps our speech. And that any disagreement with homosexual practices equals hate speech, so that they have social permission to be rude.

            We can be utterly indifferent to homosexuals until they interfere in our beliefs and practices. That is, unless they thrust themselves into our faces. Homosexual activists intentionally interfere with our traditions, beliefs and faiths. They brook no discussion. This is not about individual (civil) rights, but the rights of a privileged class.

            Phil Robertson did not defame homosexuals. He said that their sexual practices were sinful and would not get them into the Kingdom of Heaven. Who knew that the Homosexuals would want admittance? Especially, when the price of admission is to give up their sins. Phil was no hypocrite; he had to give up being a drunkard.

            This is not about Phil Robertson accepting the homosexuals, but whether God will. If the Bible is correct, then they are forever ourside the pale, until they change their ways. Tough.

          • Brucehenry

            Dude, this myth that you tell yourselves about gay people “asking for special privileges” is just that — a myth. Gay people are only asking that they not be discriminated against, period.

            I don’t want a long discussion about a two day old thread, but the butthurt bullshit about gays “interfering in our beliefs and practices”??

            Please.

            If gay people marry it won’t “interfere in your beliefs or practices.” If your church doesn’t sanction gay marriage now it won’t be forced to in the future. Yeah some florists and photographers might have to deal with a nuisance lawsuit if they wanna turn down gay business. Boo hoo.

            “They brook no discussion.” Hilarious. What are we having right now, genius? On my local Time Warner Cable system there are 30 religious channels, and at least half of those regularly wail about the ominous Gay Agenda and yada yada about 23 out of every 24 hours (that’s hyperbole, before you get silly.)

            Phil Robertson’s comments were indeed quite mild, in my opinion. I’ve heard worse from Rick Warren and a lot worse from Swaggart, Falwell, et al. But A&E is a privately owned business and can do as they wish, Just as the Food Network did with Deen, as ABC did with Maher, and as MSNBC did with Baldwin and Bashir. And nobody said he was a hypocrite; he’s the same lucky dumbass redneck Biblebeater he’s always been.

            If you want to feel smug because gay people aren’t going to your imaginary paradise more power to ya, Mr DayLateAndaDollarShort.

          • louis_wheeler

            Of course, you are asking for special privileges. You are not asking for rights as an individual, but for rights as a member of a group. You don’t try to persuade anyone. You use personal attacks against anyone who disagrees; you intimidate. No long standing tradition is proof against your desires. You don’t care what you wreck.

            Marriage is a religious sacrament which was taken over by state governments in the 1830s to prevent inter-racial marriages. A marriage license was always a state privilege; they could set the terms of issuing them. Hence, there is no civil right for one. Absent a civil right, there is no discrimination. Personally, I don’t care. Unless a union is blessed by God, it isn’t a marriage.
            A piece of paper does not make one.

            Go live in sin if you want; no one will care. You will not be a blip on our horizon. You ignore us and we will return the favor. If you want the benefits of marriage then ask for them as an individual.

            As the Declaration of Independence says, Civil Rights are a grant from God. What if God disagrees with Gay Marriage? Will a preacher, who agrees with the Bible, marry you? If he doesn’t, will you sue him in court? That is not a discussion.

            Do equal rights trump religious rights? The 14th amendment Is very over extended. It has moved a long way from protecting the rights of former slaves. Is it superior to the 1st amendment?

            This is all part of the Left’s war against American culture, which is still in process. GLAAD got their noses bashed in for sticking them where they didn’t belong: another person’s religious beliefs. GLAAD has been getting away with intimidating Hollywood, TV and celebrities for decades. Until now.

            A & E is a private concern. They can suspend Phil Robertson if they want. The Duck Dynasty crew can threaten to move elsewhere. Facing that choice and a possible loss of money, A & E recanted. Did you watch ever Duck Dynasty? I doubt it. Then, why do you care what they do?

            No one promised you that you wouldn’t be offended by other people’s beliefs. That is guaranteed by living in a diverse Society. Why don’t you just watch the non-religious cable channels? I avoid a lot of my cable channels. I’m not offended by them. They are just errors.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            A quibble, it’s more of a demand for approval vice settling for tolerance.

          • louis_wheeler

            Approval is a private opinion. Who are you to make demands?

            If the homosexuals asked for their rights as individuals, then they would get tolerance. We would politely ignore each other.

            Instead, they stomp all over other people’s beliefs. They demand that other people change.

            If they act so rude, why should we grant them anything? The homosexuals are not winning hearts and minds by their actions. They are provoking reaction. We vastly out number them.

      • jim_m

        Only when you conflate disagreement and disapproval of their lifestyle with bashing. Like the rest of the gay community you are demanding that everyone approve of their lifestyle and you want to silence anyone who thinks otherwise.

        You will find lots of bashing of people who want to control what other people think.

    • ackwired

      Don’t worry. You will never find any gay bashing on this site.

    • MRASoldier

      what worries me the most is the Gaystapo using THE FORCE OF GOVERNMENT to FORCE people to accept the gay lifestyle. I don’t care for gays, but out of sight out of mind..if i saw a gay person I wouldn’t flip out i’d just avoid it..HOWEVER gays want to consider avoidance(freedom of association) a “hate crime”. They have a Christian Photographer being FORCED to take pictures of a gay wedding..that is crazy..Government should not be allowed to coerce people into this..what next if I refuse to shop at a gay owned business the government will force me??

      • louis_wheeler

        This issue with Phil Robertson was never about the homosexuals, because they are too small in numbers to matter. The Homosexuals are one of the Left’s stalking horses. They were used to undercut traditional American values.

        The Left are caught in a bind. It was self evident to the communists by the 20s that their aims had failed. Everything which Marx predicted was wrong; working class people were prospering under Capitalism. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union was a tyranny under Stalin and the Russian people starved.

        The Left weren’t ready to say that Marx was wrong and that the capitalists were right. They followed Antonio Gramsci’s advise and crowded into the areas in society where propaganda could work: Education, the Mass Media and Hollywood.

        Sixty years later, they have over done Leftist memes. Their movies and TV shows are too boring to make money. Along comes a conservative push back and the Left are very afraid. Duck Dynasty is religious and fun: it promotes rural social values.

        The Left have been looking for years to find a way to undercut Duck Dynasty. The problem was that as long as the show was making money, it was hard to attack.

        It looked as though Phil had fallen into the Left’s trap, but he hadn’t. Neither the Robertson family nor their viewers would be cowed into submission. Duck Dynasty would just move; there were plenty of bidders. The controversy added viewers who had never heard of the show.

        A & E saw that they might be losing a cash cow, so they recanted. This will encourage more defiance by Conservatives in TV. Non Leftist or even Anti-Leftist memes can be fielded now. If they make money, the Left have lost.

    • MRASoldier

      what worries me the most is the Gaystapo using THE FORCE OF GOVERNMENT to FORCE people to accept the gay lifestyle. I don’t care for gays, but out of sight out of mind..if i saw a gay person I wouldn’t flip out i’d just avoid it..HOWEVER gays want to consider avoidance(freedom of association) a “hate crime”. They have a Christian Photographer being FORCED to take pictures of a gay wedding..that is crazy..Government should not be allowed to coerce people into this..what next if I refuse to shop at a gay owned business the government will force me??

  • Commander_Chico

    Like Daffyd Thomas.

  • http://foxmuldar-conservative-thinker.blogspot.com/ Foxmuldar

    What a crock, all this idiot had to do was turn on his favorite gay media station and all they did was bash Robertson. Maybe if the kid tried not to push his gay feeling upon his fellow classmates then perhaps he wouldn’t feel so threathened. Go back in the closet you loser if you feel so threathened. You can expect other times when your gay lifestyle will come in question. Just stay out of Muslim countries. There you can expect to have your life threathened if you openly show your gayness.

  • jim_m

    I invite the little jerk to go to Iran or Egypt or any number of muslim nations who will gladly throw him in prison or execute him for professing his homosexual lifestyle.

    If he’s afraid of a few words I suggest he buck up and get a grip. There are people out there who will use much more than just words to show their disapproval. But then I guess that he feels safer attacking people who use only words rather than people who will hang him.

  • http://www.harlemghost.blogspot.com/ HarlemGhost

    there is a good chance that “gay student” isn’t gay nor is he a student but some sort of political activist …

  • Michael Lang

    PolishBear, I think you should be more concerned about your own mental health.

  • Michael Lang

    PolishBear, I think you should be more concerned about your own mental health.

  • http://www.traveLightgame.com/ ljcarolyne

    Oh brother, give us a break. Drama, Drama.

  • http://www.traveLightgame.com/ ljcarolyne

    Oh brother, give us a break. Drama, Drama.

  • http://www.outsidethebeltway.com rodney dill

    The Christophobic gay kid is making me feel unsafe as his statement is obviously encouraging Christian bashing.

  • Obamaracist

    Whiny little bitch

  • Obamaracist

    So wait he feels unsafe because someone thinks putting his thingy in a vagina is preferable to putting it in a man’s dark spot. WOW! That kid needs to be institutionalized and pronto, he will be the next Adam Lanza for sure

  • 914

    So? Sounds like a dirty guilty conscience to me.

  • Douglas H. Book

    Once again, the most revealing thing about the Robertson story is the unwillingness of “inclusive, broad-minded” leftists to permit the existence of any opinions which disagree with their own. Nope. No hypocrites on the left.

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE