Friday, December 20, 2013
Gay rights groups defend Duck Dynasty firing with fractured logic
The firing of Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty isn't about free speech, says Time Magazine's James Poniewozik. So I guess that means that the firing of gays isn't about discrimination either, right?
The arguments now being deployed by gay rights groups to defend A&E's treatment of a Duck Dynasty star are completely at odds with their stated positions about how everyone else should be required to treat them.
Here is the statement of a representative of GLAD,a gay rights group, on the Megan Kelly' show on Fox News last night in defense of the firing of Robertson: "We all have to answer to our employers."
That is precisely the exact and utter opposite of their position on the treatment of gays themselves. In other words, their position is that it's absolutely unacceptable to fire someone (this is the whole point of gay rights laws) because they engage in homosexual behavior, but it's perfectly fine (and in fact laudable) to fire someone because he doesn't agree with the lifestyle gays lead.
If you're gay, no one can fire you for it. But if you disagree with gays, not only can they fire you for it, but they should.
In case you haven't read 1984 lately—or if you have just forgotten your Orwellian terminology, this is called "Doublethink": the holding of two mutually exclusive thoughts in your mind at the very same time.