Open letter to the defenders of Phil Robertson.

Phil Robertson defenders, which include your standard list of deeply Republican people who purport to stand for decency even while insisting gays and atheists are a threat to the well-being of the world (Huckabee, Jindal, Palin, etc.), piss me off to no end.  It’s not that I give a good god damn about the opinions of some yokel on TV, I don’t.  But the mobs of people defending him drive me nuts.  So here’s a brief open letter to all of them:

Dear defenders of Phil Robertson,

There are two main things about what you’re doing that fill me with rage.

1.  You don’t understand freedom of speech.  Freedom of speech means the government cannot intrude upon your speech or arrest you for saying things it doesn’t like.  Phil Robertson has enjoyed this protection.  Freedom of speech, however, has no bearing on what an employer chooses to do if their employees say stupid things in public.  If a chef at a restaurant went on national TV and said he has always dreamed of teabagging somebody’s food, guess what, he’ll be fired (but the government will do nothing).  If I were to go on national TV and say “It is my firm belief that every single Christian should literally be punched in the face for reciting bible verses to people who didn’t solicit them,” guess what, Patheos would be right to consider dropping me.  Freedom of speech does not guarantee you a spot on a reality show, a job in a kitchen, or a blog on a religious discussion website (and much, much more).

Waving around an American flag, paying lip service to the Constitution, and trumpeting your supposed patriotism are actually worth less for making one a patriot than actually understanding the Constitution, its history, and how it works.

2.  You’re all a bunch of liars.  You don’t give a single shit about “freedom of speech rights” (which is easily discernible by how poorly you understand how they operate).  You support Robertson because you like what he said and you agree with him.  Had Robertson been fired for saying “I’m attracted to men and would like to marry my boyfriend”, you hypocritical lot wouldn’t be making a peep about his freedom of speech being violated.  You’d be defending the network for standing by “traditional values”.  Acting as if you’re fighting for “rights” is a cheap way to make your endless pursuit of getting your way sound noble, and it makes your obvious dishonesty an even more powerful demonstration of how religion doesn’t do shit for making people more moral.

It seems that belief in Jesus, in this case, doesn’t instill a moral sense that makes a person indignant to dishonesty and ignorance, but rather more welcoming to them.  While this comes as no surprise to me, it should really bug people who think religion is a wonderful thing that makes people more noble – because all of you are making a tremendous case in the opposite direction.  If you think making life shitty for gay people is morally more important than being honest or understanding what you’re talking about before spouting off your opinions, you don’t get morality – and really getting Jesus isn’t a substitute for that.

Sincerely (very, very sincerely),

JT