Quack

I almost conceded to the urge to write more aggressively, more accusatory about this whole Duck Dynasty business going on right now. I apparently can't resist the urge to say something about it, probably because it is freaking everywhere. I think, though, I'm going to take a slightly different approach.

I didn't watch it and don't intend too, but I have read several articles about it. The reason I don't intend too is simply because I don't watch that show or shows like it, not my cup of tea, and I'm not going to just for this. That being said, the issue now isn't really what he said it has turned into a freedom of speech debate, so that's what I'm going to talk about more.

Where do we draw the line, or does there even need to be one? Well, that's sorta tricksy isn't it? In theory, I would suggest no line what-so-ever, however in practice the line is decided by people.  What should vs. What is. Which one is "correct"?

I agree with the ideologists, there should be no line. Human beings should be able to do and say what they please. I am actually extremist in this view. I think people should be able to do anything, that isn't just limited to your voice and sexual/gender orientation, I include your political and social views. Everything in your lifestyle, what you wear, your education or lack of, if you want to do drugs, your job, financial situation, the words you chose to speak with, who you have sex with, "how" you have sex, hobbies.... whatever, really.

However, I actually completely agree with the realists. This isn't how the world works, it really doesn't seem how human beings are programmed. Laws and regulations are all made up, they are fiction. People know that but don't seem to "get it", *We* decided what is ok for people to do and say, public consensus decides how society turns, it doesn't have to be on a ballot to be that way. When society, I guess, "notices" something just feels morally wrong the tides of change are always inevitable. They may take a long time, many of our moral shifts we look back on while slapping ourselves in the face thinking "How the hell COULD we....?", but they happen.

Our society is on a gender/sexuality moral shift right now, and beware if you are on the opposing side. I promise you there will be a time when we look back and the LGBT discrimination and slap ourselves in the face. Right now, people need their face slapped for them, just like the beginning of any of these moral shifts.

You simply can't get away with being hard on someones gender, or sexual preference these days like you could before, people don't like it. As more of the community come out and more of the "normal" (that's a term I use loosely) world sees we are "normal" too we increase our influence exponentially That's not to say our job is done, and it's remarks like Mr. Duck's that remind us we aren't finished.

That's the problem, you remind us. You remind us of a time where views like that were wide spread, and it was dangerous to be LGBTQ (I don't think I know them all, sorry...) As it is, people are killed simply for not being straight-cis. Today, right now while you're reading this post of mine someone is being violently killed because they don't have sex like "you" do. Let that sink in a bit before you go on....

Do I really need to say "That's not ok."?

Freedom of speech is a very powerful thing, I guess we have too much of it so we forget. Like all powerful things it comes with responsibility. You have the power to say what you want, and what you say can influence things in ways unknown to you. You have the responsibility to deal with the consequences of your words, otherwise you are not ready to carry such power and society will be certain to let you know.

"Freedom of speech" doesn't equal "Freedom from responsibility."