Phil Robertson Indicates Atheist Dad Would Be Fine With Rape Of Daughters
“I’ll make a bet with you,” Robertson said. “Two guys break into an atheist’s home. He has a little atheist wife and two little atheist daughters. Two guys break into his home and tie him up in a chair and gag him. And then they take his two daughters in front of him and rape both of them and then shoot them and they take his wife and then decapitate her head off in front of him. And then they can look at him and say, ‘Isn’t it great that I don’t have to worry about being judged? Isn’t it great that there’s nothing wrong with this? There’s no right or wrong, now is it dude?’”
Robertson kept going: “Then you take a sharp knife and take his manhood and hold it in front of him and say, ‘Wouldn’t it be something if this [sic] was something wrong with this? But you’re the one who says there is no God, there’s no right, there’s no wrong, so we’re just having fun. We’re sick in the head, have a nice day.’”
Copyright 2015 Liberaland
64 responses to Phil Robertson Indicates Atheist Dad Would Be Fine With Rape Of Daughters
« Previous 1 2Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
fahvel March 25th, 2015 at 05:32
please please please stop giving this piece of excrement any more space.
Suzanne McFly March 25th, 2015 at 11:43
How many times are we supposed to allow this cretin to show us how worthless and idiotic he is before we smarten up and learn to finally just ignore him?
Mr. Wizard March 25th, 2015 at 14:00
Is he Charlie Manson’s long lost brother? Looks like him and he’s totally insane too!
Dwendt44 March 26th, 2015 at 00:57
He could pass for an ISIS warrior.
lissany March 25th, 2015 at 16:47
On the contrary, atheists know what is right from wrong without having to be told by a deity under threat of eternal punishment or the promise of eternal reward.
Luciusleftfoot March 26th, 2015 at 10:46
Exactly! Doing the right thing should be done because it’s the right thing, not because you will be rewarded for doing it.
IamCaptain March 25th, 2015 at 16:54
Everyone asking what’s wrong with him missed his title “Conservative”
Debora Elizabeth Hill March 25th, 2015 at 18:26
Is it really possible to be as sick as this man, and not be in a padded room? I’m not sure if he’s taken too many drugs or he needs them…
Rhonda March 25th, 2015 at 19:11
I think the point of what Phil Robertson said, and one that obviously sailed past most people reading this, is that the natural outcome of a naturalistic/humanistic pov is that if anything goes, then that atheist father shouldn’t be surprised at the inhumane treatment of himself and his family. Without God, who determines what is right or wrong? Sure you can *say* something is wrong, but without a standard, who is the final arbiter of what is good, evil, right or wrong? That was his point. You don’t have to agree with it, but whether you like it or not, there *is* a holy God who is both loving and just. *He* is the one who determines right and wrong, and it has nothing to do with how “nice” someone is. He is holy, we are not. He is the Creator, we are the created. He wrote the Story, we are simply living in its pages.
James King March 25th, 2015 at 19:30
I understand that when I am cut, I bleed, and it hurts. And even though I have absolutely NO CLUE what others are actually feeling because I have no direct access to their nerves and spinal cord and brain, I believe that when they are cut, they are hurt, too.
Therefore, I choose to act in a certain way not because someone ordered me to do so, but because I don’t like it when I am hurt, and I suspect that others do not like it when they are hurt. So I do not knowingly hurt people. I would not knowingly kill or harm another person physically because such an action would make me feel upset, and I do not wish others to have that feeling.
That is empathy. It exists outside of religion. It requires no religion to understand or put into practice.
Now, there *are* mentally ill people who don’t have empathy for others, and those people definitely need something stronger than they are so they do not harm others, because they harm people for their own purposes without any regard to the other person’s feelings.
People like Phil seem to have empathy, but only for people who are within their own tribe. They have limited empathy. They would willingly harm or kill someone outside their own tribe, and might even be rewarded for doing so by the tribal members. That may not be mentally ill behavior, but it certainly is far more primitive and less advanced than someone who respects all human life.
Phil’s comments actually show me that he has less respect for human life than many atheists do, because Phil requires that you be a part of his tribe or you recognize his tribe’s superiority and are subservient to his tribe in order for him to respect you.
OldLefty March 25th, 2015 at 19:43
Phil’s comments actually show me that he has less respect for human life than many atheists do, because Phil requires that you be a part of his tribe or you recognize his tribe’s superiority and are subservient to his tribe in order for him to respect you.
____________
Agreed.
Also seems like he needs carrots and sticks.
OldLefty March 25th, 2015 at 19:42
I think the point of what Phil Robertson said, and one that obviously sailed past most people reading this, is that the natural outcome of a naturalistic/humanistic pov is that if anything goes, then that atheist father shouldn’t be surprised at
________
They say the same thing about religious people. People justify all sorts of evil with their religion.
“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”
― Steven Weinberg
CarolO March 25th, 2015 at 20:37
I am 72 years old and haven’t walked into a church in 50 years. I do not believe in killing, rape or committing any crime not because of God but because of ME. I have morals, a conscious and believe in being of good character. It took 1500 years to write the Bible and it was written by numerous people. WHO? No one even knows. But yet people beat their chests over what was written by unknown people. Phil Robertson should be telling people how he was nothing but a drunk, his wife left him and supported their kids and held a job while he lived in the bottom of a bottle for years
OldLefty March 25th, 2015 at 21:03
CarolO, forgive my repetition, but your post inspired me to do it..
“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”
― Steven Weinberg
CarolO March 26th, 2015 at 00:27
The problem with Robertson’s train of thought is that he believes HIS religion is the only way of thinking. He doesn’t consider the US is made up of many people with many religions……and some with no religion. But he would consider an Atheist anyone who doesn’t believe as he does.
tracey marie March 25th, 2015 at 23:12
you are as sick and twistest as that piece of shit from reality TV
Dwendt44 March 26th, 2015 at 01:06
Is this the same god that endorses slavery, exemplified polygamy, supported child abuse, supports rape marriage, and advocated killing those that disagree with your beliefs?
No thanks, I’ll pass.
Charles Wallace March 25th, 2015 at 20:39
Why does anyone listen to complete morons?
Foundryman March 25th, 2015 at 21:46
Someone should follow the money to see who is financing this Robertson clan. These people are sick an dangerous.
tracey marie March 25th, 2015 at 23:15
he owns a business and the discovery channel, they pay him and his klan to be rednecks
Luciusleftfoot March 26th, 2015 at 10:40
Duck Dynasty is on A&E, which is not part of Discovery Communications.
I know Discovery has their fair share of redneck reality tv, or “Poor-nography” as I call it, but let’s get the facts straight here.
tracey marie March 26th, 2015 at 11:44
My mistake, no need to be testy
Alexander Price March 26th, 2015 at 01:35
It deeply saddens me that there are people who say things like this. His analogy was over the top, graphic, and unnecessary. But while much of what he said was ludicrous – and if you can look past his violently bitter attitude – I believe he makes a good point on one level. If there is no God (or some other supernatural presence or being), there can’t be such a thing as objective morality. That is not to say, however, that Atheists have worse moral conduct than anyone who is religious. It’s just that to be Atheist and claim that you objectively know what is right or wrong is fallacious. Logically, morality cannot be subjective. if one person says “You are wrong, I am right.” and someone else counters that by saying it directly back to them, one can be right, both can be wrong, but they cannot logically both be right. If there is no supernatural presence governing the world, morality has to either be objective or non-existent. As far as the seemingly pervasive immoral actions of Christians are concerned, I would implore you to bear in mind that Christianity is the biggest religion in the world. Referring back to the fact that neither religious people nor Atheists have superior moral conduct, it makes perfect sense that you would see more Christians doing more harm than Atheists. But you also see more of them doing good. It’s all a numbers game. It’s just that the negative actions of Christians are highlighted more often. When Christians claim an identity of righteousness (which they aren’t supposed to do, but often do anyways), people watch them more closely and judge them more harshly. I worry when Christians say ignorant hateful things like this because they make the rest of us look bad and they end up creating division instead of unity. Thank you if you took the time to read this really long comment.