Bud Wright: Last-minute gifts for ‘Duck Dynasty’ star, ‘Affluenza’ judge

By Bud Wright

The Daily Advance

11 Comments | Leave a Comment

John Lennon once wrote a song that began with the line: “So this is Christmas.” My thoughts exactly. I don’t know how something so remorselessly publicized, promoted and hysterically heralded can sneak up on me, but danged if it hasn’t. As usual, I’ve been slack about my shopping obligations. I’m generally a last-minute type of guy. My family is used to receiving gifts that can be purchased at a gas-n-go late on Christmas Eve. It does my little heart good to see their eyes light up when they open up their camouflage-hued stockings full of Slim Jims, Blazin’ Jalapeno-flavored Doritos and cardboard air fresheners.

Dear Reader,
This content is only available to subscribers of The Daily Advance print and/or e-edition. If you are a current subscriber and have established a user name and password, you can log in. If you have not established your user name and passwords, click here to set up your information.
To become a subscriber, click here.


Ahm, yes it is

A free speech issue Mr Wright. The same free speech rights so enjoyed by those promoting a certain lifestyle belong to those who are standing up and speaking out agenst it. Freedom of speech is just that--freedom of speech-it is all year round-every day-24/7 for each and every American. We hear many opinions in the DA each and every day are we gonna pull out all of them just because someone does not agree with another opinion? I do not think so. Oh and by the way I am sure Mr Robertson knows good and well his rights under the US Constitution.

Miss Melanie

Have you ever read Romans 1 or 1 Corinthians 6:9-11? Would that be considered hate speech by today's liberal standards?

Actually, I have

I've read quite a lot of the Bible over my 52 years. And quite a bit of it is hate-filled -- especially in the Old Testament. Paul despised women. I do think his stance on women was hate-filled. I do NOT believe that Jesus shared that view. For better or worse, the Bible as it exists today was written and assembled by men. And much was excluded. I do NOT accept a literal interpretation of the Bible, especially given what was excluded. I encourage you to read some of the excluded Gospels and then contemplate on WHY they were excluded.

At least your critique of the Duck Commander

is consistent with your theological views. Thank you for the honest response. It must also then be your opinion that the writer of the Pauline epistles is lying when he says his teachings come directly from Christ. I also assume you dismiss his account of the event on the Damascus road, and that you believe 2 Timothy 3:16.17 to be categorically false. Would you happen to know anything about the concept and ancient custom of the blood covenant? People think that Jesus was exclusively loving and forgiving, however nobody in the Bible spoke more about hell and judgment than He did. He defined sin and forgave it but never excused it. Some of His harshest words concerning judgment are found in the book of Revelation. Liberals love to use the phrase "Judge not, lest ye be judged" taking it completely out of context. This was to say don't condemn someone for doing what you yourself are doing. That is I cannot condemn you for something and then do the same thing myself. Jesus said judge with righteous judgment, i.e. make your judgments using His Word. Christians are Biblically commanded to make judgments all the time but they are to do so using the Word rather than their own opinions. I understand that you would not subscribe to that doctrine since you believe the Bible to be errant and uninspired. Opponents of the Gospel also use Jesus' forgiving of a woman caught in adultery as pointing to his excusing sin and contradicting Levitical law, when what really occurred was that the trial was illegal since both parties in the act of adultery must be brought forth. Although it cannot be proven I rather theorize that Jesus was writing the names of the Sanhedrin members who had slept with prostitutes or even raped women in the sand. That is likely why they dropped their stones. In other words the Judge threw out the case based on improper and illegal procedure rather than excusing the crime. I have read most all of the excluded works including the apocryphal books. I suspect the official scholarly and theological reasons for exclusion differ quite sharply in contrast to yours but we'll save that for another time.

Well put Twinstar

I quite agree


Hey,Mr.Bud Wonder how much Judge Boyd was paid under the bench to make that ruling...Vernon James III

C'mon Bud

You write, "I wish to make it clear that I do not watch “Duck Dynasty,” so I know little about it." A little knowledge never stood in the way of an opinion column.

No one

No one needs to have watched Duck Dynasty to comment on the words uttered by one of its stars in public. I understand why YOU would defend his comments about homosexuality. I'm accustomed to ultra-conservative Christians condemning homosexuality (not all Christians share that view). What I don't understand is the defense of his comments that Black people were happier in the Jim Crow era, before the Civil Rights Movement. And I think it is amusing that you ignored the other issue raised in the column. How do you feel about the privileged young man who got a pass for killing 4 people?


that was righteous and expressed my thoughts better that I could. The "conservatives" will come out of the woodwork and try to trash you. But ignore it. Phil Robertson chose to exercise his right to free speech and while I vehemently disagree with his message, I defend his right to share that message. HOWEVER, his supporters seem to NOT understand that words have consequences. The First Amendment has no application here. The government is NOT involved.


But it is ok for the liberals, led by the "messiah obama" himself who has called Louis Farrakhan a "hero" for his views including stoning homosexuals? How about the right Rev. Wright? The messiah defended his bigoted words many times. Words only have consequences for the folks on the right, as long as the media only reports one sides' gaffes. I do not condone the words he used but as a christian I understand what he was trying to say. It is a shame the media only "cherry picked" his words and did not print them all. Pete Gilbert

I will repeat

I believe Mr. Robertson has the right to say anything he wants to and I will defend that right against any government suppression. Words have consequences -- in this case, consequences that involve his television show. Surely, he knew that. As to your comments about President Obama, apparently the majority of people in the United States do not share your view. And that's okay. You still get to hold it and espouse it. And I will defend your right to do so. I will say this to you, though: I chastised Liberals who referred to President Bush with derogatory names ("Shrub" and the like). I've not seen any similar criticism among my conservative "friends" denouncing such disrespect to the current President.

Add comment

Login or register to post comments