Why should they fire him as their spokesman? Because actor Matthew McConaughey decided to voice his anti-gun opinion on our 2nd Amendment rights by saying, "Let's Forget That Right!"
Stupid? Sure it was. And frankly, I thought the guy might have been smarter than that.
His opinion on our Constitutional Rights came out when it was reported on October 23rd, 2014, that actor Matthew McConaughey stated that we should just do away with certain rights in the U.S. Constitution.
It's true, in an interview for the November issue of GQ magazine, Matthew McConaughey said that he understands that Americans have the right to own guns -- but that it’s time to "forget that right" because some people misuse guns.
According to reports, the actor's ant-gun statements actually came in response to a question about McConaughey’s love for the Washington Redskins and his opposition to changing the team’s name.
How's that work? Well, he was talking about one thing one moment and then another to try to make some sort of idiotic point.
In the interview with GQ magazine, he was asked, "What do you think about calls for the team to change its name?"
McConaughey responded by pointing out that opposition to the team name, a name everyone has been "fine with…since the 1930s," suddenly got "pushed into the social consciousness."
In other words, something that’s been accepted as the norm until recently suddenly become unacceptable. Because of this, he said although "a lot of Native Americans don’t have a problem with it… They’re not going to say, ‘No, we really want that name.'"
Then he delivered the clincher by saying, "It’s like my feeling about gun control: ‘I get it. You have the right to have guns. But look, let’s forget that right. Let’s forget the pleasure you get safely on your range, because it's in the wrong hands in other places.'"
While the analogy didn't work real well, he did make his point that he thinks that the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights is out-dated and not needed because he believes it enables harm to be done.
If we use his logic, then "let's do away with the freedom of speech" because some people -- for example, like those folks in Hollywood who produce blood filled ultra-violent films and gore, or distribute false information like say the 9-11 Truthers -- can misuse free speech.
Using that logic, then we can look at all of our Bill of Rights and deem them worthless and out-dated simply because they all have the possibility of being used in the wrong way.
Fact is, lawyers get suspects off all the time by way of the Bill of Rights.
If we take the actor to task, he should tell us if he thinks that we should have the "rights" we do? After all, they have been around for so long. And besides, in the wrong hands in other places those rights might not put people behind bars -- but what if those rights prevent an innocent from being put behind bars?
Using his logic, let's allow the few bad apples to control what the rest of us need.
Yes, need. Remember, we should not allow a few who use firearms for criminal activities and evil doing to control the rights of others who need firearms for doing good -- such as for self-defense against rape or to prevent the murder of one's family.
And there is the problem, anti-gun actors like Matthew McConaughey think they know what's best for the world and see themselves as the supreme decision-makers when it comes to determining what rights Americans should and shouldn't have.
I have never presumed to know what is best for everyone, but I know what works. And yes, the Bill of Rights has worked for over 200 years.
Our Rights that have been so dearly paid for by the blood of free men and women have enabled us to ward off evil at home and stave off dictatorships in our capitols.
Our Rights have stopped power hungry politicians from claiming that our rights should be forfeit because they do more harm than good -- according to them.
Frankly, an Liberal actor not understanding the importance of the 2nd Amendment or the entire Bill of Rights really doesn't surprise me.
Him saying that he would want us to simply forfeit one of our rights is stupidity on parade!
And yes, I hope it will alienate a lot of pro-Constitution folks like myself who my have thought about seeing his movies or buying one of the products that he is advertising lately -- but now won't.
Take for example his Lincoln SUV commercial. I read where the people who put it together stated something to the effect that Matthew McConaughey is a very serious actor and is the right fit to represent Lincoln's new luxury SUV.
Lincoln may want to rethink using this actor in the future. The reason is that, like many who hear about his anti-gun stance, I won't even consider buying a Lincoln any model if he is their spokesman.
If he wants to take away my rights, and use his celebrity status to influence others to go along with him -- I don't have to buy Lincolns or any other product that he is associated with, or allow him to make a dollar in celebrity endorsements.
I simply do not need to throw my support to someone who doesn't support our Constitution.
And yes, that's how I see it.
Tom Correa
Stupid? Sure it was. And frankly, I thought the guy might have been smarter than that.
His opinion on our Constitutional Rights came out when it was reported on October 23rd, 2014, that actor Matthew McConaughey stated that we should just do away with certain rights in the U.S. Constitution.
It's true, in an interview for the November issue of GQ magazine, Matthew McConaughey said that he understands that Americans have the right to own guns -- but that it’s time to "forget that right" because some people misuse guns.
According to reports, the actor's ant-gun statements actually came in response to a question about McConaughey’s love for the Washington Redskins and his opposition to changing the team’s name.
How's that work? Well, he was talking about one thing one moment and then another to try to make some sort of idiotic point.
In the interview with GQ magazine, he was asked, "What do you think about calls for the team to change its name?"
McConaughey responded by pointing out that opposition to the team name, a name everyone has been "fine with…since the 1930s," suddenly got "pushed into the social consciousness."
In other words, something that’s been accepted as the norm until recently suddenly become unacceptable. Because of this, he said although "a lot of Native Americans don’t have a problem with it… They’re not going to say, ‘No, we really want that name.'"
Then he delivered the clincher by saying, "It’s like my feeling about gun control: ‘I get it. You have the right to have guns. But look, let’s forget that right. Let’s forget the pleasure you get safely on your range, because it's in the wrong hands in other places.'"
While the analogy didn't work real well, he did make his point that he thinks that the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights is out-dated and not needed because he believes it enables harm to be done.
If we use his logic, then "let's do away with the freedom of speech" because some people -- for example, like those folks in Hollywood who produce blood filled ultra-violent films and gore, or distribute false information like say the 9-11 Truthers -- can misuse free speech.
Using that logic, then we can look at all of our Bill of Rights and deem them worthless and out-dated simply because they all have the possibility of being used in the wrong way.
Fact is, lawyers get suspects off all the time by way of the Bill of Rights.
If we take the actor to task, he should tell us if he thinks that we should have the "rights" we do? After all, they have been around for so long. And besides, in the wrong hands in other places those rights might not put people behind bars -- but what if those rights prevent an innocent from being put behind bars?
Using his logic, let's allow the few bad apples to control what the rest of us need.
Yes, need. Remember, we should not allow a few who use firearms for criminal activities and evil doing to control the rights of others who need firearms for doing good -- such as for self-defense against rape or to prevent the murder of one's family.
And there is the problem, anti-gun actors like Matthew McConaughey think they know what's best for the world and see themselves as the supreme decision-makers when it comes to determining what rights Americans should and shouldn't have.
I have never presumed to know what is best for everyone, but I know what works. And yes, the Bill of Rights has worked for over 200 years.
Our Rights that have been so dearly paid for by the blood of free men and women have enabled us to ward off evil at home and stave off dictatorships in our capitols.
Our Rights have stopped power hungry politicians from claiming that our rights should be forfeit because they do more harm than good -- according to them.
Frankly, an Liberal actor not understanding the importance of the 2nd Amendment or the entire Bill of Rights really doesn't surprise me.
Him saying that he would want us to simply forfeit one of our rights is stupidity on parade!
And yes, I hope it will alienate a lot of pro-Constitution folks like myself who my have thought about seeing his movies or buying one of the products that he is advertising lately -- but now won't.
Take for example his Lincoln SUV commercial. I read where the people who put it together stated something to the effect that Matthew McConaughey is a very serious actor and is the right fit to represent Lincoln's new luxury SUV.
Lincoln may want to rethink using this actor in the future. The reason is that, like many who hear about his anti-gun stance, I won't even consider buying a Lincoln any model if he is their spokesman.
If he wants to take away my rights, and use his celebrity status to influence others to go along with him -- I don't have to buy Lincolns or any other product that he is associated with, or allow him to make a dollar in celebrity endorsements.
I simply do not need to throw my support to someone who doesn't support our Constitution.
And yes, that's how I see it.
Tom Correa
I think what Matthew McConaughey said was indeed the wrong thing to say. He's against the 2nd Amendment and he says that most sports teams should keep their names. But I'll say this for ya. It will be a cold day in Hell before I start rooting for a team known as the Tampa Bay Klansmen or the Columbus Mexicans. I already have two teams that I root for. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Crimson Tide. And ain't nobody gonna come along and tell me what I can and can't enjoy. Especially that good for nothing F.U. McConaughey. Besides, the only good movie he ever put out was "The Free State Of Jones". I would have included "Dazed And Confused" but I just feel like in that film he was being too much of a major Hollywood ham. So yeah. I'm with you on that. He deserves to be a fired. Not only that but he should be replaced by somebody who actually gets the picture. Such as Brad Pitt or Rambo. There are so many celebrities that are worthy of voicing their opinion on the 2nd Amendment. But he ain't it. That's all I have to say.
ReplyDelete