The National Organization for Marriage (NOM), the nation's most vociferous opponent of gay marriage, on Wednesday started a petition protesting the suspension of Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson.

A&E, which airs the reality series, placed Robertson on indefinite filming hiatus over anti-gay remarks he made in an interview with men's glossy GQ.

(Related: Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson calls gay sex illogical “sin.”)

In the interview, Robertson said that engaging in homosexuality is an illogical “sin” and compared LGBT people to drunkards, thieves, prostitutes and adulterers.

A&E acted following complaints from gay rights groups HRC and GLAAD.

“Phil Robertson's remarks are not consistent with the values of our faith communities or the scientific findings of leading medical organizations,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “We know that being gay is not a choice someone makes, and that to suggest otherwise can be incredibly harmful. … the A+E Network should take immediate action to condemn Phil Robertson's remarks and make clear they don't support his views.”

In promoting its petition, NOM President Brian Brown hailed Robertson's remarks.

“Well guess what – homosexuality IS a sin in the bible, and virtually every other sacred text out there. Engaging in homosexual sex IS considered by God to be sinful according to the teachings of most religions. And sin is NOT logical. Sin is deceitful, harmful and degrading to the human soul,” Brown wrote.

“What Phil Robertson has done is express the traditional Christian view of homosexuality – decry the sin but love the sinner. It's what every major Christian leader including Jesus Christ himself has taught us.”

“Do we want to live in a country where we cannot express something we believe so sincerely and feel so strongly without fear of reprisals, bullying and intimidation?” he added. “Do we want to let groups like HRC that spew hateful rhetoric and incite bigotry towards Christians dictate what is and is not acceptable to say in the public square in America? What kind of America will that mean for our children? And, more immediately, what would that mean for the future of marriage in America?”