HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Conservatives Rush To Def...

Thu Dec 19, 2013, 05:08 PM

Conservatives Rush To Defend Gay-Bashing 'Duck Dynasty' Star

CAITLIN MACNEAL – DECEMBER 19, 2013, 3:26 PM EST

After 'Duck Dynasty' patriarch Phil Robertson was suspended from his popular reality television show for making controversial anti-gay comments in an interview with GQ magazine, conservatives jumped to his defense.

Lousiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) in a Thursday statement called Robertson's suspension a "messed up situation."

Both former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) also weighed in on Facebook by defending Robertson's right to free speech.

“Free speech is an endangered species. Those ‘intolerants’ hatin’ and taking on the Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing his personal opinion are taking on all of us," said Palin.


:::snip:::

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/conservatives-defend-anti-gay-comments-by-duck-dynasty-star

6 replies, 1218 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Conservatives Rush To Defend Gay-Bashing 'Duck Dynasty' Star (Original post)
DonViejo Dec 2013 OP
liberalmuse Dec 2013 #1
SummerSnow Dec 2013 #3
Gothmog Dec 2013 #2
Arneoker Dec 2013 #4
Cosmocat Dec 2013 #5
Initech Dec 2013 #6

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2013, 05:12 PM

1. Now if Palin had rushed to Bashir's defense...

when he was fired over her definition of "free speech", she may have had at least an ounce of credibility. That was such a perfect opportunity for her, and she blew it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberalmuse (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 19, 2013, 06:31 PM

3. She only defends the free speech of conservatives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 19, 2013, 05:20 PM

2. The First Amendment only applies to State Actors

Unless a governmental entity is doing the censorship, the First Amendment does not apply. Here the TV network is free to take whatever steps they want and there is no violation of the First Amendment. This is basic constitutional law. Here is a brief explanation of this requirement from Cornell Law School http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/state_action_requirement

The state action requirement stems from the fact that the constitutional amendments which protect individual rights (especially the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment) are mostly phrased as prohibitions against government action. For example, the First Amendment states that “[c]ongress shall make no law” infringing upon the freedoms of speech and religion. Because of this requirement, it is impossible for private parties (citizens or corporations) to violate these amendments, and all lawsuits alleging constitutional violations of this type must show how the government (state or federal) was responsible for the violation of their rights. This is referred to as the state action requirement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sat Dec 21, 2013, 08:50 PM

4. Are you telling me that the First Amendment doesn't guarantee me my own reality show on AMC?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sat Dec 21, 2013, 09:21 PM

5. Good to see them wash the Dixie Chick blood off their hands

nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sun Dec 22, 2013, 01:18 AM

6. The talking points have been fed to the parrots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread