Breaking News: Elderly Lousiana Redneck is a Homophobic Racist

[Bunny]

What bothers me the most about this is people claim that somehow A&E is violating his free speech right. Just like he has a right to speak his mind A&E has the right to respond as they see fit (within the law). Free speech doesn't mean you can say what you want and everyone has to accept it.

If people in this country actually understood their own constitutional rights, this place would be much different than it is.

What bothers me the most is that this trout isn't news. A bigot being a bigot should not be one of the most talked about things on the internet right now.

And yet that's basically the only time you show up.

I'm not even sure what this means but I'm almost positive it is stupid.

The controversy over how far our freedom of speech should extend and whether or not condemning homosexuality is still mainstream Christianity is news.

Except this isn't a First Amendment issue and has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech.

[Hollycat]

What bothers me the most about this is people claim that somehow A&E is violating his free speech right. Just like he has a right to speak his mind A&E has the right to respond as they see fit (within the law). Free speech doesn't mean you can say what you want and everyone has to accept it.

If people in this country actually understood their own constitutional rights, this place would be much different than it is.

What bothers me the most is that this trout isn't news. A bigot being a bigot should not be one of the most talked about things on the internet right now.

And yet that's basically the only time you show up.

I'm not even sure what this means but I'm almost positive it is stupid.

The controversy over how far our freedom of speech should extend and whether or not condemning homosexuality is still mainstream Christianity is news.

Except this isn't a First Amendment issue and has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech.

Yeah. It does. He's free to believe whatever he wants without being punished for his beliefs.

[Bunny]

So.. you have no idea what freedom of speech is or what the First Amendment entails, do you?

[Flying Mullet]

Losing Your TV Job Is Not a First Amendment Issue | TIME.com

[Spuuky]

Yeah. It does. He's free to believe whatever he wants without being punished for his beliefs.

What does being free to believe something have to do with being free to express it, and what does a private enterprise punishing an employee have to do with government censorship?

[Hollycat]

Yeah. It does. He's free to believe whatever he wants without being punished for his beliefs.

What does being free to believe something have to do with being free to express it, and what does a private enterprise punishing an employee have to do with government censorship?

The right to express your beliefs is freedom of speech. If I were to go on tv and say Santa is real, should I be punished for being wrong?

[Spuuky]

The right to express your beliefs is freedom of speech. If I were to go on tv and say Santa is real, should I be punished for being wrong?

The network should have the right to tell you not to come back on their TV program, absolutely. That's what you're asking, right?

[Flying Mullet]

Firing someone isn't the government punishing them.

[Hollycat]

The right to express your beliefs is freedom of speech. If I were to go on tv and say Santa is real, should I be punished for being wrong?

The network should have the right to tell you not to come back on their TV program, absolutely. That's what you're asking, right?

That's not what I mean and you know it.

Would this thread exist for someone being wrong about santa? No.
However, because it was something homophobic, not only is the network punishing him, but so are the people.

[Bunny]

Yeah. It does. He's free to believe whatever he wants without being punished for his beliefs.

What does being free to believe something have to do with being free to express it, and what does a private enterprise punishing an employee have to do with government censorship?

The right to express your beliefs is freedom of speech. If I were to go on tv and say Santa is real, should I be punished for being wrong?

He has every right to express his belief that homosexuality is wrong. The government is not oppressing him, which is what the First Amendment is. The network, which he likely has a contract which says that he will be suspended if he brings any type of negative attention to himself, the show they produce, or the network itself, is the one punishing him. Again, this is not a freedom of speech or First Amendment issue because the person "oppressing" him is not a governmental body.

I suggest you take five minutes to read the First Amendment before spouting nonsense like you have a clue.

Would this thread exist for someone being wrong about santa? No

I know this argument probably sounded genius in your head but it is so far removed from what the conversation is about that you should really just stop.

[Spuuky]

That's not what I mean and you know it.

Would this thread exist for someone being wrong about santa? No.
However, because it was something homophobic, not only is the network punishing him, but so are the people.

No, I didn't know it. I guess I do now. This thread wouldn't exist if it was about Santa because Santa isn't an actual person who is actually being oppressed; see the EoEO thread. If this thread was about him saying something terrible about actual people, it would exist, regardless of whether the specific was homosexuality or something else.

[Hollycat]

Yeah. It does. He's free to believe whatever he wants without being punished for his beliefs.

What does being free to believe something have to do with being free to express it, and what does a private enterprise punishing an employee have to do with government censorship?

The right to express your beliefs is freedom of speech. If I were to go on tv and say Santa is real, should I be punished for being wrong?

He has every right to express his belief that homosexuality is wrong. The government is not oppressing him, which is what the First Amendment is. The network, which he likely has a contract which says that he will be suspended if he brings any type of negative attention to himself, the show they produce, or the network itself, is the one punishing him. Again, this is not a freedom of speech or First Amendment issue because the person "oppressing" him is not a governmental body.

I suggest you take five minutes to read the First Amendment before spouting nonsense like you have a clue.

I suggest you not twist what I say to fit your argument.

I'm not upset about the network suspending him. I'm upset about people being intolerant of his beliefs, which to him are tied to his own religion.

If someone were to attack him for this, would that not be a hate crime?

[Shlup]

Except this isn't a First Amendment issue and has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech.

Well I know that. The crazy right-wingers that agree with him are the ones refusing to acknowledge it.

[Flying Mullet]

Don't make sweet Santa a str aw man! He's got enough on his plate this month as it is.

Edit: Seriously, the str aw man filter is the most ghetto filter this place has ever had.

[Hollycat]

Don't make sweet Santa a str aw man! He's got enough on his plate this month as it is.

Edit: Seriously, the str aw man filter is the most ghetto filter this place has ever had.

We have a filter for really valid point and i'm impressed by your thinking.?

Edit: hahaha holy crap that's awesome.