'Duck Dynasty' star's free speech rights weren't violated
Published December 22, 2013
by L.Z. Granderson, CNN Contributor, December 20, 2013.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal got involved in the "Duck Dynasty" controversy Thursday by tweeting his response to A&E's decision to suspend Phil Robertson for his inflammatory remarks in a recent GQ interview.
"I remember when TV networks believed in the First Amendment," he wrote, adding, "it is a messed up situation when Miley Cyrus gets a laugh, and Phil Robertson gets suspended."
The truth is it is a messed up situation when a governor rumored to have his sights on the presidency doesn't understand the breadth of the First Amendment.
The Federal Communications Commission did not send officials into the office of Nancy Dubuc, president of A&E Networks. The FBI did not threaten to put Robertson away, and the Internal Revenue Service didn't freeze his bank accounts.
This is what the First Amendment protects us from -- laws being made that restrict freedom of religion, the press and/or speech. It does not protect us from how society responds to the expression of one's religion, the press or speech.
Robertson's boss punished him for his remarks. The government didn't.
Now for those out of the loop, Robertson -- a 67-year-old Louisiana native and a star of "Duck Dynasty" who holds a master's in education -- said, "I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person," and the black people he worked with "were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues."
He also compared homosexuality to bestiality and quoted a Bible verse that essentially said anyone who is an adulterer -- which according to Matthew 5:32, includes "anyone who marries a divorced woman" -- is going to hell.
There's a lot to chew on in the interview. (To his credit, Robertson issued somewhat of a mea culpa which, in part, read, "We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.")
But the interview had a lot for some to be offended by, especially given the number of black, gay and divorced people there are in the United States. And while conservatives such as Sarah Palin want to drape Robertson's remarks with the banner of Christianity, the truth is not everyone who identifies as a Christian subscribes to anti-gay beliefs.
Just as not everyone who identifies as a Christian believes black people were happier before the civil rights movement or that marrying a divorced woman is adultery. This variation in religious expression in general and Christian denomination in particular are also protected by the First Amendment.
Not that it really matters.
Robertson didn't falsely yell fire in a crowded theater -- which Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. said was not protected by the First Amendment back in 1919 -- so he is legally free to say whatever he wants to GQ about anyone he wants.
But that does not mean he is protected from how people react to what he says.
People like his bosses.
Or those who make decisions about advertising.
Or viewers.
This is where Jindal -- as well as those who believe Robertson's suspension violates his constitutional right to free speech -- get it wrong.
You can say some stupid stuff -- whether it's Paula Deen dropping the N-word, Alec Baldwin dropping the F-word, Jesse Jackson using a derogatory word for Jewish people as he talks about New York City -- or Bobby Knight infamously saying, "'I think that if rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy it.'' -- and the First Amendment will keep you from going to jail. But it is not a get-out-of-jail-free card in the eyes of society.
And if you don't believe me -- try walking into your boss' office and call him or her a big fat idiot with ugly children.
Then see if "freedom of speech" helps you keep your job.
December 22, 2013 at 8:58 am
Richard Bunce says:
First Amendment protections are against government infringement. What A&E will ultimately do will depend upon which "group" in this disagreement can bring the most pressure to bear on their business and A&E is a part of a for profit business.
It is not illegal to yell fire in a theater... actors on stage can do it, the janitor cleaning up after the show can do it, what is illegal is to yell fire in a theater with intent to cause harm or without intent but leading to harm or others.
December 22, 2013 at 10:21 am
hampton brady says:
L.Z. nailed it!
December 22, 2013 at 12:10 pm
Norm Kelly says:
If liberals were treated the same when they say stupid and/or offensive things as do conservatives/christians, there probably wouldn't be people like Bobbi Jindal making foolish comments about first amendment violations.
The TRUTH, which escapes most libs, is that there is definitely, provably a double standard. When the Duck guy says something he believes is right, people in the media (and on the left; boy that was redundant!) go absolutely nuts. When Alec Baldwin is simply Alec once again, the press basically ignores him. They may/perhaps/might once make a comment about Alec being Alec again, but it doesn't go any further than that. Let the Duck guy say something that the LGBT community or some black activist finds the slightest bit offensive, and all hell basically breaks loose. People come out of the wood work to request/demand that person be removed from whatever job they have; their income making opportunity should be suspended. The Duck guy said something that appears to have offended some blacks as well as some gays, and suddenly stores are removing Duck-themed merchandise from their shelves. How many retailers contacted Citi (is that who it is?) when Alec last went nuts? How many retailers announced for their customers that they would no longer accept Citi credit cards? What's in your wallet, besides support for offensive and stupid speech? Use some other credit card, and our stores, nationwide, will give you an additional 10% discount on your purchases for the next 7 days? Did any retailer do this?
When Paula Deen used the 'n' word, how many supporters came out and said they would continue to watch her shows, buy her merchandise, etc. and the networks & media accepted this as well as her apology? How long ago did Paula make this comment, whether it was offensive or not? And when did it become necessary that people on the 'right' are no longer allowed to say something that might offend someone on the 'left'? Why are lefties feelings suddenly so delicate? And why does ANYONE really care about the feelings of any leftie? It's time for lefties to let go of their feelings, and start using their BRAINS again. New theme for lefties: start THINKING, stop FEELING. You'll be amazed at how much more enjoyable life is!
(i'm sorry. was that offensive to lefties? guess i'm gonna have to quit my job now. will i be eligible for unemployment from the lefties?)
When the CNN host read a prepared statement that was approved by management at CNN suggested that the proper treatment for Ms. Palin would be for someone to sh*t in her mouth, how did CNN respond? Think people. I know, you lefties gave up already. Too much effort. The answer is: CNN did NOT respond. Since it was speech they approved of, they could not respond. Was his stupidity offensive? Well, yes. But since the subject of his offensiveness was a conservative woman, then it was to be expected and accepted. There was no need for CNN to take any action. And how did the liberal media (redundant again!) respond? They didn't, silly rabbit! They also believed the CNN guy's prepared speech was acceptable and to be expected. Conservatives have said far less offensive things and the lefties have gone nuts DEMANDING elimination of that person from whatever profession they were earning income from.
See the double standard? Well, to be honest, if you are a leftie, you don't see the doubleness here. A true leftie says that the situations were handled correctly and basically in the same fashion in all instances I've written about. So lefties, including Mika Brezinski on CNN. She believes she is being fair and unbiased in her assessment of the Duck guy when compared to other 'celebrities'. Because she a leftie through and through, so her heart is 'pure'. In her estimation anyway. Guess I'm just not a good leftie. Imagine that!!
