DO YOU REMEMBER...BLASTS FROM THE PAST.

"DUCK DYNASTY" CONTROVERSY, AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH. PT 1.

( FIRST PUBLISHED ON 12/22/2013.)

This past week the A&E network announced that it was suspending Phil Robertson, star of their reality T.V show "DUCK DYNASTY", indefinitely. This action was in response to statements made by Robertson in a GQ MAGAZINE interview to be published in January. Quotes taken from the interview, which indicate the he believes Homosexuality to be "Sinful" and not "Logical", were reported in different media outlets to have offended Same-Sex rights activists and groups.

What is written in the above paragraph is considered to factually accurate, and neither Robertson or GQ has claimed any inaccuracy in the words or quotes reported to be in the body of the interview, or that certain statements were taken out of context. So where is the controversy?

It is amazing that no matter how apparent the flawed reasoning of certain individuals can be, there are those who will seek to justify it. The following is a prime example;

ACCUSATION- BY SUSPENDING ROBERTSON, A&E HAS VIOLATED HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

Question- Did Robertson make these statements?

Answer- Yes, that is not in dispute.

Question-- Are Robertsons comments protected by the 1st amendment,

in that he cannot be prosecuted or punished criminally?

Answer- Yes, his words are protected.

Question- Because A&E suspended Robertson, his Constitutional Right to

Freedom of Speech has been violated.

Answer- Absolutely not.

To even have to address this issue is silly, for it has been covered and ruled upon (Judicially), many times.

However, certain political pundits and commentators are trying to score points with the public at large by claiming that the "DUCK DYNASTY" star has been punished contrary to Constitutional Law.

The simple answer to this claim is the following; TO HAVE YOUR RIGHT OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH OR EXPRESSION VIOLATED, IT MUST DONE BY AN ENTITY OF THE GOVERNMENT. PRIVATE CITIZENS OR GROUPS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS SET FORTH IN THIS PART OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

Legally, there are restrictions in how an individual may exercise their right to freedom of speech. Slanderous or Libelous statements can lead to legal sanctions, but that is because the truth of these claims are called into question. Time, Place and Location is also a factor when judging whether or not one has the right to speak or act freely, but that is because such acts may infringe upon the rights of other individuals.

Look for PT 2.