Hey, I like what you are saying and good for you for standing up and speaking your mind. We should all do that, right? By your own words, why should I or anyone else have to like those bigoted, perverted homosexuals? What right do they have to tell me that I must accept their life style?

BIGOT
: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

Full Definition of BIGOT
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

I am never going to question anyones right to say anything they want. But if you are trying to make this into a first amendment case, you are dead wrong. If this character was being dragged off to jail, that would be a First amendment outrage. But he is not.

The guy is not the first ignorant buffoon to spout off something offensive and lose his job and he won't be the last. But people do not lose their liberty for it. That is the First Amendment protection.

Do you think A&E has no right to control the content of their programming or to choose who represents them in public? Have we lost track of who is signing the checks?

This guy is free to raise his own capital, establish his own production company, produce his own show and try to sell it to various outlets. But he is free, so no First Amendment issue.
He has no right to say things that the Corporate managers feel are not in the best interest of the Corporation that employs him.

You are also free to not watch A&E, or organize a boycott, or whatever.

As a Corporate Manager myself, it is within my prerogative not employ anyone who says anything in public that harms my shareholders. And I don't really care if you like it or not.

I don't care if you like it or not either and that is my first amendment right to say so just as you had used your first amendment right to tell me. And what is this lame ideal that you have to be taken off to jail before you lose your first amendment rights. A&E took away Robertsons first amendment by taking him off the show. "I am paying the checks so you do as I say" is a violation of Robertson's first amendment rights. If he was speaking out against A&E then yes, they have a right to kick him off the show but it had nothing to do with A&E. He was speaking for himself, not as a representative of A&E. It was in interview with QE. A&E does not own P. Robertson nor his views. So, yes. His First Amendment Rights were violated .

I don't care if you like it or not either and that is my first amendment right to say so just as you had used your first amendment right to tell me. And what is this lame ideal that you have to be taken off to jail before you lose your first amendment rights. A&E took away Robertsons first amendment by taking him off the show. "I am paying the checks so you do as I say" is a violation of Robertson's first amendment rights. If he was speaking out against A&E then yes, they have a right to kick him off the show but it had nothing to do with A&E. He was speaking for himself, not as a representative of A&E. It was in interview with QE. A&E does not own P. Robertson nor his views. So, yes. His First Amendment Rights were violated .

Yeah, but he is a good ol' boy.... and that is a big part of the mystic of the show... My personal opinion although it is very early in this incident is that A&E is way underestimating the notion of "Family Allegiance" and "Southern Pride". I seriously doubt that there were be anymore tapings of "Duck Dynasty" because if the Robertson boys feel that their father has been slapped down by the network they themselves will probably walkout on the program. Just my opinion, and no I am not defending his remarks, just making an observation of the situation, I think that those in Hollywood only understand money and somehow think that they can have that show after censoring Phil, I don't think that they understand that money just might be as important to the Robertsons as their respect for their patriarch.

Here's the text of our Constitution's First Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The amendment is about our right to speak our mind without fear of retribution from the Government.

As previously stated, this amendment does not protect you from actions by a private party or corporation (or your employer) if you publicly say or do things that damage their interests.

A&E had the authority to fire Phil.
The Robertson family can choose to support Phil and leave A&E.
None of this is a government or 1st Amendment issue.
Consumers will ultimately control what happens to this show.

A&E will pay a heavy financial price for this business decision when their golden goose dies. I seriously doubt that GLAAD or similar activist organizations will pass a hat to compensate A&E their loss. They just got more media action than they could ever afford to buy thanks to Old Phil's personal opinion. He inadvertently did the gay groups a favor. I suspect the activists are the only ones smiling.