Wednesday, December 25, 2013

Jesse Jackson: 1st Amendment Doesn't Apply to Phil Robertson

GTY Jesse Jackson Phil Robertson nt 131225 16x9 608 Jesse Jackson: Phil Robertson More Offensive Than Rosa Parks Bus Driver

Via Yahoo News:

Jesse Jackson has decided to weigh in on the inflammatory comments that Phil Robertson made to GQ about gays and African Americans.

In an interview with Drew Magary, the "Duck Dynasty" star said the Nazis needed Jesus, that he never saw the mistreatment of African Americans while growing up in Louisiana before the civil rights era and that homosexuality was a sin.

A&E has already suspended Robertson, but Reverend Jackson, his Rainbow PUSH Coalition and GLAAD are demanding to meet with network execs, along with Cracker Barrel's CEO, to discuss the future of all "Duck Dynasty" memorabilia or content.

"These statements uttered by Robertson are more offensive than the bus driver in Montgomery, Alabama, more than 59 years ago," Jackson said in a statement obtained by ABC News.

"At least the bus driver, who ordered Rosa Parks to surrender her seat to a white person, was following state law. Robertson's statements were uttered freely and openly without cover of the law, within a context of what he seemed to believe was 'white privilege.'"

The release, dated Dec. 23, requests a meeting within 72 hours with A&E and Cracker Barrel execs and urges the network to uphold Robertson's suspension.

Jackson and GLAAD said they believe it's not right for a personality with such a large platform to benefit from such comments.

I'd like to focus your attention to this statement:

"At least the bus driver, who ordered Rosa Parks to surrender her seat to a white person, was following state law. Robertson's statements were uttered freely and openly without cover of the law, within a context of what he seemed to believe was 'white privilege.'"

Without the cover of law? Has the reverend never heard of the 1st 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.

Robertson did have the cover of law. But race-baiter Jesse Jackson doesn't think the law applies to Phil Robertson? Jesse Jackson is a disgrace - both to his religion and his race. Blacks should be embarrassed by him. Americans should be embarrassed by him. Jackson should be embarrassed of himself.

Jackson said Phil made his statements without the cover of law. Since the constitution is the supreme law of the land and the 1st amendment guarantees freedom of speech he absolutely DID have cover of law. We aren't implying A&E is without rights here. We are saying Phil ALSO has rights - and cover of law... the supreme law of the land! 

7 comments:

  1. Jezsie jackson u want to see a war keep commenting on something just to get ur name out there. Every white perso in the world hates u u racist pig. No body cares at all what u think and in fact u really neal before God and beg for forgiveness. U should be hung in a tree for all the world to see because nothing u do is for God it is for ur self-righteous black ugly bug eyed bastard. U r so bad that u shouldnt be able to utter miss parks name.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This idiot race- baiter is part of the 27% of the population that are brain dead. PERIOD!!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have a friend who was born in 1926, he grew up in and worked in the coal mining community. He says the blacks were happy people, worked and lived right beside the whites, that they all got along so well together. Yes! They had a KKK. Did the KKK persecute blacks at that time in that community? No. The KKK went after drunks and other ne'er do wells who refused to work and who would not feed their families.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Actually, the First Amendment does not apply in the case of Robertson. Congress did not pass any laws to silence him. A private company responded to statements he made, as is their right to do so toward any employees of their company. Robertson is still free to say whatever he wishes. He is also free to practice his religion as he wishes. He will just no longer do so as an employee of A&E.
    The Freedom of Speech does not protect you from criticism, nor does it protect you from sanction by a private employer.
    Surely you knew this.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Actually it DOES apply here! Jackson said Phil made his statements without the cover of law. Since the constitution is the supreme law of the land and the 1st amendment guarantees freedom of speech he absolutely DID have cover of law. We aren't implying A&E is without rights here. We are saying Phil ALSO has rights - and cover of law... the supreme law of the land!

    ReplyDelete
  6. No, it does not apply. There is nothing in the Constitution that protects anyone from criticism or sanction by private entities. Nothing. He is not protected by one single law or constitutional amendment. Jackson and the other organizations are not seeking Congressional action against Robertson, because his speech is protected by the Constitution, but he is not protected by anything from sanction by private parties. He did make those statements without the cover of law, because no law protects him from the criticisms and actions of others based on statements he made.
    If he had the cover of law to freely say what he wished without sanction, then A&E would not have been able to fire him, would they?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no law preventing him from freely saying what he said BECAUSE of the 1st amendment of the US constitution... A LAW! Phil had cover to say what he said BECAUSE of the supreme law of the land. He had the cover of law. This article is NOT dealing with A&E's rights at all and we are NOT suggesting Phil had any protections against being fired. Please try to keep up!

      Delete