Posted on 12/19/2013 5:49:34 PM PST by Battle Hymn of the Republic
I'm tired of people getting in trouble for expressing their opinions, popular or not. A person should say what they believe, and we should support their right to say it, whether we disagree or not. This is America. Then again, I don't own a company that depends on revenue generated by quirky Louisiana duck hunters, who look like ZZ Top and believe homosexuality is wrong and Southern blacks were a lot happier back in the good old days.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Neither do I....But to be honest, I really don’t care.
So called “morals clauses” are really bad press clauses. No network actually cares is their stars act morally or not, they care if they bring bad press. Phil brought bad press, he got “suspended”, the suspension will end when the situation blows over, all will continue as if nothing happened.
A&E can presumably do this because of whatever contract they have with Phil. I don't know the nature of the contract between them, as AFAIK, such contract has only been conjectured about, not disclosed. Absent a contract there would be the catch-all state statutes, which most likely would have Phil as an at-will employee, under which he could be terminated for any reason or no reason at all.
But more than likely, there is a contract, and it would seem likely that A&E drafted such contract as part of its offer to Phil. Big companies often have an advantage in such things over on-screen talent, I conjecture. I suspect Phil didn't fully appreciate A&E could or would do such a thing, as citizens generally live under many rose-colored misconceptions about our presumed freedoms.
In the case of the CO bakery getting in hot water, we see how people in seats of government power view their authority as a thing to be bent to their political will, much as they see the Constitution as a living document (ptui!).
We find our freedoms of expression, association and religion being trumped by newly-emanating rights of interest groups claiming to seek "equality" via vengeful superiority, even absent the failure of support for the Equal Rights Amendment and its sought planned follow-ons. By claiming victim status, such groups as lesbians via their politically like-minded friends in politics, systematically, in material dialectic fashion, erode the rights of the alleged perpetrators.
With activist judges enforcing merely conjectured, penumbral rights, conservative interpretations of rights are increasingly thrown onto the trash heap.
More of Romans 1:18ff.
HF
>> Exactly, let the marketplace determine it, not the government.
You’re both naive.
You don’t know what you are talking about.
They aren’t just redneck hicks, they actually are really good business people. I would say they are a hell of a lot better at business than A&E. They are certainly more tolerant.
Willie and his wife adopted a couple of children of color way before it was ‘cool’. They are the sweetest kids. They attend a Christian school where they aren’t treated any different from the other kids even though they are on a hit television program.
These are good and honest people who are being trashed by the Gay Mafia where many of them work for the likes of A&E and other networks who have a big microphone.
You have no idea how many contracts they have or with whom. If A&E had any moral clauses they should have used them on some of their more trashy shows instead of a man on his reality show for voicing his religious beliefs.
“don’t embarrass the network” clause
I guess they forgot that when they hired Honey Boo Boo, the Rodeo Girls, Modern Dads or former Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards and his young bride on The Governor’s Wife.
A&E (an initialism for its former name, the Arts & Entertainment Network, is an American cable and satellite television channel that serves as the flagship television property of A+E Networks, a joint venture between the Hearst Corporation and Disney–ABC Television Group (both of which maintain a 50% ownership interest). The channel is headquartered in New York City and operates offices in Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; Detroit, Michigan; London, England; Los Angeles, California and Stamford, Connecticut.
The docudrama Flight 93, about the hijacking of the plane which crashed in Pennsylvania during the September 11, 2001 attacks was the most watched program on the network; it attracted 5.9 million viewers for its initial telecast on January 30, 2006. This was later surpassed by Duck Dynasty’s fourth season premiere. The previous record-holder for the network was a World War II docudrama, Ike: Countdown to D-Day, starring Tom Selleck and broadcast in 2004, with 5.5 million viewers. A&E later acquired rights to rerun the critically acclaimed HBO series The Sopranos; its A&E premiere on January 10, 2007, averaged 3.86 million viewers, making it the most-watched premiere of a rerun off-network series in cable television history at the time.
On May 26, 2008, in conjunction with the premiere of the original film The Andromeda Strain, A&E rebranded with a new logo and slogan, Real Life. Drama., representing its shift from an arts-focused network to a more contemporary network focused on scripted programming.
On December 11, 2013, A&E unveiled a new on-air brand identity built around the slogan “Be Original”, emphasizing the network’s lineup of original productions and positioning it as a “much lighter, more fun place to come and spend time” then it did during the “Real. Life. Drama.” era.
“Southern blacks were a lot happier back in the good old days.”
Don’t think he said that. Appears to be author’s words.... not Phil’s.
>> I said it is not a ffreedom of speech issue.
Of course it is. What aspect of censorship do you not understand?
Phil’s quotes on the black issue.
Scroll down about midway of the first page to the insert.
http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson
This should help you understand the position of A&E.
Per Wiki:
A&E Television Networks, LLC (DBA A+E Networks and formerly also known as AETN) is an American media company that owns a group of television channels available via cable & satellite in the US and abroad. A&E stands for Arts & Entertainment.
The company is a joint venture between Hearst Corporation and Disney-ABC Television Group, a subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company.
Phil’s words:
“Phil On Growing Up in Pre-Civil-Rights-Era Louisiana
“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”
Why can’t the bakery refuse to have a contract with somebody if that somebody doesn’t like the terms of agreement (for instance that the wedding be between a man and a woman)? That’s the question. Sure, companies can enter into contracts and refuse whatever behaviors they want to, within that contract. So why can’t a baker stipulate that they will bake a cake if it’s for a marriage between a man and a woman? That’s free enterprise. Why does A & E get the benefit of free enterprise, but not a bakery?
If Robertson could find some provision in his presumed contract that contravened state law's business hiring practices he could bring suit. That such hasn't yet been mentioned (to my knowledge) may indicate he has little to no chance of winning on such basis.
Cases such as the LGBT claim probably wouldn't reach court were in not for "benefactors" that support bringing such suits or lawyers that would do such pro bono.
Businesses are licensed by the state. Any business contracts or refusal to do business could be deemed material for a state court to consider.
If what the LGBT crowd would claim is unconstitutional initially or on appeal, any earlier contract nullification judgment (as conjectured above) could be vacated.
HF
I would say that male homosexuality is WORSE than bestiality!
State law can tell you who you have to sell to?
A Holocaust survivor, for instance, could be forced to cater for a Nazi festival? Because state law would require it - not allowing any room for conscience or religious or political belief?
How can that not be a prohibition on the free exercise of religion or on the freedom of association? Granted, the US Constitution prohibits Congress from making laws restricting those things, but haven’t the courts generally held that the freedoms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights also apply to states?
Generally speaking, anyone has the freedom to make a contract or not. But there have always been exceptions.
At English Common Law, going back hundreds of years before the American Revolution, businesses that catered to travelers-- inns, stagecoaches, ferry boats-- had to serve "any peaceable subject of the King" who paid the posted rate, on a first come-first served basis, and couldn't discriminate on any basis.
Fast-forward to more modern times: under the [federal] Civil Rights Act of 1964, "places of public accommodation" (stores, restaurants, hotels) can't discriminate based on sex, race, religion or national origin. Sexual orientation, however, is not covered.
Some states (a minority) have civil rights statutes that do prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Even among those states, most cover only certain kinds of businesses (typically, restaurants and hotels). So these kinds of suits against bakeries and photographers are possible only in a few states. (I don't agree with these lawsuits, BTW, but the state laws in question may well be upheld as constitutional by the courts.)
Yes, the free exercise clause applies to the States, but (to oversimplify a very complex area of law), it generally does not protect you from having to comply with a generally-applicable law just because you have a religious objection to it.
If I start a church which teaches that paying federal income taxes is a sin, I and my co-religionists still have to pay taxes. (If the law were different, I would start that church today and get a million members by tomorrow.) If I belong to the Church of Moloch, I am not allowed to practice human sacrifice (even on a willing victim). Rastafarians believe that God commands them to smoke marijuana, but they can still get arrested for it.
There are exceptions and wrinkles to all of this-- constitutional law is complicated-- but that's the general rule. The Hobby Lobby case now before the Supreme Court may change these rules somewhat, so wait and see.
The show cannot go on without the main man. It’s a family thing or nothing - that’s really one of the main points that makes it popular.
Free speech is a constitutional right against government interference, not individuals, corporations or other groups. For instance, you may be kicked off Freerepublic for your personal opinion if the censors say so, which is their right, and a right the government cannot interfere with.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.