Piers Morgan: First Amendment 'Shouldn't Protect Vile Bigots' Like Phil Robertson

Big Journalism ^ | 12/19/2013 | AWR Hawkins

[markomalley]

At 9:30 a.m. on December 19th, CNN's Piers Morgan tweeted that the First Amendment "shouldn't protect vile bigots" like Phil Robertson.

And while making this claim, Morgan also reiterated his position that the Second Amendment "shouldn't protect assault rifle devotees." 

Twitchy.com posted Morgan's tweet, as well as one he sent six minutes earlier in he which typed, "Phil Robertson is not a 'victim of political correctness.' He's a victim of his own repulsively racist, homophobic bigotry." 

When defenders of Robertson's right to speak his mind took to Twitter to tell Morgan how the First Amendment works, Morgan hedged himself in by tweeting, "Calm down everybody. I'm merely exercising my own 1st Amendment freedom of speech rights to say Phil Robertson's a racist bigot." 

[silverleaf]

excellent

[driftless2]

Gee whiz, a foreigner doesn’t understand the first amendment. I’m stunned. Of course, Morgan is a citizen of a country, the U.K., where you CAN be thrown into prison for speaking your mind. Now where would I rather live...the country with a strong first amendment protecting freedom of speech or one where petty fascists like Morgan want to throw me in prison because they don’t like what I say?

[Amagi]

Sorry, Piers, YOU don't get to limit the First Amendment.
But you remain free to continue to make a fool of yourself, Brit Twit.
Besides, using your "logic" in support of the truly vile comments Martin Bashir made about Sarah Palin, then similarly it was the gays who got Phil Robertson suspended, putting corporate A&E in the jeopardy about which they now find themselves in a panic.

[Liz]

PHIL, CALL YOUR LAWYER Under Obamacare, the Taliban gets an exemption for religious reasons.

REFERENCE On page 107 of the Obamacare legislation provides for individual religious exemptions. The language is non-specific with regard to particular faiths, however. Read carefully:

(5) EXEMPTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.— In the case of an individual who is seeking an exemption certificate under section 1311(d)(4)(H) from any requirement or penalty imposed by section 5000A, the following information [is required]:

(A) In the case of an individual seeking exemption based on the individual’s status as a member of an exempt religious sect or division, as a member of a health care sharing ministry, as an Indian, or as an individual eligible for a hardship exemption, such information as the Secretary shall prescribe. Similarly, page 128 of the legislation states:

“(A) RELIGIOUS CONSCIENCE EXEMPTION.—Such term [i.e., “applicable individual”] shall not include any individual for any month if such individual has in effect an exemption under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which certifies that such individual is a member of a recognized religious sect or division thereof described in section 1402(g)(1) and an adherent of established tenets or teachings of such sect or division as described in such section. The above passage amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, of which Section 1402(g)(1) defines “a member of a recognized religious sect or division thereof” as follows:

(1) Exemption Any individual may file an application (in such form and manner, and with such official, as may be prescribed by regulations under this chapter) for an exemption from the tax imposed by this chapter if he is a member of a recognized religious sect or division thereof and is an adherent of established tenets or teachings of such sect or division by reason of which he is conscientiously opposed to acceptance of the benefits of any private or public insurance which makes payments in the event of death, disability, old-age, or retirement or makes payments toward the cost of, or provides services for, medical care (including the benefits of any insurance system established by the Social Security Act). Such exemption may be granted only if the application contains or is accompanied by—

(A) such evidence of such individual’s membership in, and adherence to the tenets or teachings of, the sect or division thereof as the Secretary may require for purposes of determining such individual’s compliance with the preceding sentence, and

(B) his waiver of all benefits and other payments under titles II and XVIII of the Social Security Act on the basis of his wages and self-employment income as well as all such benefits and other payments to him on the basis of the wages and self- employment income of any other person, and only if the Commissioner of Social Security finds that—

(C) such sect or division thereof has the established tenets or teachings referred to in the preceding sentence,

(D) it is the practice, and has been for a period of time which he deems to be substantial, for members of such sect or division thereof to make provision for their dependent members which in his judgment is reasonable in view of their general level of living, and

(E) such sect or division thereof has been in existence at all times since December 31, 1950.

=========================================================

THIS WE KNOW Islam considers insurance to be “gambling”, “risk-taking”, and “usury” and is thus banned. Obamacare exempts Muslims specifically based on their religious beliefs.

Is anyone else exempted from O/Care by reason of religious affiliation? They are IF you can you find a religious group that is banned from gambling, is against public health insurance, and had enough people join by 1950 to create an exemption.

[lavaroise]

Like Miley Cyrus or other homos present better alternative of redemption. these people are murderers and rapists.

[Uncle Chip]

Really??? There is nothing more vile in the media than Piers Morgan.

[lavaroise]

he is a fabian aristocrat: no term limits, no free speech necessary.

[Ouchthatonehurt]

“Inside of many liberals is a fascist struggling to get out.”
- John McCarthy

[Venturer]

Exactly : Piers Morgan is not an American, what right has he got to say what my rights are?

If we can protect the right of a Britih penis Head that isn’t allowed to go back to where he came from we have a right to protect Phils Freedom of Speech.
Piers Morgan is a Poofer.

[cincinnati65]

What is so shockingly stupid about his comment is that the First Amendment is there for exactly this reason -- to protect Phil Robertson's freedom to say whatever is on his mind, and to prevent the government from imposing sanctions or restrictions on that free speech. Granted, it gives the same rights to Al Sharpton and Melissa Harris-Perry, but I am free to hear, accept, or reject their views for myself.

And there's a reason it's the FIRST amendment.

[Venturer]

I think the British are so happy to be rid of this POS they don’t want him extradicted.

[Venturer]

Gee Chip I could make a good argument with that statement.

“There is nothing more vile in the media than Piers Morgan.”

There is Chris Mathews, Rachel Maddow, Al Sharptongue,
The entire staff of the N.Y. Times and Washington Post, I admit Piers is right up there close to the top of the list, but I would say it’s a close race.

[smedley64]

I’m totally aghast at the cowardice of those who participate in “the knockout game,” however, if Piers Morgan were to be randomly decked on the street by some thug playing said knockout game, I think I could support the perp in such a scenario.

Can we start a “knockout Piers Morgan” foundation somewhere, and see that the funds get transfered to whoever earns them?

[xzins]

A&E has clearly violated Robertson’s equal protection rights not to be discriminated against based on his sexual orientation and his religion.

It’s not free speech; it’s equal protection.

[Farmer Dean]

I’m always impressed by non-citizens trying to define what my rights are under the Constitution.NOT.

[Mycroft Holmes]

Can we start a “knockout Piers Morgan” foundation somewhere, and see that the funds get transferred to whoever earns them?

This is an interesting problem, and hard enough that you would want to generalize it. Solving it once is not cost effective. I prefer a cream-pie to punching but they are both assault. You need to do the transactions in something like bitcoin. Verifying that the funds are delivered to the clown who wields the pie is interesting as well. Offshore hosting is a must.

[Uncle Chip]

It would be a horse race and a photo finish as they are all equally vile.

[NCLaw441]

Someone needs to remind Piers Morgan that the First Amendment mentions religious freedom before it ever gets to free speech. Religious belief is protected because, among other things, faith is not something that one can simply shed at will. In that sense it is like skin color or national origin. Calling someone’s faith “vile bigotry” is itself bigotry of the vilest rank.

[New Jersey Realist]

Is this clown still in America?

[bray]

Marxists need to eliminate free speech since their ideas don’t work in the real world.

Pray America is Waking