Relevant News Story for Christians

[Aviela]

This isn't a question of freedom of speech.

I think some of us would disagree with this statement. I think it is, in part, a freedom of speech issue.

 

[seeingeyes]

I think some of us would disagree with this statement. I think it is, in part, a freedom of speech issue.

But it isn't. Whose freedom of speech was impeded?

 

[Aviela]

In the sense that they spoke up against gay rights and were in a sense reprimanded / lost income. I see their openness about their believes as part of the problem and not just their beliefs as alone.

 

[seeingeyes]

In the sense that they spoke up against gay rights and were in a sense reprimanded / lost income. I see their openness about their believes as part of the problem and not just their beliefs as alone.

They were not reprimanded by the government.

And consumers are not required to spend money on those they disagree with. Cable stations are not required to put any show on the air. The consumers didn't want to buy what these twins were selling, so the show got cut. If you were running a tv station, would you put a show out there that you knew would bomb and that no one would support?

 

[Aviela]

They were not reprimanded by the government.

And consumers are not required to spend money on those they disagree with. Cable stations are not required to put any show on the air. The consumers didn't want to buy what these twins were selling, so the show got cut. If you were running a tv station, would you put a show out there that you knew would bomb and that no one would support?

Whether one supported a couple of people who had morals, Christian morals, that, in part, would be a moral choice and that would depend upon the integrity of the people deciding whether to support them as in the television station. Secondly consumers arent required to spend the money but when an agreement has been made by parties and if an agreement has been broken because somebody has exercised their freedom of speech, then that would be a freedom of speech issue. As I said I see freedom of speech to only be part of this issue.

 

[seeingeyes]

Whether one supported a couple of people who had morals, Christian morals, that, in part, would be a moral choice and that would depend upon the integrity of the people deciding whether to support them as in the television station. Secondly consumers arent required to spend the money but when an agreement has been made by parties and if an agreement has been broken because somebody has exercised their freedom of speech, then that would be a freedom of speech issue. As I said I see freedom of speech to only be part of this issue.

Well, if there was a contract broken over it, they can sue.

 

[Aviela]

Well, if there was a contract broken over it, they can sue.

Exactly, but I don't know to what extent the agreement was. But even if there was a spoken agreement there still would be concern regarding that.