“Maybe so. But the man still has the right to say what he wants within his four walls. Doesn't he?”
Amie Nogrady on Apr 29, 2014 at 21:58:09
“You are really working hard to defend this guy, aren't you, Zippy? Once again, he CAN say whatever the heck he wants to say, however that does not keep him from suffering the consequences for whatever he has said. Now do you understand?”
Lady1genius on Apr 29, 2014 at 20:43:11
“He sure does. But he better watch who he's mouthing off to. There is no such thing as "free of consequence" speech. That sword cuts both ways. The NBA was expressing their right to free speech by banning him for life.”
loveis22984 on Apr 29, 2014 at 19:55:07
“and the NBA have a right to run their organization as they see fit. Sterling hurt their organization, so they showed him the door.”
“First Amendment is more basic than a contract with the league. Person cannot sign away his First Amendment right.”
Lady1genius on Apr 29, 2014 at 20:46:24
PGage on Apr 29, 2014 at 19:54:16
“The first amendment only protects him from government censorship. He can ABSOLUTELY sign away rights to speak or to act in a private contract. People do it thousands of times every day in this country, and such contracts have always been found fully enforceable.”
“No. He has a right under the First Amendment to speak.”
truelambda on Apr 29, 2014 at 23:02:24
“He has a right to speak, and the league, has a right to sever ties with those that violate their code of conduct. He is not going to jail and the government is not going after him for speaking his mind. The NBA however has a right to procure the financial success of the league, keeping a guy like Sterling around ensures financial hardship for his team and possible as for the rest of the league.”
loveis22984 on Apr 29, 2014 at 19:43:10
“Will you stop posting about the first amendment. The NBA is not a government organization.”
“What about Sterling's civil rights? All he did was make a nasty comment inside his own home to his girl friend. Yet he was fined millions and deprived of his property. Isn't that a First Amendment case??”
harmonie555 on Apr 30, 2014 at 07:01:17
“He has the right to say whatever he wishes, but that does not mean there will be no consequences for what he says or does. People need to consider the consequences before they open their mouths or act. It is called responsibility.”
TennisMom14 on Apr 29, 2014 at 21:49:03
“The first amendment protects you from government prosecution. It does not give you a free ticket to say whatever you want to whomever you want without consequences. The government didn't punish him.”
54Cheyenne on Apr 29, 2014 at 21:46:44
“Not a 1st Amendment case - there is no government action involved. You should learn what your rights are, why they are your rights and what they actually mean.
It was a business decision, really had little to do with racism. The NBA has the power and authority to fine and ban anyone they deem bad for business, bad for the NBA. That's what they did. Merely a smart business decision on the part of the NBA, protecting business assets.”
Lady1genius on Apr 29, 2014 at 20:40:38
“Hid civil rights are intact. Has he been arrested? NO. Nor will he be. But his speech may have consequences, and in this case, it did.”
khimtone on Apr 29, 2014 at 20:14:27
“No it is not.”
EmmaDarian on Apr 29, 2014 at 19:56:29
“Which civil rights (since you used the plural) do you think Sterling lost?
The NBA has rules for its owners. He agreed to them. No, this has not one single thing to do with the First Amendment since the government has not censored him or arrested him. If you don't know that, you best read up on the First Amendment.”
Absolute on Apr 29, 2014 at 19:40:40
“His sanctions are based on the existing rules of the NBA. It is not a First Amendment case because the government isn't punishing him.
Words and actions have consequences. He is now experiencing them.”
loveis22984 on Apr 29, 2014 at 19:40:28
“No this is not a first amendment case.”
PGage on Apr 29, 2014 at 19:37:06
“No. He acted in a manner contrary to the best interests of the League, and they exercised their First Amendment right of association to decide no longer to associate with him. He signed a contract going in that, as a franchise owner, he would always behave in the best interests of the league and if he didn't they could kick him out.”
“Let people say and write what they want. Freedom of Speech is guaranteed by our Bill of Rights.”
DarkSyn on May 11, 2013 at 00:30:06
“You are allowed free speech, you are not allowed to change the facts to fit your opinion. By the way, that works two ways sport. No one has to listen to your opinion either.”
CoronaDischarge on May 11, 2013 at 00:16:50
“What's the point? He said what he wanted. Others responded. He was fired because of the bad publicity. Sounds to me like free expression triumphed. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.”
“You want public officials who use illegal drugs, lie, break the law? Did it occur to you that we hire public officials to STOP such things? Ever heard of hypocrisy?”
bar1ed on Mar 25, 2008 at 15:21:24
“the hypocrisy is that they do, and we cant ---- and its not only drugs ! ! !”
Listen2me on Mar 25, 2008 at 15:13:03
“Prohibition is an awful flop.
We like it.
it can't stop what it's meant to stop.
We like it.
It's left a trail of graft and slime,
It's filled our land with vice and crime,
It can't prohibit worth a dime;
Nevertheless we like it.
Not all laws are just laws. Segregation was upheld by lots of laws; I for one am grateful that some people had the courage to defy them. And DRUG PROHIBITION is the step-child of Jim Crow---our laws against cannabis, cocaine, and opiates were ALL passed in order to provide a legal pretext for harrassing various racial minorities, during the era from the 1870's to the 1930's. These are NOT laws that were passed for the good of the public, in the first place. In the second place, they are laws that have NOT achieved their purported purpose, since all they do is sponsor racketeering on both sides of the law; and finally, prohibition laws are fundamentally unAmerican because they are inconsistent with a free society and they violate the ninth and tenth amendments to the Constitution.”