Bigots and defenders of bigotry have gone ablaze Thursday morning after hearing that their beloved messiah Phil Robertson, patriarch of the Duck Dynasty clan, was indefinitely suspended from the show for his appalling homophobic remarks. The self-proclaimed redneck superstar confessed his beliefs in an interview with GQ, leading to Duck Dynasty’s parent company A&E temporarily removing Robertson from the show.

Following the announcement, the approval of LGBT advocacy groups overshadowed by the ominous onslaught of Christian and conservative groups who still equate equal love to Sodom and Gomorrah. The tweets popping out of this demographic show a general lack of understanding of the difference between being temporarily suspended and being fired, as well as a first grade reading of the First Amendment, what constitutes free speech, and the implications of homophobia.

The comments themselves, which ranged from likening homosexuality to beastialia and Uncle Tom’ing the entire pre-Civil Rights movement Black population, were most certainly not Robertson innocently expressing his beliefs, faith, or opinion. His vivid description of anal sex included actually mocking gay men, and his slippery slope argument lacks any basis in faith but rather a grossly scientifically inaccurate assumption. Extending upon this, he equates people who love people of the same gender to people who have murdered innocent lives. This is not expressing one’s faith, nor was it a mildly acceptable response to the question.

To address the largest concern, Robertson has not had his First Amendment rights infringed on. In fact, he utilized them to the fullest degree in his interview with GQ. The First Amendment protects Robertson’s speech from government laws and suppression, not how society responds to the speech of an individual. Nowhere in the first amendment does it say private entities need to agree with or provide a soapbox for others beliefs. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the first amendment is.

Speech is never neutral. Robertson wasn’t simply expressing his opinion or his faith, he was advancing a viewpoint that devalues those who are LGBT. While this may be a product of his faith and upbringing or just his own opinion, it is this kind of rhetoric that oppresses and does psychological violence to people. It creates an atmosphere that justifies devaluing LGBT people, which translates into actual violence and institutionalized discrimination, something that feels entirely at odds with Christian philosophy.

If you look at the actual content and celebrity buzz around Duck Dynasty before the incident, Robertson family has been actively expressing their Christian faith and political conservatism extensively for quite some time. A&E has been fine with their expression up until Robertson discriminated against a group of people, which is no longer a neutral or innocent expression of faith or political belief but advocating an ideology which perceives a group of people as less than human.

These defenses mirror a misreading of the old Voltaire saying about not agreeing with someone but defending their right to say it. Just because we defend the right to say it doesn’t mean society will let people with inflammatory and offensive rhetoric get off free by screaming “free speech.” Violent rhetorical practices need to be understood as such, and by letting people say whatever they want freely without any social repercussion at all leads to complicity with discrimination. What Robertson experienced was his free expression leading to outrage and real world consequences, which he needs to accept instead of victimize himself over.

Those dancing the cell block tango with the “they-had-it-coming” defense say that A&E should have been aware of the beliefs of self-proclaimed rednecks from the get go and lambast them for being surprised at something obvious. The inherent flaw on this is the generalization of people who are rednecks and christians as innately homophobic, which is a problematic view. There are many people of faith and also on the right who respectfully believe marriage is between a man and a women while acknowledging the legitimacy of LGBT rights and are able to express that inoffensively. Even if the majority of Southerners or Christians believe what Robertson believes, it is in no way something they were born into (as opposed to being LGBT, which is scientifically proven to not be a choice). As such, it doesn’t justify them saying violent things simply because they are “rednecks.”

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal went on to compare the situation to Miley Cyrus’s antics, saying she got a laugh while Robertson got suspended. Even if Cyrus is lewd and absurd on TV, she didn’t actively characterize an entire group of people as subhuman murderers. There was no implication to Cyrus’s expression, while Robertson’s implicated anyone who identifies as LGBT.

This is not an issue of ‘political correctness’ in the vein the ‘defenders’ have constructed it to be. This is about addressing forms of language that marginalize, oppress, antagonize, and do violence. A&E has demonstrated that there are repercussions for violent discourse, even for the star of it’s most successful TV show. Robertson stood by his values and so did A&E.

There is no double standard on the ‘left’. Liberal megastar Alec Baldwin (also a well known homophobe) shouted several homophobic slurs to a reporter, a much less formal context, and was subsequently suspended and then fired by MSNBC not a month ago. Same story, different political ideology, same result. By definition, not a double standard, but rather a standard industry practice.

The reality is that the left did not collectively censor Phil Robertson, nor was there a massive conference where PC-obsessed liberals demanded A&E erase Duck Dynasty from history. What happened was that A&E did what any other and every other sensible business does, damage control.

The question remains if the Christian conservative right would cause the same outcry in any other instance. The answer is most certainly a no, considering earlier this year Richie Incognito of the Miami Dolphins was suspended for the season after making racist remarks in private to a teammate. He was not surrounded by the rallying calls of First Amendment rights, however.

Not everything is a First Amendment right. In fact, only five things are First Amendment rights. The right to being on a commercial TV space is not one of them. I do not expect a Evangelical TV station to air my 30 minute analysis on Nietzsche’s and Dawkins’ critique of Christianity because it is their airspace to use as they choose. Arguably, A&E has exercised it’s freedom of speech by choosing to not advocate discourse it disagrees with in its airspace.

What we see here is a highly politicized figure, one who stands for the basic stereotype of Evangelical Christian Conservative southerners, experiencing backlash for an internalized symptom of that political movement. While some people are legitimately morally bankrupt and selfish enough to only care that they won’t be able to watch a single character in a TV reality show, most are feeling at odds because they can’t come to terms with the fact that homophobia is outdated and no longer socially acceptable.

There is nothing to remotely suggest ever that affluent white folk will have to worry about their free speech being endangered.  Ultimately nothing bad happened as a result of a show’s star getting temporarily suspended from a TV show he technically doesn’t own the rights to. He is still able to express himself on his website and any number of online and broadcasted news sources. While I am all for free expression, I don’t think people who express violent views should be able to get off free because it’s what they believe. If the Robertson family believes LGBT people are terrorists, that is fine, but there are and need to be repercussions to discriminating against people. A&E is letting the Robertson family know that there is a line between free expression and advocating forms of violence, and that Phil crossed it.

The only thing left to be said of the defense is that if one takes the maxim of homophobia and hatred to heart, they will be able to justify Robertson 100 percent of the time. Discrimination and prejudice is not a Christian value, nor is it an American value. This message needs to be made loud and clear to those who are hiding their intolerance in their faith or political beliefs.

You don’t have to agree with A&E’s decision and you don’t have to be pro-LGBT, in fact you have the right to do so. What you should probably realize, however, is that the first amendment does not come into play at all in this controversy. If you disagree with A&E because you are also a homophobe, that is fine, just please don’t sugarcoat your intolerance.