# Dr. Laura wants her first amendment rights back...

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dr-laura-wants-her-first-amendment-rights-back/550594>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [August 18, 2010, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dr-laura-wants-her-first-amendment-rights-back/550594 "2010-08-18T01:27:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 214

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\
**Post date:** [August 20, 2010, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dr-laura-wants-her-first-amendment-rights-back/550594/214 "2010-08-20T16:29:30Z")

</div>

Interestingly enough, the Board’s members were not always so sanguine about speech having consequences.

In [this thread in 2007](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=444239), here’s what I said about the US woman’s bridge team after they held up a sign saying, “We did not vote for Bush,” and got suspended by their organization:

> [@U.S. Bridge Federation slams its victorious team for "WE DID NOT VOTE FOR BUSH" sign](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-bridge-federation-slams-its-victorious-team-for-we-did-not-vote-for-bush-sign/426566/5):
>
> I believe in free speech, but “free speech” doesn’t immunize me from the consequences of exercising my right to free speech when representing a non-political organization of which I am a member.
> 
> In other words: the United States Bridge Federation does not strike me as unreasonable for demanding that their representatives eschew political commentary during publicity for official bridge events.
> 
> This is not an encroachment on the right of “free speech” as that right is generally understood. The players were there representing the organization, the event, as opposed to being there in their own persons. The organization can reasonably require that they limit their commentary to event-related platitudes, and can enforce that requirement by whatever sanctions are in their legal power to levy.
> 
> I will say that “treason” and “sedition” are charges that are over-the-top… but of course the United States Bridge Federation is not making such charges.

Many other posters disagreed with me at the time. It sure is nice to see my views on the general issue coming into acceptance.

And no – no. I won’t hear any objections about the unanimous opinions now being the result of disliking Dr. laura and her message, and the mixed opinion in 2007 arising from the fact that the message then was anti-Bush, and therefore laudable. Dopers take positions based on facts; they just don’t do things like that.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dr-laura-wants-her-first-amendment-rights-back/550594)._