One of the most esteemed liberties of American citizens is the Freedom of free speech. The First Amendment defines what the Congress can and cannot do concerning the right to free speech. For instance, the Congress cannot pass laws that limit the Freedom of speech. The amendment ensures that the electorate is informed and the local, federal and state powers cannot interfere with that freedom whatever. The citizens can, therefore, air their views and opinions without fear of victimization. However, in 2012, Chick-fil-A Company was victimized and this raised concerns about this freedom of speech.
Chick-fil-A Company was objected to locating its enterprise in Boston by Mayor Thomas Menino. The objection came as a result of Company’s CEO, Dan Cathy, publicly proclaiming his views on same-sex marriage. Cathy proclaimed his opposition to marriage equalities, and this led to bitter reactions from the political class. The Boston Mayor took it a notch higher by declaring that the Chain was not welcome in Boston and licenses would not be issued to them. Chicago Alderman Joe Moreno went ahead to say that he would prevent Chick-fil-A operations in his ward. The stand by the two leaders against the chain had both social and economic impact on the Company (Severson, 2012). The statements made by the two were in direct contradiction of the First Amendment and the right of speech.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Dan Cathy had the right to express his opinion as a US citizen concerning the same-sex marriage. The amendment clearly describes the scope in which an individual can air his views without being victimized. Despite been the CEO of Chick-fil-A, Cathy had freedom of speech and therefore could express himself without the company carrying the undue burden of his statements. The statements were individual opinions and not the stand of the Company. Cathy was within his rights to express his opinion on same-sex marriages. However, the company was made to suffer the consequences of his actions. These burdens were undue to the business, and in Cathy’s case, his freedom of speech was violated.
Works Cited
https://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/30/opinion/randazza-first-amendment/index.html
Severson, K. (2012). Chick-fil-A thrust back into spotlight on gay rights. The New York Times.
