First, this is NOT censorship, and I'm far from alone in saying that. (And kudos to L.Z. Granderson, whose background is in sportswriting, to note this.) Businesses have the constitutional right to control their company's communications, and in various ways, to control their employees' on the job communications.
And, all sorts of related things. Only governments can engage in censorship. And, too many liberals and conservatives alike get that wrong.
Now, per Charles Pierce, whether a corporation should be able to control OFF the job commenting is another thing entirely. As is whether liberals should support an idea like that, or even self-censorship.
In short, we have the idea of tolerance colliding with the idea of free speech.
Well, free speech USED to be a principle of liberalism.
But, with the surge in New Wave political correctness led by the social justice warrior types, it seems to be less and less that way. And, that's dangerous.
First, I'd rather have life real, than in a cocoon. It's good for Robertson to be honest about his statements, rather than hiding.
Second? Not too long ago, employers would fire employees for making PRO-gay remarks. Or, PRO-atheism ones. It's hypocritical to applaud A&E for putting Robertson on ice without wanting the same to happen to you.
The third riffs on this a bit. To use the old Texas phrase, "you dance with them what brung you." Stereotypes about rednecks aside, for A&E to not recognize they were getting a full human package from a Southern, red-state redneck is clueless. Or else lying by no comment.
Do you really want to applaud a corporation for acting like this just because it's worried about the monetary bottom line rather than principles?
So, social justice warriors? Especially those of you in the Gnu Atheism and Atheism Plus movements, who have been doing some dumb things pre-Christmas this year already anyway?
First, learn what censorship is, and is not. (Ditto on this one for wingnuts.)
Second, learn that "tolerance" is a sword that cuts both ways.
Third, learn that "tolerance" isn't the same as "acceptance."