Robertson first expressed, in admittedly vulgar terms, his incredulity that some men find other men more attractive than women. Fine. Call him insensitive, but it's hardly a debatable point that heterosexuals don't quite grasp the allure of homosexuality.
But that doesn't seem to be his offending statement. When he identified homosexual behavior as a sin, he might as well have robbed a bank on live television. But when he cited the New Testament book of 1st Corinthians as including homosexuality in a list of sins, he had past the point of no return. He's outta there.
Of course, this isn't a violation of Robertson's First Amendment rights, because the censorial actions emanated not from the government, but from a private company, which is not constitutionally barred from doing what it did.
Constitutional issues aside, we are witnessing a profound display of leftist intolerance, and they need to be called on it. Some in the gay activist community demanded Robertson's head because of his "hate."
GLAAD spokesman Wilson Cruz said, "What's clear is that such hateful anti-gay comments are unacceptable to fans, viewers and networks alike." Robertson's removal "has sent a strong message that discrimination is neither a Christian nor an American value."
Discrimination? Who discriminated against whom? Did Robertson call for any action against homosexuals? Did he engage in any discriminatory action against gays? Or did he just voice an opinion that GLAAD finds contemptible?
Robertson, on the other hand, was the subject of discriminatory action. He was suspended for voicing his Christian beliefs.
The American left -- actually, it's a global phenomenon -- is increasingly intolerant of opposing viewpoints, while holding itself out as the exemplar of tolerance. I've mentioned before the defiance of one university administrator, who defended her suspension of a professor for making available to her students a magazine article that reportedly was critical of homosexual behavior. "We will not tolerate the intolerable," she said.
Similarly, I just read a tweet from CNN's Piers Morgan, which said, "Just as the 2nd Amendment shouldn't protect assault rifle devotees, so the 1st Amendment shouldn't protect vile bigots."