ACLU Defends Anti-Biden Signs | Bill O'Reilly

The ACLU is defending a woman pro-bono over her "obscene" anti-Biden signs, Bill O'Reilly reports.

However, Bill believes the matter is best left to local authorities.
---

Follow Us on Social!

ABOUT:
The First exists for the massive group of Americans whose voices have been ignored. The people who are passionate about American values, aren’t afraid to engage big ideas, and who care about where the country is headed. The people who are conservative in their views but aren’t beholden to any party’s talking points. The independent thinkers who rely on things like the facts, context, and perspective to inform their ideology. The people who, although they form the backbone of this country, have been cast aside by the politicians and the media.

The people whose beliefs and values are increasingly being cancelled. They are why we created The First. You are why we created The First.

We’re the home of free speech, free ideas, and free TV.

[jillybean]

Big difference between threatening and obscene Bill

[jamesfullwood]

Bill is just going more to the left every week.

[henrysara]

People can burn the flag, but not express their opinions politely.

[FREEDOM-qbdb]

Oh please, Bill. Legislating what is obscene would mean half the displays in museums would have to be removed. Obviously that would include tee shirts with obscenities on them. After all, children see those, Bill. O'Reilly really blew this One.

[jluepke]

Public obscenity is also free speech. Either you believe in freedom or you don't.

[djmars]

That's where I disagree with you Bill the first amendment should not be superseded by local towns and municipalities if you have a sign that is obscene that local town or municipality can sit and spin for all I care because I am getting tired of being censored by goody-two-shoes busybodies.

[wetwriterrr]

Sorry Bill you are WRONG!!! The 1st needs to be defended as much as the 2nd.

[BendingUnit]

its not public obscenity's, its public TRUTH!

[YouYou-iuwo]

Idk, this is touchy... is free speech only free speech when everyone is in agreement??? I'm not condoning it but she does have the RIGHT...

[zachtaylor]

I completely disagree. Who will decide what is “obscene, ” Bill? A majority of voters. Today, it’s the F word. Tomorrow, it could be anything. Slippery slope here.

[bertg.]

It's a First Amendment issue, Bill, not a 'local' one, whatever you mean by that.

[billyray]

I thought you were one of the good smh

[ggriff]

Feeling DO NOT supersede Constitutional Rights Mr. Bill! Perhaps you should re- read the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

[raymullen]

There is such a thing as GOOING TO FAR and
that's just too FAR...

[xcherokee]

Love your commentary Bill but you're simply wrong. You're creating a slippery slope. This is coming from someone who would never display these signs.

[dragonfly]

"We'll do it live, fvck it"

[yt]

A town ordinance does not override the constitution and the first amendment. Perhaps very unpopular things are said and very foul language is used, if you can’t take it, you have no understanding of the first amendment. I don’t want it in my neighborhood but I’m not gonna do anything to stop it. You either have a constitutional right or you don’t

[chrisfranco]

I agree with Bill. We don’t want public obscenity

[thismayoistoospicy]

As one who often uses such 'enhancers' in my own verbal displays. No on ordinances, or any one ruling over what you can say.. BUT bear in mind that these people want to destroy the souls. Excercise your right, but no need to be just as obscene as the left are.

[JohnSmith-eosp]

What is the criteria for "obscene"? Who decides it and with what unintended consequences for pursuing a crusade against obscenity?