Community Chat

[Bri369]

I think it's important to understand the context of his comments. 

He was speaking about how children of celebrities should be protected.  He was on Dax Shepard's podcast:

"Shepard explained that because the First Amendment makes photographing children of famous people legal, he & Bell had to encourage journalists to leave kids alone out of respect & decency. On the podcast, both men talked about not being able to take their kids on a walk or to the beach without being harassed by cameras & reporters.

It was at that point Prince Harry made his comments about the First Amendment, prompted by what Shepard had said. Prince Harry didn’t say that the First Amendment should be undone, but that news outlets should find a balancing point that allows his children to have some privacy." 

[Nancy Drew]

It's being reported everywhere. I heard the story ten times before Hannity. Are we supposed to not listen to them either? Face it, news and reporters you don't like get a voice also. Take off the power pants.

[Marp]

---

@Nancy Drew wrote:

Which just prove you don't call something bonkers if you don't understand it. He sure enjoys his 1st Admendment rights but then again rules for thee but not for me is his tag line.

---

Which is exactly what is happening in this thread.  Harry says something about the first amendment and is excoriated yet the majority of posters are exercising the right they want to deny to Harry.

Personally, I agree that many aspects of the application of the first amendment is "bonkers", especially as it applies to public figures.