Everyone is all wound up one way or the other about Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty getting suspended. Problem is it's a non story.
Does Phil have freedom of speech to say what he wants? Yes.
But as I've argued before that free speech does not equal freedom from consequences. TV Networks can hire and fire at will and put whatever shows they wish on their air waves. That in turn is their freedom, not supporting that is just as wrong as not supporting freedom of speech in the first place.
Sometimes networks make bonehead choices (like when Firefly was cancelled!!!!) which we as consumers of their products can respond to by either supporting them and watching their choices of shows or boycotting them and refusing to watch their shows.
In this case, while I support the networks right to control what they put on the air, I think they made a boneheaded move. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck it's most likely a duck. They hired the crew of Duck Dynasty because they wanted a reality show about unrefined rednecks being who they are. That's what they got.
My prediction is though that they are playing both sides on this one. By suspending him they appease the crowd that would be offended by his remarks. After a short period of time, the public's memory is short after all, they allow him to return with a big hoopla and the ratings will boom.