The first conclusion states that one doesn’t have to operate in a malicious spirit to do tremendous harm (Blow 2013). Insensitivity and ignorance in a person are very insufficient, and intolerance portrayed by any given person who is disarming is very dangerous. The second conclusion from this article can be drawn from Robertson ability to protect the constitutional right to voice his opinion and attain a corporate right of deciding if his views are consistent with corporate ethos.
