Quote Originally Posted by Starter View Post
The problem you have when free speech is limited is knowing when to stop. In a free society many people say things which are offensive to others. It's the price you pay for being able to freely express your own views. Banning certain viewpoints may sound good when it's something you find offensive.

The problem is "mission creep". When you have banned the most excessive and unpleasant expressions, where do you go from there? The range of subjects allowed in discourse is now narrower. There are always people who will strongly object to what is now the outer range of expression (after banning the other stuff). Repeat the cycle until you have a tightly controlled society with essentially NO freedom of speech.
I don't advocate for banning them or suppressing free speech in any way. All I say is that IMO that paper before the attack was a piece of garbage and after the attack still is a piece of garbage. Now they've became some sort of heroes of free speech when I see them more as hijackers of free speech... the down-side of free speech if I may, you have to take them too 'cause it doesn't really work any other way.