On the limits to free speech

Re Finding some nuance in the free-speech debate, Opinion Feb. 1 Freedom of expression is indeed a right, but there absolutely must be limits that should never be overstepped.

Should anyone ever be allowed to make racist remarks about a neighbour or call our Queen a hooker because they dislike them? And how about if I called Salman Rushdie an unspeakable idiot? Absolutely not!

And such expressions must be punishable. Anyone who wants to draw offensive cartoons about leaders or religions of someone else’s country should try it on someone in their own country and see how acceptable that would be. But at least the Islamic State group wouldn’t seek revenge.

I absolutely condemn the attack in France, but I also believe that a line must be drawn. Margie Pratt, Kingston

The current discussion about free speech misses the point. It is not about the right to shout “Fire” in a crowded cinema, but the right to express opinions. About that, there can be no debate. Stratton Holland, Markham

“Why should irrational belief attract so much reverence?” asks Alan Borovoy. Why, indeed.

It is morally indefensible to state that we should limit free speech and those who conspire to attack and murder those who satirize are expressing their illogical and malevolent desire to do just that.

So there is no middle ground here as implied by the writer. Cartoons, teddy bears and hysterical expressions of hurt for these are not defensible unless we are also prepared to allow fairy tales, hobgoblins and soothsayers to be maintained as moral equivalents. Ronald J. MacPherson, Port Colborne