As I have gotten older, I came to see the value in true free speech, and how absolutely crucial it is to discourage anything or anyone who would set out to stifle that, even if their intentions seemed good. It is a very dangerous route to take, if you begin to either make a criminal offence or use other methods to suppress it. For a start, if you do that, who is to decide who can say what, and when? What happens when other forms of free speech, or opinions that you concur with are removed? Too late to do anything about it then, so, whenever possible, I would defend a person's right to say a thing, and all of that. I had cause to have a dialogue recently with an old man of 72, who supports the BNP. He was having a rant about Muslims, a very confused one, it must be said! As ill informed as his views may have been, he remains entitled to them, and who am I to say that he should not be allowed them? No one should be able to tell that man that he is not entitled to make an ass of himself, each time he opened his mouth to me. If we ban points of view, however much you may disagree with them, we merely offer those views a sort of false status, higher than it merits - nothing generates clamour quite like 'something' being banned, right? You also offer a form of 'romanitc martrydom' to the person or group who are making a statement, by banning them, they can turn around and say that the reason you are doing so, is that you are afraid of truth, and not willing to debate it. Perfect example, Slick Nick Griffin (who even blames his lazy eye on Muslims, lol). There was this hysterical fear that by him going on QT, the British public, not historically fans of Fascism, would be magically won over by this man. Well, maybe on this occasion we should have had a bit more faith in old Joe Public, as Griffin got his air time, he made a total rasper of himself it must be said, and his party did so poorly at the next election that they failed to get even ONE MP. Griffin also suffered heavy loses in his own constituency.