After reading the views of so many posters, I suppose it's only fair that I climb down off the fence and offer my own opinion on the subject.

I believe that 'freedom of speech' is not the simple concept  some think it to be. I tbelieve it is an incredibly complex one, comprising many many layers of competing rights and responsibilities And if we are going to defend it we need to examine the nuts and bolts and full ramifications of what we are defending rather than waffle on about some vague, feel-good theory.

In a democracy the rights of the individual have always to be balanced against the rights of society as a whoe, that's why we have laws. 

No-one can be prevented from having an opinion or from expressing it in private, but when it comes to expressing opinions publicly the right of the individual to say whatever he or she pleases has to be weighed against the damage it may do to society as a whole - or to any section of society, and it is clealy the weighing of this balance cannot simply  be left to the discretion of each individual.otherwise we would end up with a form of anarchy in which all laws pertaining to defamation and even libel or slander would have to be abolished. 

As I see it, in a democracy the only real option we have is to allow our elected representatives, i.e. our government, to draw the line for us. And if we feel the laws their decision is either too harsh or too lax, then we  can protest it at the ballot box.

This is my own, personal opinion. It does not mply a criticism of those who may feel differently, and I would be really interested to hear the cosidered opinions of those who do (feel differently) .