The atheist case for free speech

"What constitutes hate speech to one segment of the population is righteous argumentation to another."

"All deeply controversial speech is by definition offensive to someone or some group. And while you might relish the thought of your obviously correct viewpoint holding sway and the silencing of their obvious lies, if they are in power, it’ll be you who is muzzled (or worse)."

"Free speech is not free. It comes with a cost, and that cost is allowing speech that is heinous, foul, false, repugnant, and immoral. It is a very steep and painful price to pay, but one far preferable to a lack of free speech, which may serve you and yours if you and yours are in charge, but most certainly won’t if others are."

"We must never insist that we maintain an air-tight monopoly on truth. We must always be open to being wrong. We must always be open to new evidence. New insights. New arguments. Silenced or condemned viewpoints may, sometimes, actually be correct. Suppressed speech may, sometimes, still hold a kernel of truth. And even when our enemies’ speech is irrefutably incorrect, it can still be useful, for simply by engaging with it, we can sharpen our own opinion, better defend truth in the face of challenges, muster even stronger evidence to bolster our position, and not grow lazy, knee-jerk, or dogmatic in our views."

"Free speech is the most fundamental right of a civilized society. In a sense, it is the right upon which all other rights depend, because free and unrestricted speech is the only way any society can hope to notice and correct its mistakes so that it can make moral progress. The moment we ban the expression of any idea, even if we do it with the best intentions in the world, we’ve set foot upon a fatally slippery slope. To do this is to say that there are policies that may no longer be questioned, aspects of society that may no longer be discussed – and down that path lie dogmatism, tyranny, and all the black and terrible evils that come with them. Once an idea is banned because it is too noxious, too radical, too subversive – and once people become used to this – then the line inevitably moves, and the next most radical idea becomes the new target. The only way to stop this process is to cut it off at the root – to declare that we will never countenance the banning of any idea, no matter how strongly we disagree with it."