Freedom of speech. To an extent.

As a big proponent of freedom of speech, I find one of the most annoying statements anyone can make is 'I support freedom of speech, but there is some stuff you shouldn't be allowed to say.', often included is the classic 'you have to draw the line somewhere, and yes, you do have to draw the line. The answer is that you should be allowed to say anything. That is freedom of speech.

Noam Chomsky put it far better than I can attempt to when he said "Goebbels was in favour of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favour of free speech, then you're in favour of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you're not in favour of free speech."

Freedom of speech means allowing everyone to say anything. 'Drawing the line' at any point means that the government of the time can choose where that line is drawn, and in turn, this means that they can simply choose to make it illegal to say you support any ideal they do not. This may be all right while the people in power support the same ideals as you, but what about when they don't?

Freedom of speech has to be an absolute thing, and yet people still talk about wanting freedom of speech for some things and not others. This is a nonsense.

A quote that I use far too often when it comes to this subject is as follows, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." --Evelyn Beatrice Hall (As a summary of Voltaire's beliefs.)