Call it the axis of small-mindedness or perhaps the “axis of the forever offended.”

I say “fuck them all”

As was expressed above, the problem cause by the college is the ‘disciplinary procedures’ which are expected. (Arguably, an investigation has a cooling effect on free speech as well, but the idea of not investigating in order to not cool free speech seems to itself be problematic.)

and other cartoons on this site

Also, I understand that the National Secular Society are preparing a formal protest to the principal of Clare College.

Nuh-uh – would not either – it’s not a violation of free speech to express outrage at those who express outrage at those who express outrage at those who express outrage at those who express outrage. Keep up.

There is no fault at expressing outrage at an insult, or in demanding an apology, or in insisting that a respected news organization inhibit their reporters from making these types of comments.

Indeed, it would be a violation of freedom of speech to condemn those who express outrage merely because they are expressing outrage – to say that speech which is expressing outrage is not to be allowed.

I find it surprising how many people insist on the free speech rights of printing a cartoon, but not the free speech rights over expressing outrage over a cartoon.

However, the proper limit for expressing outrage for words written (or cartoons drawn) is with words and private action (meaning, the types of actions people can perform every day, such as deciding with whom to do business, who to invite to a gathering, or who to go with to the football game).

Free speech is not violated when words (or cartoons) are met with words (or cartoons) or private peaceful actions in response, but only when one escalates the conflict to threats of violence (including criminal punishment). Where none of that has happened, no rights have been violated.