[Cold Heat]

“Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative, provided it does not intend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having.” --Lord Justice Sedley:

It certainly applies here, but if the words written with the key board would draw a likely violent reply if uttered in person, then it is not proper speech as your quote illustrates.

Peruse the posters assertions of a directly personal nature and you will see that. If you don't then you are using the quote as justification for personal attacks to cover a lack of knowledge on the subject matter and what can only be identified as salacious and specious argument to elicit a anger response.

In other words.......trolling....

[Mr. Silverback]

I did an in forum on SQ, and you must be a hair trigger kind of guy if you think any of that would justify violence. They don't even come close, and if you think any of those posts would justify violence, please share which ones? And, once again in your first post to SQ you condemned her for answering a post where she received a de facto invitation to respond.

In other words, ou were not only practicing the "free speech for me and none for thee" so prized by the liberal crowd, you have now said that anyone who expresses those opinions should not only shut up, but should expect a beat down. Truly, a mark of real intellectual prowess.

I suggest you quit whining. This is FR, so man up a little.