Alright, you're making a very good point here one that I did not think of. But in the context of what FREE SPEECH is about, there always should be a level playing field. No one should be stifled from voicing, or forced to adopt an opinion...
I say let the idiot voice his twisted convoluted thoughts and teach the children to think!
"But in the context of what FREE SPEECH is about, there always should be a level playing field. No one should be stifled from voicing, or forced to adopt an opinion..."
1) I agree that 'free speech' means 'No one should be stifled from voicing, or forced to adopt an opinion' and i agree its an ideal to support overall.
2) The term 'level playing field' is an inapt term in the context of free speech. It raises the bugaboos of things like 'equal time' and 'fairness doctrine' and other true enemies of free speech. Free means Freedom - no restraints.
You cannot enforce equality without impinging on freedom.
Freedom often creates un-level playing fields as those with more resources can exercise freedom more robustly (again, Dan Rather vs me).
3) I think you are getting lots of feedback that this is far from a 'free speech' issue. It's about the appropriate role and responsibility of a taxpayer-paid teacher in the classroom. Had this lunatic been doing his ranting on his free time, there would be no issue at all.