Readers discuss Clayton Hardiman's point: Free speech isn't free of consequences

Clayton Hardiman's column, "Free speech isn't free of consequences," about the Olympian booted from the Greek team, stirred some debate.

Hardiman wrote:

Papachristou was kicked off the Greek womens track team for posting a -- racist? tasteless? insensitive? -- joke on Twitter about the growing number of African immigrants in her country. With so many Africans in Greece ... at least the West Nile mosquitoes will eat homemade food!!! she tweeted, along with comments of her support for the countrys extreme far-right Golden Dawn political party.

OK. Spectacularly unfunny. But should an unfunny joke -- even a horribly tasteless joke -- be enough to end ones lifelong dreams of Olympic participation? What about freedom of speech? Shouldnt Papachristou have the freedom to voice her opinion?

Well, of course she should. And she exercised that freedom. But often the people who shout the loudest about freedom of speech are the quickest to confuse it with freedom from consequences.

michprogressive supports allowing people to say really dumb things:

Freedom of speech is that, freedom to say what you feel, regardless of if it's really stupid. Conservative talk radio has been pushing that envelope for a very long time. But free speech has it's limits. If your speech causes physical harm to someone (yelling fire in a theater) or if are libelous then you can be held accountable. Sports, entertainment figures and politicians will continue to speak their minds and sometimes stick their feet in their mouths. It just proves that they are human like the rest of us.

I believe brainless is the problem. Whether I admire the person for other talents, brainless will always be what I remember about them.

Original post:
Readers discuss Clayton Hardiman's point: Free speech isn't free of consequences