It is simpler than any mathematics of modern world, to understand the logical recognition of freedom. Interestingly, freedom of a person actually becomes a limitation of other person. Where in a society a person enjoys the liberty to live, all other persons are actually ceased the freedom of their actions to snatch the right to live of other person. Similarly no person enjoys the freedom to interfere in the privacy of other person. So in order to protect the civil liberties of a person, state has to impose limitations on ultimate freedoms of a person. In any society, no one can enjoy the ultimate taste of freedom in action, deeds and expression. Freedom of expression is not absolute and must be used responsibly in highly pluralistic world to ensure the sentimental rights of cultures and religions. Free speech should not be used a weapon to harm the others on any account, rather it should be used to ensure the establishment of a free and open society. Reckless use of this freedom can only make situations more complicated and eventually make people less free to address the critical issues for social interaction and cooperation. Philosophy behind the free speech doctrine is to protect the democratic values and to enable people to point out wrong doings that tend to erode the social fabric and undermine the creative thinking. So any act of free senseless speech can turn the situation hostile in any direction where other fundamental rights become more vulnerable and serve no purpose to democratic values.First condition of liberty is its limitation; life is a balance of interferences, like the suspension of earth in space negating gravity. Men are so diverse in capacity and courage that without restraint their natural differences would breed and multiply through thousands artificial inequalities into a stagnant and hopeless stratification of mankind. So there comes law as this forum has certain laws to protect the other fundamental rights of its members. But freedom of expression should not belong to man who has his own forum, as Journalist A. J. Liebling of The New Yorker wrote a line that for many years framed the debate over the power of the media: “Freedom of the press belongs to the man who has his own press.” there should be a rational way to settle the differnce through healthy debate rather imposing decesions.
Qamar
________________
Just a comment