On the difference between ‘must’ and ‘should’ when it comes to free speech.

This is a good point.

As I noted when Chris Kluwe called on people to steal (or perhaps borrow) Ender’s Game because purchasing the book would put a few pennies in the pocket of a person he disagreed with, no one’s saying you don’t have the right to engage in a boycott. No one’s saying you should be forced to do anything you want to do and no one’s saying that your refusal to purchase a copy of a book is a violation of an author’s First Amendment rights. What I am saying is that your politicization of every facet of the public sphere makes you kind of a dick and leads to a coarsening of society.

It’s somewhat in reaction to Randall Munroe’s unfortunate xkcd comic on the subject of free speech – Munroe is very good at what he does; it’s just that he seems to think that political commentary is part of what he does, and it’s not, really – but I’m less annoyed about that than some.  That’s because the attitude found in that strip will sublime instantly the second we decide to apply the same standards to same-sex marriage contributions to, say, people who contribute to Palestinian-supporting organizations. Or people who want to legalize partial-birth abortions. Or, hey, the rate things are going: people who contribute to global warming groups! – Because global warming supporters are on the way to becoming about as unpopular as people in the first two categories.

Always cherish the right of idiots to speak, in other words. Because ‘idiot’ is a subjective term, and one day it will be applied to you.