"If you accept -- and I do -- that freedom of speech is important, then you are going to have to defend the indefensible. That means you are going to be defending the right of people to read, or to write, or to say, what you don't say or like or want said.
The Law is a huge blunt weapon that does not and will not make distinctions between what you find acceptable and what you don't. This is how the Law is made. ...
The Law is a blunt instrument. It's not a scalpel. It's a club. If there is something you consider indefensible, and there is something you consider defensible, and the same laws can take them both out, you are going to find yourself defending the indefensible."
As a journalism major at Tennessee I learned the value of the First Amendment, and that we have to defend expression, even if we don't agree with it, or risk losing our right to express as well. I will always defend people's right to express themselves. It's too important and precious not to.
The entire post is here: http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2008/12/why-defend-freedom-of-icky-speech.html?m=1