This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

No shortage of freely speaking about free speech.

— Speak up and get called out — George Pyle | The Salt Lake Tribune

"... Free speech deserves no protection, serves no purpose — and is no fun — unless it strikes a spark, invites a rejoinder, pushes everyone to do more research and welcomes friendly amendments from the floor. ..."

— Holland is a courageous example for UVU students — Lynn Wardle | For The Salt Lake Tribune

" ... Distinguished constitutional lawyer Gene Schaerr filed a brief recently in the Obergefell same-sex marriage case in the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of more than 100 American university professors. One of the brief signers was Utah Valley University President Matthew Holland, a former political science professor. Now Holland has been wrongly criticized for signing the brief. ..."

— Attacks on marriage-brief signers show ugly intolerance of progressive liberals — Derek Monson | For The Salt Lake Tribune

" ... Lacking any rational foundation, the arguments contained in these letters amount to thinly veiled stereotyping of and intolerance toward supporters of the institution of marriage, based primarily on a philosophical and policy disagreement regarding marriage. ..."

— Reason, dignity and the Supreme Court — Ralph Hancock | For The Deseret News

"The key argument — or, rather, rhetorical strategy — of the 'marriage equality' movement was conceived more than 200 years ago by the philosophers of the Enlightenment. When the aggressively secular philosophers of the 18th century realized that simple logic could not actually refute traditional ideas of God or of a Higher Good, they settled on a strategy that did not depend too much on reason: the public would have to be moved by passions and appetites to reject traditional authority, and the rational appeal of transcendent goods would have to be neutralized by a relentless campaign of ridicule conducted by a unified army of prominent writers. Haughty contempt, aided by wit and literary talent, would suffice to intimidate traditionalists and thus supply the defect of truly conclusive reasoning. ..."

— Major global faiths seek mutual respect amid conflict — Michael Gerson | The Washington Post [via The Deseret News]

" ... There is no contradiction between First Amendment absolutism and a moral commitment to the cultivation of mutual respect among the Abrahamic faiths (and outside them). Just as there is no inconsistency between the vigorous defense of America against terrorists and a respectful engagement with Islam. They are, in fact, inseparable. ..."

— Cacophonous liberty is neither gentle nor kind — Robert Leger | The Arizona Republic

" ... Freedom of conscience only exists if it is extended to those outside the mainstream. There's no need to protect the ability to say popular things; a free society lets it all fly. ..."

— You're either for free speech or censorship — Jason Stanford | For The Casper Star Tribune

" ... The problem with limiting free speech protections to smart people of good judgment is that it's supposed to apply to Americans. We're fat and lazy and read at a seventh-grade level. If the Bill of Rights applied only to the worthy among us, it would protect only our mothers and not all of them. ..."

— Fundamentals of free speech — Barry Fagin | For The Colorado Springs Gazette

" ... But when acting on religious conviction, the right question to ask isn't "Am I right?" You're already sure you're right. That's a foregone conclusion. A better question is "Can people who disagree with me continue to live their lives as they choose?" If the answer is yes, then I'll happily sit next to you on a plane, in your pew, or on your prayer rug.

"If not, then we have a problem. More accurately, you do."