Freedom of speech

Into recent events concerning Dutch politician Wilders being denied access from Britain due to his 'freedom of speech'. I have decide to clarify, just what freedom of speech should imply in my opinion.

First and foremost of all, I am a strong believer in freedom of speech. No person should be denied to share his or her opinion into any public domain. Let preachers preach, let doom mongers monger and let people and politician challenge all settled norms and values. Let no dogma alive. As the matter of fact, I think any belief, in what form soever needs to be criticized, challenged, ridiculed and cheered if only to develop its contents further.

But where lies the limit? When is freedom of speech no longer freedom of speech? Which norms and values shouldn't be compromised by new ethics? Which people shouldn't abandon their good morals? And when do preacher's generalizations turn into accusations?

Lets formulate it clear and simple, so that interpretations and generalizations will only improve it:

“No publicly distributed opinion may directly encourage physical harm to another person.”

Let this foremost be the judging of opinions, whomever expresses them. In addition I am more overly of the opinion that no opinion should be uttered without argumentation. Foremost we should respect life.

Good day,

Frederik