There are some distinctions to be made. Viewpoints can’t hurt anyone. Only actions can. There is a difference between speaking and writing about something and doing it. Incitement to racial hatred is a crime. Incitement to rape is a crime. Being racist or sexist isn’t. Only through discussion will those people begin to change their minds. Closing down the discussion serves only to drive people underground.

You have also presumed that all liberal views are helpful. How do you account for the fundamental Christian who believes that being Gay is wrong and wants to say so? They may find gay people and liberals threatening to their way of life, to their children and to their eternal souls. Just because liberalism looks empathetic and helpful doesn’t mean that it is when viewed through a lens you don’t share.

And yes, we should be listening to Joe. Simply because Joe exists and if his writing is good enough, it should be curated. Why? For the reason I explained above. You have picked an extreme example, there aren’t many people who would like to read his stuff — but who gets to decide? And wouldn’t it cultivate an interesting discussion about whether there’s much difference between what Joe is doing, and what thousands of lovely liberal people ignore in abattoirs up and down the country?

I’m not a vegetarian, I’m just playing devil’s advocate ;o)