In the wake of a foiled terrorist attack in Garland, Texas -- where two gunmen attempted to slaughter those at an event for the best cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad -- some have called the event an "incitement" to violence and questioned whether free speech protects "hate speech."
TheBlaze's national security adviser Buck Sexton took apart the argument in a web special posted Friday, pointing out that "doing something provocative is not hate speech just because those who are provoked hate what is being said or done."
"A religion's prohibition against making images of their holy figures does not have to be respected by anyone other than those who voluntarily choose to do so," he remarked. "Remember, if provocative speech is not protected by law, then by definition, we do not have freedom of speech."
"I'm not saying freedom of speech is absolute and boundless, but lunatics bent on inflicting mass casualties on civilians don't get a say on where those boundaries are," Sexton concluded. "Period."