Right to offend?

Cameron has come out defending freedom to offend... but I'm guessing you're only free to offend certain people, because one could say that Jim Clancy who was a senior host/ anchor on CNN got let go from his position of over 30 years for supposedly causing offence to Jews, so we're when the powers that be claim that we're free to cause offence, some people are just more free to offend than others? Jim Clancy could just claim that it was his right to cause offence, isn't that what everyone is marching about? It's only in hind sight that we discover that maybe it wasn't such a good idea.

Just by having this "freedom" doesn't mean you have the right to abuse it. This right comes with certain responsibilities, people must exert some common sense- which in most societies is sorely lacking! A person shouldn't be allowed to bully and marginalize people that already feel like they are slowly being expelled by society.

This whole conversation about freedom of speech began with the horrific acts in Paris. The attacks on the satirical magazine were inexcusable, yet people gloss over the reason as to why this establishment was attacked. The magazine would poke fun at every religion but it was evident that they did target one religion more than the others, the whole point of satire is that it's meant to attack people in power, but above all else it's meant to be intelligent. Now how much intelligence do you think was required to pick up on people's irrational fears, which in this case would be Islam and make a joke out of it? The Muslim population is so often de- humanised in western media and it is the responsibility of professional journalist to show some common sense when depicting them.