… Did you hear any speaker in the opposition to this motion, eloquent as one of them was, to whom you would delegate the task of deciding for you what you could read? Who… would give the job of deciding for you, relieve you of the responsibility of hearing what you might have to hear? Do you know anyone? Hands up… [waits for audience members to put their hands up] Do you know anyone to whom you would give this job? Does anyone have a nominee? you mean there’s no one in Canada good enough to decide what I can read or hear? I had no idea. But there’s a law that says there must be such a person, or there’s a subsection of some piddling law that says it. Well to hell with that law, then. It’s inviting you to be liars and hypocrites, and deny what you evidently [referring to nobody in the audience putting their hand up] know already.

…especially Prior Restraint, as it’s known in the United States, where it’s banned by the first amendment to the constitution. It may not be determined in advance what words are apt or inapt. No one has the knowledge that would be required to make that call and more to the point, one has to suspect the motives of those who do so.

Crazy. Like there’s some kind of class war or something, or like all you have to do is scratch a liberal to find some kind of authoritarian, genocidal monster who only cares about money and power.