Commentary
In a free country, the public square should be accessible for everyone, not just for those who adhere to the “correct” or majority opinions. A private entity like a church or a business need not make space available for all comers, and can legitimately pick and choose. In contrast, a city cannot discriminate against the “wrong” opinions when regulating the use of public parks, conference centres, or the square in front of city hall.
In a free society, citizens get to decide for themselves what is true or false, or what is hateful or not hateful, without the government deciding on their behalf and then censoring the “wrong” perspective. Denying access to public places (paid for by all taxpayers, not just some) is one form of censorship. When everyone thinks alike, nobody thinks very much. The success of democracy and the progress of science desperately depend on public debate….