I have seen on a US list
a very vigorous discussion of whether the Library of Congress's action violates the privacy of people who posted tweets.
It is interesting that
this very vigorous discussion has so far drawn no women (unless KC is a woman), and certainly not a single defence of the Quebec bill as an expression that sexual (or nowadays gender) equality is more important than the others.
Not exact matches
We have as a society somewhere along the line gotten on a
very,
very wrong track re our tolerance of a full and complete and
vigorous discussion of the investing realities.
There's a
very important distinction between factual statements and
vigorous expressions of opinion (sometimes discussed at Lucia's, as here; see the link to Milkovich v. Lorain Journal for more
discussion), but I can't see how an EPA person gets to testify about how Steyn's readership would or should interpret the words.