This time it’s christians taking offense (and getting support from the legal system in India) at the”blasphemy” of revealing the actual mechanism behind a purported “miracle”.
And yet even though freedom of expression needs to be protected (especially when that expression brings truth and clarity in place of lies and obfuscation), there may still be some rationale for restriction. It is harder to justify prohibiting the telling of a truth because of what amounts to a blackmail threat of violent reaction than in the cliche’d case of “yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre” but to some extent the situations are parallel.
My instinct is to just tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may, but reason sometimes advises otherwise and then I have a dilemma.