Would there be any freedom of press or speech if one must reduce his vocabulary to vapid innocuous euphemism? An author should be real in treating his subject and be allowed to express his thoughts and ideas in his own words.
—People of the State of California v. Lawrence Ferlinghetti, No. B27585 (Municipal Court of the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, Oct. 3, 1957), in Ronald K. L. Collins and David M. Skover, The People v. Ferlinghetti: The Fight to Publish Allen Ginsberg’s “Howl” (Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2019), 115
As an artist who, in the manner and form presented on this website—and in his books and recordings available for sale through it—chooses to express himself in such a way without reservation, hesitation, trepidation, regret, apology, or fear of reproach; remaining ever adamant in his commitment to never compromise his artistic integrity or succumb to censorship of any kind, Jono Borden hereby asserts and invokes his lawful right to do so under the following international agreements and national legislation which protect him and guarantee his freedom of speech and expression as a human right fundamental to the sound, democratic functioning of a just and civilized society.
Obviously, the state’s responsibility should be to legislate rules for a well-ordered society. It has no right or duty to creep into the bedrooms of the nation.
—Martin O’Malley, “Unlocking the Locked Step of Law and Morality,” The Globe and Mail, 12 December 1967, page 6. Paraphrased by Pierre Trudeau as “There’s no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation,” 21 December 1967, CBC Television News, time code 0:37
That is to say, with respect to the Law of Nations, and with recourse to the same, videlicet:
American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man, Res. XXX, Final Act of the Ninth International Conference of American States (Pan American Union), Bogotá, Colombia, March 30–May 2, 1948, ancillary obligation to Charter of the Organization of American States, 30 April 1948, 119 UNTS 1609, Can TS 1990 No 23 (entered into force 13 December 1951) [ADRDM/COAS], arts. 2(f), 3(l), 6, 11, 12, 17, 19, 45(a); art. IV
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, GA Res 217A (III), UNGAOR, 3rd Sess, Supp No 13, UN Doc A/810 ([10 December] 1948) 71 [UDHR], art. 19
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 7 March 1966, 660 UNTS 195, Can TS 1970 No 28 (entered into force 4 January 1969) [ICEAFRD], art. 5(d)(viii)
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 December 1966, 993 UNTS 3, Can TS 1976 No 46 (entered into force 3 January 1976) [ICESCR], art. 15
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 19 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171, Can TS 1976 No 47 (entered into force 23 March 1976) [ICCPR], art. 19, ss. 1, 2
American Convention on Human Rights “Pact of San José, Costa Rica”, 22 November 1969, 1144 UNTS 17955 (entered into force 18 July 1978) [ACHR], art. 13
The freedom to speak one’s mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty—and thus a good unto itself—but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole.
—Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46, 50–51 (1988), quoting Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of the United States, 466 U.S. 485, 503–504 (1984)
Further, with respect to the Law of Canada, and with recourse to the same, videlicet:
Canadian Bill of Rights, S.C. 1960, c. 44, s. 1(d)
A court is the proper forum for resolution of an allegation of obscenity. [F]reedom of expression does not stop at the border. [I]t will be very difficult to make the case of obscenity against a book. [P]ornographic materials play a more important role in the gay and lesbian communities[.] The protection of expressive freedom is central to the social and political discourse in our country. […]Authors and artists have suffered the indignity of having their works condemned as obscene, and not fit to enter the country. Perhaps most important of all, ordinary Canadians have been denied important pieces of literature. […]Systemic problems call for systemic solutions.
—Little Sisters Book and Art Emporium v. Canada (Minister of Justice),  2 S.C.R. 1120, 2000 SCC 69 at paras 8, 10, 13, 14, 18, 20, 21, Binnie J. [Little Sisters No. 1]