There is more to free speech than what the law says about it. No one here as far as I can see argues that forcing RMS out is illegal. People argue for the princ

There is more to free speech than what the law says about it. No one here as far as I can see argues that forcing RMS out is illegal. People argue for the principle that you should be able to express your views without fear of losing your livelihood. The problem is that there is no universally trusted authority on what is and what isn't acceptable speech. I find what RMS said to be less outrageous than what I regularly hear from politicians in recent presidential debates. Does it mean I should start firing employees expressing those views because of "consequences" or "freedom of association"? It would lead to a tribal world where you either walk the exact line of your institution/employer/group or you're out possibly with grave consequences for your financial and family situation. In my country it's illegal to fire people for their political views even if the employer finds them immoral and incompatible with the culture they want to foster. It's part of legal and social framework to protect freedom of expression. Freedom of expression neither starts nor end with what The Constitution says about it.