I’m as happy as anyone that Savage’s often racist, sexist, homophobic and otherwise antiquated ideas on life in America in 2003 will no longer pollute the airwaves via MSNBC.

But anyone who is a strong proponent of free speech should be at least a little uncomfortable with Savage’s axing.

Don’t get me wrong—I’m happy Savage got the boot. But we as gay and lesbian people need to understand clearly why we are celebrating his demise. And we need to make sure the general public understands, too.

Furthermore, we need to ask ourselves some tough questions about where we stand on free speech, regardless of whether or not we like the speaker and what he or she is saying about gay and lesbian people.

There seems to be this prevailing impression that Savage was fired because he said something homophobic. Witness this lead sentence about the incident as reported by the Associated Press on July 7: "MSNBC on Monday fired Michael Savage for anti-gay comments."

I hope that elementary analysis isn’t the reason Savage lost his job—simply because he said something unkind about homos.

Savage is no stranger to anti-gay comments and language. Certainly, this wasn’t the first time (and we can bet it won’t be the last) that Savage disparaged gay and lesbian people.

This is what happened: A caller who phoned in and apparently expressed his dissatisfaction with Savage. (Just what the caller said remains unclear, as parts of his comments were cut from the air by MSNBC, and another part is simply unintelligible in the broadcast.)

Whatever the caller said, though, it was enough to alert Savage that the man was a displeased gay listener.

"So you’re one of those sodomists. Are you a sodomite?" Savage asked in response to the man’s comments. The man answered that yes, he was.

"Oh, you’re one of those sodomites," Savage then continued. "You should only get AIDS and die, you pig. How’s that? Why don’t you see if you can sue me, you pig. You got nothing better than to put me down, you piece of garbage? You got nothing to do today? Go eat a sausage and choke on it. Get trichinosis. OK, do we have another nice caller here who’s busy because he didn’t have a nice night in the bathhouse who’s angry at me today? Huh? Get me another one. Put another sodomite on! No more calls? I don’t care. Let’s go to the next scene. I don’t care about these bums, they mean nothing to me. They’re all sausages."

Savage’s rant is rife with offensive comments: He uses words like "sodomite," and calls the man a "pig," and a "piece of garbage." He calls us all "bums." He uses the stereotype that gay men are sexual predators and spend all their time lurking for sex at bathhouses. He even covertly calls us all "dicks," a word he can’t use on the air, so he rather boringly and uncreatively substitutes the word "sausage" for it.

All these comments are annoying and tedious. But to all of these remarks I say: So what? Ho hum.

Someone called us a bad name? Stop the liberation movement!

I understand that words are powerful, and can have real-life repercussions. Still—are we going to collectively wince every time one of our opponents calls us a fag? Part of a free speech society is that all of us should be free to express our opinions openly, regardless of how offended others might be by the ideas we hold.

If I want to call Michael Savage a fat, piggish, intellectually-stunted, dumb-ass of a breeder—well, it’s my right to do so. And if I demand that right, then I have to acknowledge that he should have the right to say whatever he wants about me and my kind, too.

Some people would argue that it’s not what Savage said, but how he said it. I think that’s a hollow argument. An important part of free speech is your means of expression. Are we really going to say it would be fine with us if Savage had calmly said in an even-toned voice,

"I believe homosexuals are the demise of our society because they are unnatural sexual deviants, and thank you for calling. Have a nice day."

We as gay and lesbian people should remember that in much of America, it is our ideas and opinions that are most in danger of being shut down and labeled offensive. We can’t wave the free speech banner when it behooves our side of the debate, then trample all over it when it comes to our opponents.

Having said all that, I do think Savage crossed the line with one comment: When he told the caller to get AIDS and die. If I was his boss, I probably would have fired him, too.

We need to remember that constitutionally protected free speech protects a citizen’s right to criticize the government. MSNBC has every legal right as a private organization to say what it does and doesn’t want to broadcast on its airwaves.

But even so, I remain uncomfortable with the notion of a media giant silencing someone even as stomach-turning as Michael Savage simply because I find his opinions, and the way he expresses them, gross.

I wonder: When will that standard be used against me?