Free speech also includes speech you disagree with and the exercise of democracy implies the need to discuss things that are repugnant to you.

I do not agree with them, but I defend their (both Dutch pedophiles and RMS) right to state their opinions. Even if I strongly disagree with both.

We completely agree. RMS has the right to make excuses for pedophiles all day every day, if he's so inclined.

That said, conference speakers are there at the discretion of the organizers. Not being able to speak is a rights violation; not being able to speak at a conference is not.

I'd assume RMS has more productive ways to spend his time than playing games of logic that induce people into misrepresenting his position ("I'm not sure about the harm" vs. "it's harmless").

I'm glad you didn't say something to the effect of "Not being able to speak is a rights violation; not being able to publish it on the web is not." but you can clearly see it's a small leap from one to the other. After all, the servers, routers and wires always belong to someone.

Um, because he's never stood up and advocated legalization of pedophilia at a conference? (Or even actually advocated legalization of pedophilia at all, but that's a separate issue.)

And this is why raganwald's flamebait is indeed flamebait; gyardley decided to run with someone else's opinion/third-hand information without researching whether or not it was true, or even in context.

Which is pretty much what raganwald wanted to happen: fear, uncertainty, and doubt have been successfully seeded.