No, it’s not a well-thought out argument at all, B4Bear. Rather, it shows that they have no idea what the issue is about, and this shows their intellectual bankruptcy.
The issue with free speech is being allowed to say what you like without the state censuring you, not without criticism. Free speech advocates agree that it’s okay to criticise Bill Leak, and also that they are free to criticise those criticising Leak. There is no hypocrisy there.
The problem is when the state says that certain ideas are not allowed to be expressed. The Gardian’s article says that “Bill Leak was free to draw – and the Australian was free to publish – cartoons attacking black people and Muslims.” If he really was free to do that, why did he have to answer to the Human Rights Commission and 18c? That is what the issue is about, not people criticising him. Sure, others can criticise people criticising him, but even they don’t propose that criticising him should be made illegal.
Criticizing somebody in anyway may be rude, but it should never be an offence in law. If somebody criticizes me I can tell them why they are wrong, and even criticize them in return.
Once upon a time, a few years ago, we would complete the exchange over a coffee or a beer.