The Donald Sterling saga is the latest news story to have the media all atwitter, but there are some unique aspects to this particular incident. Just about everyone is in agreement that Sterling’s remarks were pretty bad, so there’s no debate there.

What is very much in debate, however, is the issue of whether it’s anyone’s business what someone says in the privacy of his own home. A secretly recorded telephone conversation is a criminal offense, and the recording is not admissible in a court of law since it was obtained illegally.

Again, there is no debate that I know of regarding Sterling’s remarks (which, if the truth be known, were probably nothing more than impulsive babbling on the part of an old guy who was angry with his girlfriend), so what everyone should be focusing on is the danger this “off-with-his-head” mob mentality poses to individual freedom.

What you say in your own home is decidedly your own business. And as to so-called hate speech, who has the moral authority to judge what does and does not qualify as such? Mark Cuban was right the first time he chimed in on the Sterling situation (i.e., before he had a change of heart and said that he totally agreed with Commissioner Silver’s findings), pointing out that it was “a slippery slope.”

Expanding on Cuban’s initial concern, let me bring it down to a specific question: If one of the other NBA owners is caught making negative remarks about gays, will he have his franchise taken away from him? My guess is yes.

But another, more interesting, slippery-slope question is: If one of the owners is caught making negative remarks about Jews or Christians, will he, too, have his franchise taken away from him? I have a hunch that the answer to that one is no.

Think very carefully about all this issue, dear reader, before grabbing your pitchfork. Freedom must be given a higher priority that all other objectives. Surely all those who love liberty can agree on this one point.