Academic freedom and the right

to hold certain views came under discussion in a meeting at the university yesterday.
I had been called in to see whether it would be possible for me to co-supervise another doctoral student. In order to be fair to the student in question I went along to discuss the possibility - and I have declined.
I have declined because I am not comfortable about the topic or the way the research is being conducted.  
Thankfully I have the freedom to make such decisions. I don't have to deal with all the issues and concerns surrounding any sort of research. The university staff do need to worry about those things. The proposal passed the ethics committee although the student's main supervisor admitted there had been some "vigorous discussion". It was passed - perhaps because the student has some funding.
After the student had gone we discussed academic freedom and research in a more general way. I was given a link to an article about one Dr Noah Carl - relevant because one of his papers was brought up earlier.  We discussed this and the cases of two academics who have been in the news here. 
I have not read Carl's work so I cannot comment on it. I have read the article about him and the statement by the Cambridge college on why he was sacked. Shall I just they make interesting reading?
Here one person was sacked for his views on climate change. (From what I can gather he agrees it exists but questions some of the research. You don't do that.) His sacking was found to be unlawful.
The other pulled out of teaching a course because a student objected to a non-indigenous person teaching anything about indigenous language and culture. The teaching responsibility was handed to a member of staff the student was ready to accept.   
Now it seems to me that 
(a) we need a diversity of views on climate change if the research into it is to go forward and we are to find ways of handling it, and
(b) we don't have the right to simply tell someone who accepts that climate change occurs but questions the causes and the research, "You're wrong. You're sacked."
I suspect the problem may have something to do with research funding.  It is still a denial of academic freedom.
The other case was even more disturbing. Here was a student dictating who could teach, what could be taught and how it could be taught. An acquaintance who works in the same institution told me, "Political correctness gone mad Cat - but none of us dare say anything."  That's wrong.
I have done research myself, indeed am doing another small piece at the moment. Perhaps I am fortunate in that I have never had a proposal rejected even though a question has been asked here and there  - and helped me improve on what I was doing. My areas of interest - psycho-linguistics, language planning and so on are not without controversy but perhaps I am simply not looking at the controversial issues or looking at them in controversial ways. Other people I know are being frustrated by the limits being placed on them. They are limits being placed on them because their institutions are worried about anything that might appear to be controversial - however unlikely.
Academic freedom does have limits of course but they should only be the same limits as those placed on the rest of society. If the limits are any greater than that and we restrict diversity of thought and teaching then we have a problem.