Butch played the role viewed by many as a spoof on Christ in the Last Supper. The creators insist that they were going for a type of "pagan party" of Olympic gods and sent a message of tolerance. Art experts have supported the creators and pointed to paintings that inspired the pagan motif. That is not exactly what was seen by millions of Christians who were deeply insulted by the parody. The question is not the intent of the creators, but the intent of critics in denouncing the display and its participants.

The threat of legal action would not be especially serious in the United States where opinion is given robust protection in both criminal and civil cases. In France, however, free speech is in a free fall with the left pushing for the censorship and criminalization of ever-expanding range of political and religious speech.

The ceremony itself had some truly powerful and stunning elements. I enjoyed the mix of music and imagery as well as the effort to show the diversity of France.

However, other elements were more divisive or excessive. For example, the producers decided to use the ceremony to feature such elements as three young people hooking up for a "ménage à trois." With many families watching with kids, many of us thought the scene was inappropriate for such an event. However, it was the supper scene that led to protests from clerics and critics. While claiming a message of "tolerance," the scene was taken as yet another slap at religious elements in society.

That is a debate that has continued to rage, particularly on the Internet.

Audrey Msellati, Butch's attorney, posted a statement on Butch's Instagram account that the DJ and activist who will seek legal action after being "the target of an extremely violent campaign of cyber-harassment and defamation." She is promising to file "several complaints against these acts."

Clearly, any direct and intentional threats of violence against Butch should be prosecuted, as they can be prosecuted in the United States. However, the French laws sweep far more broadly in criminalizing opinion and what I have called "rage rhetoric."