How free should you be to offend others, and is freedom of expression a right above all others? That was the subject at last night's Guardian debate at the Hay festival. You can listen to it here (mp3, 61 minutes, 28Mb).

For the lawyer Anthony Julius, free speech is a meta-freedom, standing above all other freedoms, which allows other values to exist. "It is a mistake to say that freedom of expression and the freedom to practice religion are two equal values set against each other ... all other freedoms are put in jeopardy by us telling people what they can and can't say."

For the academic and writer Ziauddin Sardar, Julius's view was a fundamentalism as dangerous as other fundamentalisms, "a statement of faith not rationality". "Why should secularists and liberals always benefit," he asked. "Why should religious people always be the ones offended?" It was a power trip by those from a western culture to impose their views on others, he added. Causing offence to those who have no power and are already marginalised was doubly offensive.

Between these polarised views at a passionate and argumentative debate, Joan Bakewell tried to offer an alternative view: it was not religion that was the problem but the politics of religion. When religious people feel offended by the views or actions of others they should "look inwards and recognise that God can take care of himself", she said.

The writer and academic Reza Aslan, here at Hay to talk about her book No God But God, applauded the debate and the engagement of the audience - very different from the US, he said. But in reality there was no answer to the question. "The only thing that matters is that the debate continues."