Giving a definition for freedom is hard. Hence I will provide only a function description. I am absolutely no philosopher or thinker, but I leave my opinion here, for the record.
To put it simply, one with freedom should be able to do anything they want to, unless someone else's freedom suffers from the action. Any action is not to be forbidden because of someone being disgusted of the action, as being disgusted does not constitute violated freedom.
Violating one's freedom includes: physical harm or confinement, targeted harassment, damaging one's property, etc.
Perhaps in question is the handling of public decency, which varies significantly between cultures. When controversial, the subject should not be banned or controlled by any means. Rather, public display of such merely needs to include a warning, in cases where the subject does not appeal to the majority of the society. Absolutely nothing should prevent creation, communication and commerce of any sort.
Abusing freedom should not be punished by depriving it, as it usually results in the whole society being framed in the same restriction. The punishment is inherently ad hominem and expelling from society should be enough to maintain stability.