There is a fine line between accountability and over-censorship. It is difficult to conclusively determine the extent to which free speech should be allowed. Where do we draw the line? When does something become too insensitive to be held unaccountable? Last week, director James Gunn, the mind behind Marvel's "Guardians of the Galaxy" and its sequel, was fired from the third installment of the franchise. Vocal about his political allegiances, Gunn was targeted by a group of Trump supporters, who sought to diminish his credibility by publicly shaming him using his old tweets. These tweets, revolving around sensitive subject matters including rape and pedophilia, joked about these issues under a bad light.

In recent years, Hollywood has moved towards a zero-tolerance policy, shunning actors for social misconduct. Recent high-profile cases include Kevin Spacey, accused of sexual harassment, and Roseanne Barr, dismissed from her show due to racist tweets. While in both the aforementioned cases, there was a near-unanimous consensus in support of the action taken by the respective studios in charge (Netflix and ABC), in Gunn's case, there has been a vocal opposition to Disney's decision of firing him from the project. This outrage comes not just from his fans, but from his fellow colleagues as well, with the likes of Dave Bautista, who plays Drax in the Marvel Universe, and Chris Pratt, who plays Star-Lord, being vocal about their support for Gunn.

The polarizing nature of this controversy begs the question, what makes this case so different from the others? Here is when the line must be drawn between accountability and over-censorship. Is it really justified to hold him accountable for his words from years ago? While the passage of time certainly doesn't make his attempts at humor any less insensitive or in better taste, it doesn't have to necessarily reflect his current views. In a publicly issues statement after his firing, Gunn wrote the following:

"Many people who have followed my career know when I started, I viewed myself as a provocateur, making movies and telling jokes that were outrageous and taboo. As I have discussed publicly many times, as I've developed as a person, so has my work and my humor. It's not to say I'm better, but I am very, very different than I was a few years ago; today I try to root my work in love and connection and less in anger. My days saying something just because it's shocking and trying to get a reaction are over. In the past, I have apologized for humor of mine that hurt people. I truly felt sorry and meant every word of my apologies. For the record, when I made these shocking jokes, I wasn't living them out. Anyway, that's the completely honest truth: I used to make a lot of offensive jokes. I don't anymore. I don't blame my past self for this, but I like myself more and feel like a more full human being and creator today. Love you to you all."

Previously, in 2012, he had issued another public apology for his poor "jokes". Bearing in mind that this apology was put up on the internet long before he was hired by Disney to spearhead the Guardians franchise, what changed?

Disney, presumably with full knowledge of his past history and comments, gave him the job. Yet, years later, after those tweets which he clearly does not believe in anymore, have resurfaced again; does it warrant a sacking?

From a purely ethical perspective, yes. According to Immanuel Kant's theory of deontological ethics, morality is a set of values that is universal. In layman's terms, it postulates that what is wrong is always wrong, and that what is right is always right. Considering this, each action has its own intrinsic morality. In this case, poking fun at the expense of one's tragedy certainly falls under a wrongdoing, and therefore, would be considered ethically wrong.

However, moral relativism is an essential angle to consider. Relatively speaking, a few crass jokes regarding the unfortunate circumstances that people suffer through does not justify expulsion. That is not to say that it's a behavior that should be condoned, however, in this case, the punishment may have been too harsh, hence sparking a massive industrial backlash.

There is a strong irony to this whole issue. Considering that Gunn's tweets were shamed by a known offender of the same crime, Mike Cernovich, the whole affair seems unjust. Not only is Cernovich a sexist, far-right propagandist, he is also associated with people who are somewhat less than holy, including openly racist and white supremacist individuals. One cannot help but wonder, should these people really be preaching about morality?

The biggest irony, however, is that Disney itself has been accused of being racist, sexist, and offensive in stereotyping characters based on their backgrounds in the past, amongst other things. However, they have been moving towards building a more family friendly, respectful, and inclusive brand. Today, Disney is synonymous with happiness. The key thing to remember here is that the company has changed over the years and made themselves better, similar to what James Gunn has done.

Ownership and acceptance of a minor wrongdoing in the past, in my opinion, particularly of an online comment, shouldn't be enough charge to incriminate a man over a decade later, particularly considering it will likely end his career. As, according to his own words, he wasn't "living" his words – what he said was, and will remain, attempts at humor made in bad judgment. What matters is people change. Today, James Gunn is a man that many will vouch for, and will stand up for. Including some of Hollywood's finest, including the thousands that admire his work worldwide.

So, when the question of his legacy comes up, I believe the answer shouldn't be "got fired for being an a-hole". It should be, "he stood accountable for his past, acknowledged he made a mistake, and bore the consequences without complaining." Because, as Batman once said (I know, I know, wrong fandom), "it's not who you are, but what you do that defines you." It doesn't matter what one used to be. What matters is, what you do in the present, and what you will do in the future. Everyone deserves a shot at redemption, a second chance, because faith in each other, and faith in humanity, is how we can make the world a better place.