Yes, your last paragraph confirmed to me that it is just semantics we're disagreeing on.
To my reading of the words, I would still say that no-one is "entitled to their own facts" in the sense meant in that phrase. Entitled to their own conviction that something is a fact, yes (which I think is what you mean by being entitled to their own facts), and others should be aware of that and understand that. But holding something to be true does not make it a fact (to my interpretation of the word "fact").
Person A holding it to be a fact that gravity is not real does not stop gravity working, so A does not have a fact in that respect, A has a mistaken belief. A is entitled to that belief (albeit not to act on it e.g. by pushing someone off a cliff, see logic above), but their belief will not change the reality.
To my reading, person A would only be "entitled to their own fact" if they lived in a universe where belief shaped reality, such that holding it to be a fact that gravity is not real would stop gravity working.
I expect that a large proportion of people using that line mean it this way - "climate change won't stop happening just because you don't believe it", not, "you're not allowed to believe that climate change is a fake".
That interpretation also avoids conflict with freedom of religion.
no subject
To my reading of the words, I would still say that no-one is "entitled to their own facts" in the sense meant in that phrase. Entitled to their own conviction that something is a fact, yes (which I think is what you mean by being entitled to their own facts), and others should be aware of that and understand that. But holding something to be true does not make it a fact (to my interpretation of the word "fact").
Person A holding it to be a fact that gravity is not real does not stop gravity working, so A does not have a fact in that respect, A has a mistaken belief. A is entitled to that belief (albeit not to act on it e.g. by pushing someone off a cliff, see logic above), but their belief will not change the reality.
To my reading, person A would only be "entitled to their own fact" if they lived in a universe where belief shaped reality, such that holding it to be a fact that gravity is not real would stop gravity working.
I expect that a large proportion of people using that line mean it this way - "climate change won't stop happening just because you don't believe it", not, "you're not allowed to believe that climate change is a fake".
That interpretation also avoids conflict with freedom of religion.