Generally speaking, people believe in their own right to free speech more than that of the guy saying something they don't want to hear. When they have something to say, the protection afforded it is absolute. When it's an idea that offends their world view, the issue is suddenly less black and white.
The fact is that, as much as its drilled into our national consciousness that freedom of speech is absolute and inviolable, there are many exceptions to freedom of speech. Prior to the terrorist attacks of 911 it was easier to argue that the limits of free speech were carefully weighed and reasonable when imposed. In the Post 911 world the floodgates seem to have flung wide on abridgments of our most fundamental rights. Where at one time we only had exceptions including laws against inciting to riot and libelous or slanderous speech that harmed a person's reputation causing significant harm; now we have precedents for so called Free Speech Zones, where protesters at a political event can be cordoned off and restricted in where they are allowed to protest, preventing said protesters from reaching their desired audience. The various Occupy protests have fallen under similar restrictions. Here in Winston-Salem, the Occupy protesters had to negotiate with the city for a mutally agreed upon location for their protest. If you want to silence a voice, the first step is isolating it. For decades our policy as a nation for dealing with Communism was containment, almost like a disease. These people are already infected, nothing we can do about that but we can keep it from spreading. Which now seems to be the approach to dissent of any kind. Contain the free speech so that you can minimize its impact.
Hearing all this, you might assume my position on free speech is that it's absolute but I remember when we had limited reasonable restrictions that seemed to be carefully considered and balanced to favor the common good. I still think those are reasonable limitations. An idea like any elemental force can be a tool for good or evil, for creation or destruction, it can free a people or enslave them. The first step in recognizing something for what it is are the boundaries that separate it from everything around it. Boundaries define what an individual, a town, a nation and a species are by what they find acceptable and what they do not. We have crossed into dangerous territory recently with our new broad and sweeping limits on freedom of speech. Whether we find our way back to a more measured and reasonable approach or become increasingly polarized and entrenched in our positions will say who we are and what we will become for the world that surrounds us.
