Not everyone is a free speech absolutist who sees it as the most fundamental value. There are plenty of things we as a society decided we should ban to protect people. Can you have the opinion that it's ok to kill people? Would society be better with that kind of diversity of opinions? At one point society has chosen that people are equal no matter their physical attributes, and that society would be better with it. Free speech can come second to that, I don't see the problem.
>> Can you have the opinion that it's ok to kill people? Would society be better with that kind of diversity of opinions?
This seems to be a strawman argument but even if this is unfair, I still have to wonder: "how do you regulate opinion?"
Opinion is not automatically speech, but it seems that even under the current 1st amendment notions if one expresses this opinion that it is "ok to kill people" then they are running afoul of the 'harm to others' condition.
I have never been to find a true absolutist on the matter of free speech -- I do not think they exist.
