Balancing freedom of speech against hate speech
You saw my own view. Your’s is a well reasoned set of arguments, and question. Free speech comes with responsibilities.
Extremism of all forms isn’t conducive to community cohesion so decisions need to be taken which serve cohesion as a higher priority than the free speech of people who are little less than haters and dividers. Democracy allows them to be entitled to their view, and to be constrained in their divisiveness.
What Emma Goldman and others have said about the character of those who appeal to patriotism could equally be said about those who most frequently appeal for free speech. We don’t need extremists and a functioning democracy can safely ignore their appeals to free speech.
These anti-abortion extremists exercise their right of “free speech” by screaming at, abusing, and even jostling others who have a different point of view.
They specifically target other human beings when at their most vulnerable. They abuse free speech and human dignity and then appeal to them as the foundation of their self-righteousness.
One less of them in Australia won’t impair the functioning of free speech in the slightest.
“Patriotism … is a superstition artificially created and maintained through a network of lies and falsehoods; a superstition that robs man of his self-respect and dignity, and increases his arrogance and conceit.”
― Emma Goldman