Well, it's easy to say categorically that all censorship is bad, and all speech should be free. The fact is, we penalize people for speaking every day -- and we should. People plot heinous crimes by speaking to one another (which is why the FBI makes use of wiretaps -- tapes of people speaking -- to arrest Mafiosi); they enlist accomplices by speaking to one another ("I'm planning to shoot up the high school tomorrow; are you with me?"); they create dangerous situations by speaking (yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater is not just "describing a situation"; it's deliberately creating a situation that is likely to get a lot of people killed when they all rush the exits at once); they infringe on other's rights by speaking (as the Supreme Court has acknowledged in the case of some over-zealous anti-abortionists). Any of the people engaging in these activities can claim "free speech" as their defense; in fact, they often do. But should all of these people be allowed to continue these activities so that we don't have to make tough choices? I think not.

I started down this path on this thread by commenting that it made sense for postwar Germany to ban the swastika flag and the Horst Wessel Lied. The flag and song in question were important recruiting tools for the Nazi regime, which had just engineered the biggest war in history, bringing death and destruction to hundreds of millions of people worldwide. Abstractions about the freedom to sing any song you want or wave any flag you want are all very nice, but sometimes in this world you have to draw some lines. The world will get along just fine without the Horst Wessel Lied.