>>359374392
>>359374936
The proportional response to speech is speech.
Escalating the response to an argument to material retaliation is against the societal value we refer to as freedom of speech.
Yes, it's legal, and it's not a violation of the first amendment, but the bill of rights is just a legal restriction on the government, not a blueprint for society or a moral guidebook.
All this exists on a sliding scale and of course as a reductio ad absurdam you're not going to be in the wrong for wanting someone to fuck off if they're trying to come into your house and use your TV to distribute their political propaganda of choice, but you cannot say you are personally in favor of freedom of speech if you confine it merely to the first amendment and even then treat it as something begrudgingly complied with that keeps the government from silencing people you disagree with.