> > ... there is no value for
>> society in protecting the speech of those who only
>> talk the talk or engage
>> in strictly "abstract" Nazis discourse.
>
>Sure there is. Free speech is, of itself, a worthwhile
>goal, and an important protection for anyone with unconventional ideas.
Proscribing the advocacy and/or incitement of racial hatred and discrimination, or advocacy/incitement of political violence is not incompatible with protection of free speech. Rather, it is simply a clear boundary. There has to be some limit and surely it is better for the limits to be clearly set out.
If free speech is protected by statute, subject only to the exceptions clearly spelt out, then those with controversial ideas will know exactly where they stand, what they can legally advocate and what they cannot.
So we don't have to put up with minority groups being intimidated and degraded in order to have free speech. Yours is a false dichotomy.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas