"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
No argument there. I'm with you! Shout them down all we can. Personally, I think "shouting them down" is much better received when we actually have factual, logical reasons that counter their own arguments in a reasonable way. Rather than just attacking them personally. I think attacking them personally actually weakens our own arguments since said attacks aren't focused on the actual arguments that they provide. Rather, they're focused on personal biases, personal attacks, emotion, and appeals to ignorance..
Not a lot of dark faces in that crowd, LOL. Bernie still isn't reaching out to the people who didn't vote for him last election.
There is no good reason why speech used to deprive people of rights must be protected speech. Court rulings before the Civil War protected slavery under the constitution and we dealt with that in 1864. Other countries have done well in protecting free speech while suppressing hate speech, I see no reason why we shouldn't take lessons from them. Just like in the antebellum supreme court that protected slavery was dealt with, we can deal with Nazi and white supremacists, at the very least make it possible for government to say no to their protest marches.
In order to keep the peace, we also need to give authorities the power to ban all weapons at protest marches too. I believe that is the only reason why the protests that I attended in Portland were peaceful. Weapons were confiscated and police cordoned off the protesters. When the assholes tried to speak our voices were louder because we outnumbered them 4 to 1.