I like the Kanye example and relating it to power. Should free speech for power be limited but opinion not? How can one tell the difference?

Nyann: For the "moral" standing, corruption is found everywhere. Those in power are usually corrupt, and they set the countries general "moral" stand. How does this solve problems concerning freedom of speech when they could limit it to things they consider moral?

pinheads: Why should someone's opinion be limited? How does speaking about an idea harm others? If you are not allowed, in the privacy of your own home, to discuss ideas about Fascism, Nazism, or any other idea considered "bad" or "evil", it raises several problems.
How will this be monitored?
What decides where the line is drawn? Is theocracy off limits? Anarchy?

Limiting opinions is the same as limiting speech. Most speech is protected because it's an opinion, political or otherwise.

Nothing should be banned, anyone can say anything they want as long they don't physically hurt someone, Consequenses for speaking your mind is too much these days. My art teacher told me that If anyone catches you swearing in public place, you get fined $250.

Ok, but does your view expand to the larger shows of opinions as well? Such as Neo-Nazism or the KKK? Are they protected under the freedom of speech you outline there?

If KKK kills another black person they should go to jail but if they express they're feelings with words it'll be ok.

You've taken two extremes. What of their marches, cross burnings, and various other public shows? They cause obvious distress to colored races and generally do not bring any helpful topics to light.

Well emotionally distressed people should just ignore them, thats how you treat bullies.

Beautifully put.

Could not agree more.

So if you don't like it, don't watch sort of deal? If that worked, we wouldn't have half the problems we have now.
That isn't a realistic solution to the problem. Such a fine line must be drawn, yet each situation has to be looked at individually. Intent, content and impact are taken into account before judgement is passed.

KKK, neo-nazi, and other lesser known groups using freedom of speech can easily abuse (or rightfully use) the system to publicly denounce other races, creeds, etc.
Not everyone may enjoy it, but people are aware of it. The reason I brought up the KKK marches is because they are generally done in residential areas or areas close enough to where people live. This makes it extremely hard to turn away and ignore.

If the government did something you really hated like ban non-reproductive sex, wouldn't you wanna do something they dislike to make them change that rule? so you should be able to express your feelings by doing that.

"Freedom of speech is the ability to express your opinion, NOT the ability to say that your opinion is truth"

I don't believe in Insulting people, it is pointless. Sure, I have my oppinions about people, but the point of an oppinion is that it is YOUR oppinoin, not that of other peolple.
I see a girl and think "Meh, whatever" and somebody else think "DAMN that is a nice ass" and then says to me "Did you SEE that man? she was awesome hot bro!" I don't run up to the girl yelling "I DON'T THINK THAT YOU ARE GOOD LOOKING!" I simply say "Meh, nothin' special." to my friend.

No point in an insult whe silence can be kept. And anyway, I could go out on the streets yelling anything I wanted, but I don't because I have JUDGEMENT. Judgement is the key here, not limits.