It's definitely not an easy thing. Freedom of speech doesn't mean a freedom from consequence. Your two points, the first seems like a fair comparison to me. Th

It's definitely not an easy thing. Freedom of speech doesn't mean a freedom from consequence. Your two points, the first seems like a fair comparison to me. There is a line in most people's minds between policy they disagree with and things that are morally wrong. Those lines are not in the same places, so it is hard to say what is 'reasonable' to stand up for in such a way. As to your second point, I think it's a little dangerous to suggest that allowing the act is primary to allowing the speech. The latter may be necessary to ensuring the former - if you can't make a living while being pro-choice, a chilling effect will be applied, and the law eventually changed. In general, if your view is kept to yourself at work, doesn't affect your work, and you don't act on it or encourage people to, it's probably best to protect expressing it. For me here, it comes down to what is effective. My understanding of the mindset of Trump voters is that they are scared, they have been sold this lie that rights for others come at their expense. Firing Trump supporters isn't going to change that.