> held to be political speech Freedom of Speech extends well beyond just political speech. It protects all forms of speech. Where did you get the idea that on

> held to be political speech Freedom of Speech extends well beyond just political speech. It protects all forms of speech. Where did you get the idea that only political speech ought to be protected? Under your theory, who gets to determine what constitutes political speech? Is my freedom to criticize a religion protected? Or is that kind of speech not protected as it does not fall under your definition of "political speech"?