> clearly bad ideas That's the problem - there isn't an objective definition of what counts as a "bad idea". The patriot, rebel, atheist, religious fundamental

> clearly bad ideas That's the problem - there isn't an objective definition of what counts as a "bad idea". The patriot, rebel, atheist, religious fundamentalist, Marxist, market fundamentalist, civil rights activist, and white nationalist each have very different ideas about which ideas are "bad". > I don't want you speaking anywhere near anyone you might convince. I'm sure the religious fundamentalist has a similar opinion about any rhetoric that advocates for legal abortions, teaching evolution, or separation of church and state. Should they be allowed to suppress speakers that advocate "clearly bad ideas"? > One of them is indefensible Without a clear and narrow definition - "I know it when I see it" doesn't count - of the types of speech that are "indefensible", that's just an opinion.