I don’t see how this can be dismissed as “whataboutism” to discuss examples of how the specific policy under discussion should impact different types of speech.

I don’t see how this can be dismissed as “whataboutism” to discuss examples of how the specific policy under discussion should impact different types of speech. It’s literally the topic of discussion. You could say, two sides of the same coin, but it’s not even really that. Where do you draw the line for violence and inciteful speech? If you’re willing the draw a different line depending on the policy goals of the person speaking, then you’re taking a political position not a moral one.