> "Group A says “violence is never ok”." Setting aside that using violence as the example of harm done is prejudicial, this flaw in this analogy is the "never

> "Group A says “violence is never ok”." Setting aside that using violence as the example of harm done is prejudicial, this flaw in this analogy is the "never ok", which is a hidden assumption of the mythical "free speech absolutism" that nearly no one subscribes to. As I have remarked elsewhere in this thread, believing that interfering with speech in some situations is wrong does not logically imply a belief that interfering with speech in all situations is wrong. So there is, at least in my opinion, still no hypocrisy.