At the core of the First Amendment is, I think, the idea that there is no speech objectivity and if someone in particular is allowed to police speech, it will b

At the core of the First Amendment is, I think, the idea that there is no speech objectivity and if someone in particular is allowed to police speech, it will be policed in a very biased way (ie. by those with the power). That's why "a behaviour society would be better off without" is fundamentally problematic. It is likely obvious to any individual how to enumerate those behaviours, but good luck getting everyone to agree. And super good luck avoiding the endless growth of that list. I think that's partly why parody is so well-established as 1A protected and why why there's nothing legally problematic with a "Shithead Steve" shirt, as ugly as you and I would both find that to be. If people find the First Amendment to be a nuisance when they're trying to silence speech that they feel society would be better off without, then the amendment is doing its intended job.