Ignoring the fact that your second link has nothing to do with words being violence, your first argument is that words are violence if the law says that words a

Ignoring the fact that your second link has nothing to do with words being violence, your first argument is that words are violence if the law says that words are violence! That’s not demonstrating an ability to reason. If the law says Allah (or any other figure) is the one true god, is that then true? Laws can be wrong. They can be passed by motivated actors seeking to protect their own power and policy. Free speech means protecting speech which is offense. You don’t need free speech protection for inoffensive speech. Further, by equating speech to violence you’re allowing them to react with actual violence to defend themselves against views they don’t like. This is catastrophic for liberal society.