Yes, because I don’t trust the government to define the boundaries of hate speech

Freedom of speech should be absolute. If some of the ideas are removed from the table (even the bad ones) then I am not able to make an informed decision.

There is no statistical data for this argument that I can find, but the MAGA regime is a good example, as we are seeing new laws in the US that prohibits foreign students from entering the US due to social media posts depicting MAGA supporters, government and policies as unsavoury, and also when taking a pro Palestine stance, due to the false notion that anti Zionism and anti Israeli government is the same as anti semitism, which would be considered hate speech under current US regional laws.

Hate speech is merely subjective, asking another individual to define it could produce an array of results.

A bill was passed in the parliament saying that speaking anything ill against Israel is tantamount to antisemitism. Islamic arab culture is also a Semitic culture, so the government effectively used their power to curb free speech. Thus, a racist institution cannot be allowed to designate the boundaries of hate speech.

I do not accept that calling a man a man is transphobic. I will not be forced to allow biological men into female only spaces, however they "identify". Their "feelings" must not override women's sex based rights. I do not trust any person (left or right politically) who thinks "feelings" take precedence over scientific fact. I do not think it is helpful to assume that gender critical beliefs are right wing. There are thousands of people who are politically left wing who hold gender critical beliefs.

Because apparently calling a man a man is somehow transphobic now. I will not be forced to allow biological men into female only spaces, however they "identify". Their "feelings" must not override women's sex based rights. I do not trust the "Left" side to understand this, since they apparently can't seem to define what a woman is anymore.