In the history of defense of the Bill of Rights, those who have been in the U.S. for a while seem to frequently want to use it to defend their idea of the status quo. Those who come from other countries know that the status quo can be used to do things that aren't very nice in any one's book, thus defending the status quo isn't always a good idea.

The rubber hits the road when what I want to do is considered offensive by someone else. Is offending someone else considered harming them? Given that we have yet to see proof that images or language cause lasting damage, I can't hold by that argument. While I will admit that certain images may give someone ideas to act on that may not be in the nation's best interest, the fact that they act on them is (I believe) indicative of a deeper character flaw.

I could go on, but this is fodder enough.