One of the fundamental tenets of American freedom, is written into our Constitution via our First Amendment, that "Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech." Because, Congress cannot make a law abridging the freedom of speech, this so indicates, that the citizens of this nation, have the right to freedom of speech. As it has been adjudicated, that freedom of speech only meets its match when such freedom of speech as Justice Holmes stated, "….create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent."
So then, fundamentally freedom of speech permits people to express unpopular views, prejudicial views, and uncomfortable views, of which citizens clearly have the option not to opt-in to listen to such; but should maintain the respect to tolerate the right of that person or persons to express themselves in such a manner. After all, it must be acknowledged, that most of us, have changed our opinion or mindset upon things of meaningful substance, at least once in our lives, of which, if we therefore were mistaken in that previous opinion, we now should be more open-minded in accepting views that differ even diametrically from our own, so as to provide space and the common courtesy for others, to express what they so desire to express.
Far too many people, desire to silence others, for having beliefs that are not in conformance with their own, and believe that society would be better off for that silencing, since apparently some of those people, believe that they, alone, and not those others or any others, know best. In reality, just as the burning of books, never serves society well; so too, the burning of other's opinions and viewpoints, at the point of a sword or through punishment or intimidation or through the long arm of the law does little to make society more harmonious. In point of fact, it isn't healthy for the mind to not want to consider, how it is that other people have come up with their opinions and viewpoints, and that a better understanding of others, and where they come from and what they are trying to achieve, makes for a better understanding of people, one to another.
It is especially disappointing that when it comes to the necessity of freedom of speech, or the toleration thereof, that surprisingly liberals, are often just as narrow-minded and bigoted in their own way, as conservatives are. That is to say, many conservatives don't want to hear or take to heart what the other side has to say, because they believe that they are right, and that which is wrong, therefore has no place in their viewpoint within the marketplace of legitimate ideas. Whereas, many liberals don't want to hear or take to heart what the other side has to say, because they believe that the other side does not have the fundamental right to spew their hateful or inconvenient opinion, and that therefore these liberals will not tolerate such speech, and thereby will not permit it to be heard.
This world can be a very uncomfortable place because it consists of vastly different ideas as well as vastly different opinions, even ones of extreme vitriol, but it is ever needful that people in societies are permitted to express openly what they feel the need to express; and if one's go-to response is going to typically be violence, or intimidation, or intolerance, that serves to say, in effect, that the only thing that will be tolerated is "my way"; and such a belief as that is not only childish but also the very opposite of freedom.