You and the ACLU have been tripped up by the paradox of tolerance: there is a time and place to analyze ideas destructive to open society, but that is not the same as what happened in Charlottesville or Germany in the '30s
I hope you realize this is the type of speech we should expect from a totalitarian regime.
Who determines whether something is destructive to society? Always and everywhere should be the time and place to analyse any ideas regardless of whether anyone thinks they're destructive or not.
This is a key question people want to avoid
Every group has their own idea as to what is destructive to society, Ask Anti-fa they will tell it is the White Supremacists, Ask the White Supremacists and they will tell you it is Anti-fa
Ask me and I will tell you it is both...
Ask Christians and they will give you a whole list of speech that is destructive,
Ask Atheists and they will give you a whole list of speech that is destructive,
Ask <insert group>, and they will give you a whole list of speech that is destructive,
So who is right? None of them.... not even me.
What is actually destructive to society is Censorship... Both by government and by society at large
Can you prevent violence by preventing speech? Yes, for sure, but where do you draw the line?
If nothing else, I hope trump's presidency teaches us all that the government should not be the one to decide what's ok to say.
those who willingly give up freedom for safety will end up with neither.
Just like there's a time and place to question the war effort, right? Besides, some people want closed borders, not an open society - why should only ideas that favour openness be allowed?