Freedom of speech is important. But it can run smack up against individuals' right to live their lives free of overt threats of physical violence. Statements that can be understood by most reasonable people to constitute threats of physical harm, including intimidation tactics, should not necessarily be protected as a free speech right. There will always be a challenge of interpretation in these matters, but the principle still counts.

Is insulting someone, is laying, is verbal treats, is racial discrimination, verbal sexual abuses, considered free speech? Obviously for the individuals bent on any of such behaviors it is.. I rest my case.

What does accept mean? Socially, or legally?

Does the president need a personal propaganda machine other than his Twitter feed and Fox News networks?
[bit.ly]

Philosopher Karl Popper defined the paradox in 1945 in The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 (in note 4 to Chapter 7).[1]
Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.

It's not what you say, it's the consequences of that speech..If Nazis, Bigots or Racist want to hold speech rallies, fine. They had better be ready for the consequences of that speech.

I think we should allow all free speech except slander.