However, when noise is generated that indiscriminately silences (CENSORS) another's free speech, it is a violation of the other person's free speech ("your freedom to swing your arms ends at my face").
It only violates the others speech if they were to do something more than Boo, like stopping that person from speaking with force. You seem to think that it's a violation of that other person's freedom of speech should they try and disrupt or express their disagreement that strongly, because that person is entitled to only certain kind of disagreement and no disruption, should he be disrupted or distracted that constitutes a violation of speech, stop disturbing, you're violating...
You cannot silence someone by being louder than them exactly like you cannot stop someone from writing by writing everywhere and anywhere that they suck. In both instances they can continue unabridged by your commotion, unless they are terminally devoid of confidence abd lack any conviction that they live entirely by suggestion and only for the approval of others, then you can try to argue that they have been violated, these poor feeble minded retards.
When noise is generated to silence it ought to be pretty quiet. O yeah, it's idiocy 101 over here, people are censoring BY booing, in robot terms: "when noise is generated". It's called freedom of expression, the conundrum is that freedom of expression is perched on what is acceptable to you and others as you try and suggest:
A brief chuckle, or booing or clapping can be an expression of your general agreement or disagreement.
Yeah, freedom of expression for general disagreement, not strong hatred.
"if there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other, it is the principle of free thought—not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate."
To attempt to argue that booing is more important (to protect) than actual speech is absurd. One person can boo as long as the other person still has a chance to speak (equal time principle).
There's absolutely no either or. They both are protected, the booing doesn't violate the actual speech, exactly like the speech wouldn't violate anything it disrupts or it has hate for, if someone wants to boo no body has the right to stop them, and should someone try to boo louder to stop them great, even if they do stop, it has not violated them and it couldn't, unless they were retarded.
RE: There's absolutely nothing wrong...