No matter how much I think through the censorship issue, the above statement always comes to the top.

I believe that media platforms should have right to censor certain speakers from their platforms. In this regard, I should have the right to say "I will not support this platform anymore because _______". Or I should use whatever influence I have garnered in life to say "I think other people should cancel this speaker/platform like I have."

But to get to put such censorship requests into formal government action of some kind usually leads to the law of unintended consequences.

The "lead to harm" speech turns a simple axiom sideways, for it could be argued that many things are harmful--like the "town hall" meeting that set off this article.

No easy answers.