<i>"he's saying that solving the finer points of free-speech issues..."</i><p>Which of course requires that one consider this question a "finer point", or that the wording is "out of context".  The <i>Internet</i> didn't exist at the time, either, but that doesn't mean free speech doesn't apply to it - or that there's a controversy we should teach on that question.  That some people <i>want</i> to restrict speech in any given way does not mean free speech should be up for grabs in any given context.<p>The general constitutional-law take on civil liberties is that they come before other legal concerns <i>unless</i> one can demonstrate a serious and clear factor that outweighs them.  To argue against the civil liberty interest <i>without demonstrating that outweighing factor</i> is far more ridiculous than to stand pat by the civil liberty interest.<p>That said, I'm not continuing this thread of argument.