Xurtio

Neither do I (it's not the swastikas fault) but whether it's viewed as bad or good is irrelevant. The functional result of banning it or allowing it is what is relevant.

I take a pragmatic approach, personally (sorry Roxy, haven't gotten around to putting Berry White on yet).

If we had clear evidence that banning the confederate flag would reduce hate crimes, then the directive would be clear wouldn't it? Ban the flag. We only have circumstantial evidence; that's why it's a debate. And here's where there's more room for opinion, since it comes down to moral philosophy: is it worth constraining free speech if there's a chance it will increase safety.

The rational answer is a question: how much safety? How much free speech? And each person has a different threshold for how much freedom they'll give up for safety - conservatives and libertarians tend towards freedom, liberals and greens tend toward safety (in somecases, even to the point of trying to guarantee a safe mind place for people, such that they wouldn't be offended).

Of course, that's over simplistic. Fundamentalist conservatives don't seem to error towards freedom on social issues, rather they are more concerned about the safety of their soul if they allow religious sins to go unchecked without their religious policing.

__________________
H̓̇̅̉yͤ͏mͬ͂ͧn͑̽̽̌ͪ̑͐͟o̴͊̈́͑̇m͛͌̓ͦ̑aͫ̽ͤ̇n̅̎͐̒ͫ͐c̆ͯͫ̋ ̔̃́eͯ͒rͬͬ̄҉