Yes to everything except possibly
the fourth bullet point ("They are very much a danger to those around them for whatever reason? Let's try that with less ambiguousness, would you still defend a person even if they're a murderer, rapist, etc. And advocating things that support one's ability to be a murderer/rapist/etc."). Pure advocacy is fine; directly facilitating rape and murder is probably illegal in and of itself (but you can stretch this - gun advocacy, for example, empowers murderers, but most people would defend it). Free speech for criminals, absolutely. Even if you believe they've forfeited their rights due to their disregard for the law, you're always going to be shutting down the speech of wrongfully convicted innocents in practice. I don't think it's worth it.
edited 24th May '11 6:38:59 AM by Penguin4Senate