Yeah, this attitude that what sort of limit is absolutely necessary is "subjective", "essentially a matter of personal opinion" is exactly what the US (not every single american, but american first amendment jurisprudence) is the exception to.
> To differ doesn't mean to accept that something is subjective.
Yes it does. That's what subjective means.
Obviously, many people refuse to accept that their personal opinions on political matters are anything less than absolute, immutable, objective fact, but that isn't relevant, because refusing to accept that doesn't make it, or you, objective.
>Even mathematicians have differed about proofs.
Politics isn't math. There is no equation or statement that can quantify the American model of freedom of speech, nor prove it correct, much less more correct than all other models, in the same way as E=MC^2 or Pythagoras' theorem.
