Does listening to hate speech do any harm to anyone? Should such folks be given a platorm when and where they wish?

Whatever goes into one's mind (via reading, watching, listening, etc.) stays in the mind - good or bad.  That "data" is then used by the individual (whether they realize it or not) when they think, speak, make decisions, or whatever.  They can choose how they use that data, but nonetheless it's there and it DOES affect them (good or bad).

We (in the US) have the right to say just about anything.  Yet the main reason behind this is so that we can try and convince others to see something our way (good or bad).  Censorship limits that ability.  Yet when it comes to hate speech (and such), do we really want to hear both sides?  Do we want to be convinced that that is the best way?  Do we really want that stuff crammed down our throats (and the throats of our children)?  Then again, who's to say what qualifies as "bad speech" and what doesn't?  Who is qualified to draw that line.  Sure, some may be "obvious", but what about those which are "borderline", or are "in the gray area"?  Should we have a "religious" person draw the line?  If so which religion?  Muslim?  Christian?  Atheist?   Should the government draw the line?  If so, who in the government drawas it?  State governors? Congress?  The president?  The supreme court?  What are they using as a standard to draw that line?  Law?  Their own personal feelings?  What if congress and the president differ on their opinion of what is acceptable and what isn't?  Who settles the "tie"?  Should it be that he/she who has more power (holds the highest office) always right?

These and many other questions like them have been asked since this nation was founded (and beyond).  Free speech and censorship is a slippery slope.  Until someone comes up with a way to answer these questions, any and every thing can be called free speech (and just about is).