And again, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. I can do this all day, I have no issue repeating myself 🙂 Freedom of speech literally means freedom from consequences from the government. The government cannot violate your constitutional 1st amendment right for protected speech. Morality has nothing to do with that. We have already gone over what isnt protected speech and none of it encompasses Charlie Kirk, no matter how sad his death was or how saintly you believe him to be. In America, you can express your opinions without reprisal from the government in any form. If the government violates your constitutional rights, you can successfully sue them. Its happened many times before, even for service members, and it will happen again when the government again violates the constitutional laws they must abide by. Military service members cannot be dismissed for morality reasons if it violates their constitutional rights. Constitutional rights come first. To help you understand your own point you are trying to make, that means if a service member does an act of immorality that goes beyond protected speech, such as lying with the intent to commit fraud or theft, that could be dismissible. However, saying wow, the look on Charlie Kirks undersized face when his neck erupted made me laugh uncontrollably, that would be protected 1st amendment speech that the government cannot legally in any way interfere with or reprimand you for.