JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES OLD SUPREME COURT CASE (THEY LOST) COMES UP IN THE NEWS concerning TERROR and HATE SPEECH!
Nobody likes TROLLING, and I've never see it defended under "free speech" underpinnings. I think this is because an agent provocateur invites civil disorder as a chief motive rather than fostering debate or merely expressing a personal, subjective POV.
JW's were clearly preaching a message of condemnation during the war years under the guise of religious freedom and free speech. They were trolling.
Today, sponsoring a contest to draw the prophet Muhammed is certainly hard to see as anything but a form of trolling. The essential question becomes: IS IT LEGAL?
You'll notice how JW's have become a kinder and gentler form of troll in modern times and not even a shadow of their former public image as hard-hitting martyrs eager to usher in the New World Society.
Do you suppose the Chaplinsky ruling had anything to do with it, or was it the death of the mean old bastard RUTHERFORD in that same year (1942) which brought an oasis of semi-sanity into the organization for a few decades under Nathan Knorr?