The problem with censorship, which I think is an underlying theme here, is the sheer complexity of administering it, or even deciding upon it.
If, for example, (only an example) I am offended by heavy Christian proselytising and propaganda, and say so, satirically or outright, many evangelical Christians (despite their alleged humility) might then be offended and say so, in whatever fashion. Whose words should be censored? Either party would feel disenfranchised.
It is clearly the manner or genre or tone of the objection that is a problem, but it would be impossible to litigate for the nuances here, because each provokes a very individual response, as we can see on this thread.
I don't have an answer - no one is clearly in the right, and the only ones clearly in the wrong are those who under the innocent.