There are times when rights conflict and the courts must rule which one trumps the other. You simply not liking something is never going to trump a right.Ruling that something is not protected speech is, in fact, "going against the Constitution" because it directly ignores the 1st Amendment. Many of our laws "go against the Constitution" and they do so when we decide that certain parts of the Constitution shouldn't apply to certain action (i.e. free speech shouldn't apply to libel). It's about "throwing our rights away for no reason" as you said earlier, so if your argument rests on "the Constitution says so", then that isn't a compelling or valid argument.