You could argue that, but the main point was that if the former two were considered "acceptable", sooner or later someone might get the funny idea that latter would be considered "acceptable" too.

That's the whole point of censorship, it takes nobody's side(s).

Completely missing the point. Censorship will never just stop after censoring the things you personally don't like. It'll bite you too, eventually. This is why you MUST tolerate ideas you find distasteful so that those who find YOUR ideas distasteful don't have precedent on their side when they hold the power to censor.

“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.” -H.L. Mencken

And before anyone tries to post The Paradox of Tolerance at me; here's the excerpt people always seem to leave out:

"I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise." -Karl Popper