Maybe it's time we start re-evaluating at our willingness to 'allow' hate groups to do as they please under the guise of freedom of speech, association and privacy rights?
Your Japanese argument is a strawman and you know it. Not even remotely close to being comparable.
It's not that 'some people' find it offensive. It is an offensive symbol, period. I'm not talking about outlawing anything that 'some people' find offensive. That should be abundantly clear.
Certainly you understand this then opens the door to allowing someone to define what is considered hate and illegal and what is not. Who is it that gets to define this? Even if a majority agree which in the confederate flag most probably do agree as most would agree with a KKK march or demonstration or their right to even assemble and display or the Arian brotherhood displaying the Nazi swastika and people stomping. How bout the black panthers, Westboro Baptist Church, burning or disrespecting the bible or the Koran, etc etc.
And what if someone displaying the flag says they aren't wearing it to represent that blacks should be slaves? That they are merely wearing it to establish southern pride, or whatever reason. There most certainly isn't universal agreement despite whether I agree with you or not on what it means and the reason people display it. It certainly should not be illegal to display it on one's private property or even if they want to continue their ignorance if there reason is they believe blacks should be slaves. You, me, or the government most certainly be telling people what they should or should not believe, as it relates to those things.