First of all, most of the examples you listed don't work against freedom of speech. By freedom of speech I meant the ability to voice yourself. When you lie about something serious, you aren't doing something wrong by lying, but you are doing something wrong by misleading. There is a difference here. You are still allowed to lie. Which is why I asked what I did in the OP.

Threats are once again, illegal because of your intention, not because of what you are saying.

Harassment through speech? How can one measure that?

If speech became unrestricted the things I have listed (which we both agree to be detrimental to society) would become legally acceptable.  Threats couldn't be illegal if speech was unrestricted.   Charging or punishing someone people because they uttered threats would be unlawfully censoring them.  They are simply expressing themselves, after all.  As for threats being illegal due to intention, that interpretation would vary between differing jurisdictions.  Intent to commit a crime is not enough to charge or convict in some places, and if the threat itself is perfectly fine because of the whole free speech thing, intent must be proven which is hard to do in the absence of action.

And then harassment.  Comments of a sexual nature in the workforce again would become acceptable because people would simply be voicing themselves. People in positions of authority in business or military would be empowered to sexually exploit those beneath them and this is already an occurrence despite harassment laws and policies already in place.

Speech is free pretty much as it is.  The limitations and restrictions adequately protect the public from possible abuses.  Please explain to me how you would provide equal protection for the public against such abuses while making speech completely free and 100% unlimited.

Well, I believe that in public its possible. Workforce (and contracts) have their own rules and regulations,  and people have to follow them if they want to keep their jobs.

But you made a good point. You were thinking about it in a different way then I did.

Limited, not vastly so by any stretch. Certain groups, whoever they are, shouldn't be made to feel bad for some ignorant fucks opinion. So yeah, if some racist, or homophobe ect wants to sound off, I'd like them to be punished.

unlimited, but if you yell fire in a movie theater and someone gets hurt or something is damaged your at fault

Would you say it would be wrong for atheists to make religious people feel bad by insulting the bible or anything else related to religion? There are such laws in some countries even now.

Well yelling Fire in a theater is too much freedom, I think there is too much Politically Correctness.

The sad thing is most of the politically correctness is in select parts of society.

For example I hear dumb jokes at certain events with certain people and no one cares, but people lose their jobs and are vilified if they say anything Politically incorrect with certain people.
I remember once a Teacher at our school said, most of the people involved in local gangs are black and no one cared and most agreed. He said that again and a parent heard and he was suspended.

I don't think they should have abuse hurled at them in public, no, but they're different. You're born with your sexuality and colour, religion is something you choose. Couple that with the fact most religion/religious people causes a lot of pain for people around the world what with being so judgemental.