The weight of censorship arguments revolves around what physical things should and shouldnt be allowed (she we be allowed to see that, should bee be allowed to say this...), but the important aspect is the intention of the item considered for censorship. If offence is intended it is offensive. If not, then it shouldnt be.
That's all very well but consider an example.

Take the marching season in Northern Ireland. Once a year, the loyalists march on a traditional route through the province. It basically involves them all dressing up, being accompanied by a marching band and waving banners. It all goes back to celebration of British victories over the Irish many years ago and the nationalists (living on part of this traditional route) object to it as they find it humiliating and offensive.
Now, almost every year, part of the march is banned. The part that goes through a mainly nationalist area. The loyalists feel they are censored and prevented from doing something anyone else (and anywhere else) in the UK would be able to do without objection.
Are the loyalists just rubbing the nationalist's noses in their victory and reminding them of their occupation or are they just exercising a right that everyone else in the UK is entitiled to exercise by taking a harmless little march?
I think I can understand both sides of the argument but the point is that it is not always so clear cut.