It is true that "hate speech laws" are limits on free speech. It is perfectly reasonable to consider any limitation on free speech to be unethical, but pretending that "hate speech" is not well defined is willful ignorance. No country has absolute protection of absolute free speech.
This seems to blur the lines between "hate speech is a thing" and "hate speech should be banned." They are fundamentally different questions, and conflating them invites the normative fallacy.
