To begin, I agree that there are those who make aggressive and unreasonable demands on others to police speech. To attack someone, verbally or otherwise, for a choice of words not intended to disparage or cause harm to someone, rather than discuss the ideas behind those words and the way they may be received, is reprehensible, and discounts the spirit of cooperation necessary to build a great society.

That said: is urging someone to adopt new ways of speaking "anti-free speech"? Free speech cannot protect specific words, phrases, or even languages, as these change over time, so free speech protects the ideas behind these words, or, more specifically, one's ability to hold and espouse these ideas without threat of harm. Barring those unreasonable and aggressive mentioned above, confronting someone over language choice does not deprive you of the ability to hold and espouse your ideas, nor does it threaten you with harm. And to call this unpatriotic is to ignore their perspective and experience. To be patriotic is to do what a patriot would. We each decide for ourselves what a patriot would do. Those urging others to elect different word choices so as not to harm others may think that a patriot views us all as equal, and equally deserving of dignity and respect, in our own fashion. Those favoring the unrestricted use of speech, publicly and privately, may think that a patriot views us all as equal, and equally deserving of the right to say whatever we believe, at any time, in any setting.

This is not anti-patriotism. This is a different form of patriotism.

At least, that's how I see it.