A. The FFs aren't constrained by what anyone else meant by the phrase, only what they meant by the phrase
and
B. What the FFs meant by the phrase is not the final metric, as the right has been shaped by court decisions; the phrase is vague and also the context for it is shaped by society as it changes.
Does freedom of speech as defined ca 1791 include this conversation, seeing as electronic communication of any type wasn't yet invented? There's a whole host of kinds of speech that have come into existence, or at least been acknowledged as speech, since that time. For instance, I wonder what the FFs would think about "money is speech"
(also, "the left" is not a monolithic group and you would do well to actually show who holds the views you are so cavalierly assigning here)
Pretty weak tea