Back in the day, when I was living in LA and they were trying to get signatures to pass a law requiring performers in pornographic movies to wear condoms, which ultimately passed despite the fact that I still think the law was unconstitutional, I had a similar debate to this on a regular basis.
The arguments from the people supporting the law was that porn that featured sex without condoms was sending the wrong message. My response was always that it's not the role of the government to decide which messages are right and which messages are wrong; and, if your argument for this law is regulation of messaging, that's a violation of the First Amendment.
Australia clearly doesn't have a First Amendment. Still, the argument is the same. The moral question is the same.
Should the government get to abridge people's liberty if those people are deemed to be sending a message that that government seems to be wrong?
I say "no".