Do you agree with censorship...?

The thing about censorship is that the people being protected don't know what they're being protected from so it's an unstable practice. I think it's better to know information in general but some truths and some experiences are hard to handle. If you try to hide some grand truth or controversial work of art for too long then you risk a worse outcome than if you just let the information out there and let people know about it.

It's a slippery slope, as we're seeing now.

No, censorship is cancer.

I'm against censorship of any kind.

No. Off the top of my head I cant think of a situation where it would be good.

Censorship can be useful for NSFW or sensitive content whereas media censorship is a disservice to its viewers. 

It depends on what you mean by censorship. A few years back, a publishing company rejected Brett Easton Ellis' novel, American Psycho--and a great outcry arose against the publishers for their "censorship." The company claimed that, after reviewing Ellis' manuscript, they had decided against it. Eventually, another company picked up the rejected work, and in the meantime, Ellis had garnered tons of free publicity.

Do I agree that the first company was censoring American Psycho? No. They were a corporation that decided that the manuscript was "unsuitable for its needs," and they were entirely within their rights. They were under no obligation whatsoever to publish Ellis' writing. Now, their decision would have counted as censorship if:

(1) They had rejected AP under governmental orders;
or
(2) They had used their influence to prevent any other company from publishing AP.

Since (as far as I know) neither of the above conditions applied, no censorship was involved.

But do I approve of the government stepping in and saying, "You can't print that!"?

Only in the case that the material in question had been reviewed by a non-partisan body and judged to endanger national security. However, there is a rule concerning "prior restraint":

The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

That is what the Constitution says about Free Speech. Government cannot abridge Free Speech. That means any government – state, county, city, whatever.

While it is fine and noble to be against censorship, be careful that you are not actually preventing Free Speech by doing so. That you are talking about preventing others from speaking. It is a fairly common occurrence if, for example, someone invites a controversial speaker to their campus. The University then cancels the speaking engagement so it has to be moved to another location. Advocates of the speaker scream about the curbing of Free Speech. But is isn’t. The University exists under its own rules, whether private or public, so if a speaker may cause a disruption or a demonstration, it is the University administration who has all the Rights to permit or to cancel the engagement.

When our most recent Ex-President had his Twitter accounts first suspended and then deleted, his supporters lost their collective minds. “There is no Free Speech anymore!” Again, it is the company who has the rights here. In order to get a Twitter account a person must agree to a Terms and Conditions contract. Our cheating Ex violated his contract with his election lies so got his account jettisoned.

If you disagree about the canceled speaker or the Twitter deletion then you yourself have the Free Speech right to try to persuade the decisions makers to your viewpoint, including peaceful demonstrations. That is how Free Speech works in our democracy.

It is not easy to be simply anti- or pro-censorship. Things can get complicated but a basic rule-of-thumb is to ask, “Did a government entity pass a law, regulation, or ordinance that prohibits you from any kind of legally available print or media?”

See the excellent post above from ellynmacg who discusses other examples of what is not censorship.