The most politically important issue of Shakespeare's time, the issue that was most similar to modern PC, was religion.

In effect you exclude all the subjects that Shakespeare wasn't even allowed to remotely touch, and that last subject you make as fuzzy as you can get -- a "Roman Catholic point of view"? A "point of view". He was a man with Catholic parents and never attended church, and yet that's the best he was allowed to do, a "point of view" that doesn't point to anything in particular?

Let's talk specifics. In regards to politics -- was Shakespeare allowed to mock Queen Elizabeth, as people are currently allowed to mock their presidents and prime ministers? Was he allowed to portray a democracy as something good, when modern films and series can portray kingships as good things (see "Chronicles of Narnia" and "Lord of the Rings" which if anything was more reactionary than the book version, since it has the King Aragorn Return, but unlike Tolkien it doesn't bother showing the Mayor Samwise Elected)?

In regards to religion -- was Shakespeared allowed to have a good atheist character, as people are currently allowed to have good Christian characters and good Atheist characters, and even good Muslim characters? And yes, as people are currently allowed to have even good racist, sexist, homophobic characters (see DCI Gene Hunt )?

Don't talk to me about fuzzy "point of views", give me a single good atheist character.

Is there a play of Shakespeare that cannot be played today because it isn't allowed to be put on stage now, because it contains material that are censored now and yet they weren't back then? The closest you would come to such an example would be the Merchant of Venice and its antisemetism. In contrast I can show you a million films that could never be allowed in Elizabethan times. Let's imagine an Elizabethan version of "Eyes wide shut", why don't we.