Topic: Free speech should not be limited by the government.
For: Nin
Against: Inui

Judges: Inui, Maraj, Dez384

Go. Now.

Free speech should not be limited by the government.

America is defined by the constitutional freedoms granted to its citizens. Perhaps the most famous of those freedoms is freedom of speech.

Freedom of the press, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly… all of these essentially stem from the freedom of speech. And if the government is given the right to limit what we say, who’s to say that they can’t tell us that we can’t protest against them?

If the government limits speech, then we have the potential to lose so many other rights. If given the right to limit freedom of speech, Congress could potentially pass a bill that could outlaw speaking out against the government, or practicing your faith, or saying the word “lightbulb” on the 3rd Tuesday of the month. And by the newly amended Constitution, those laws would be valid.

…and I love saying the word “lightbulb” on the 3rd Tuesday of the month. D;

There isn’t much else to be said really; I think I’ve my point, and I’ll have more to say after seeing what you have to say, so… you’re on, Inui.

One last thing: Without free speech, we probably wouldn’t even be allowed to have this debate.

America is also defined by being obese, uneducated, and violent. Saying America is defined by it doesn't really strengthen your case, especially given how the world currently views us and how our own citizens view the government.

Nobody is questioning the right to practice any religion you want or assemble when you want. Free speech, however, is not necessary for either of those things.

Speaking of religion and free speech, such concepts have brought about people like Fred Phelps, one of the biggest piles of trash in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps

That's an explanation of what a piece of trash he is.

And furthermore, his ability to have free speech has corrupted the youth he's around profoundly.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-gX-vQ5sMOw

Two young girls that otherwise seem intelligent and attractive are now forever tainted due to free speech allowing Phelps to get away with verbal murder.

lol, there are tons of governments that are hella stable with limits on free speech, and the citizens are generally apathetic about it. Russia does not have freedom of the press or the same freedom of speech we have, but they can still say they don't approve of stuff, for instance. Putin has a gigantic approval rating of ~85%.

http://newsfromrussia.com/main/2004/02/02/52110.html

Whoamg, the ~15% wasn't killed and had the right to say they didn't approve? Indeed, they did. My arguement is not to limit free speech entirely, but to curb stuff like what Phelps does and make it illegal, as well as outlawing the slander we've all seen in American politics.

You could have definitely done more.

Yes, we would. It's not like the arguement is to ban speaking entirely. The arguement is to ban stuff like Phelps and the political slander plaguing our campaigns.

Also, freedom of speech can be limited in order to prevent stuff like the kind of rap that literally glorifies the "gangsta" lifestyle and makes violence, sex, and drugs seem like the best things in the world.

Nin cedes. Inui wins.