The Instigator
J-man1442
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
AbandonedSpring
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Censorship should be Eliminated

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/29/2014 Category: TV
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 672 times Debate No: 66041
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

J-man1442

Pro

Round One: Acceptance. I have noticed that this seems to be a tradition on this website so I figured I would keep with it.
I would also like to say that this argument is strictly professional. This means that if one is going to argue against me on this topic, I ask that you keep any emotional statements out of the situation (i.e. profanity, name-calling, etc.) to prevent us from getting off-subject and to prevent one of us from getting reported. I imagine that either one would suck. I would also like to thank my opponent, whoever he/she may be, for taking their time to join this debate.
Let's get this started!
AbandonedSpring

Con

I will gladly accept this debate! Thanks for starting it!
Debate Round No. 1
J-man1442

Pro


Round 2:


Thank you, AbandonedSpring for joining me in this debate.


First of all, I wish to quote George Bernard Shaw, who once said, “The first condition of progress is the removal of censorship.” Our Constitution grants us the freedom of speech, something that censorship is taking away from singers, actors, and others. I feel that a lot of back-breaking exertion was used to successfully give us our own country, and even more so to create the Constitution. Getting to the point, by allowing censorship to prevail, we are denying the progress that was made by our Founding Fathers long ago.


Secondly, I would like to point out that the words that are censored are just words. The “B-word” is nothing as insulting as the word stupid or idiot, but it is regarded as a, “bad word.” This doesn’t make sense to me. Surely, my opponent would agree that if we are teaching our kids how to insult someone’s intelligence with TV, calling them a female canine.


AbandonedSpring

Con

To begin, I will define censorship: "the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts."

Under this definition, there are times when the internet should be censored. If you are being harassed on the internet, the website host should have the ability to remove the content because it is harmful. The only people who have the right to censor the internet are website owners. We all have the right to be free, and to not have to worry about harassment. What is a pedophile is posting child pornography online?

Thanks
Debate Round No. 2
J-man1442

Pro

1.) “…there are times when the internet should be censored.”

Let’s look at the country of China, where a Communist government rules over the people with an iron fist, figuratively speaking. In China, according to Britney Wilkins of OnlineCollege.org, whatever you type is recorded, your visits to game sites, e-mail websites, and others are monitored by an, “Internet Detective,” and programs such as iTunes or blogposts are blocked. Our internet here is not that bad, sure, but if censorship continues to exist, and we continue to let the government do what it wants, nothing will stop our internet from becoming just as bad.

2.) “…the website host should have the ability to remove the content because it is harmful.”

I realize that harassment is a dangerous thing, depending on how it is happening. However, a parent should be nearby to make sure a child is not being exposed to this; if an adult is on a website like this, perhaps they should be expecting this. Also, it is against the Consitution for one to delete another’s statements, etc. (Freedom of Speech). There is a difference between deleting someone’s profile from your website and deleting their posts. That brings me to my next point:

3.) “What is a pedophile is posting child pornography online?”

I am going to assume that you meant, ‘What if a pedophile…’ over, ‘What is…’

On March 26th, 2011, it was reported that the world’s greatest pedophile ring had been annihilated by the authorities. This all took place in the Netherlands, where censorship does not exist, though debates have been held on the subject. How was this stopped? The 184 suspects were subdued, not censored. If censorship had existed, people would be expecting it to stop just because they have stopped showing it. You may have stopped showing something, but you haven’t eradicated the source.

4.) You mentioned the other types of censorship in your definition, but only talk about the internet is here. What about films? Books?

AbandonedSpring

Con

China is irrelevant. China is a communist country, give me an argument with a democratic-republic government, then that argument might become valid.

" a parent should be nearby to make sure a child is not being exposed to this; if an adult is on a website like this, perhaps they should be expecting this. Also, it is against the Consitution for one to delete another"s statements, etc. (Freedom of Speech). There is a difference between deleting someone"s profile from your website and deleting their posts."

A parent does not have time to be constantly monitoring their children. Parents have to work. It is not unconstitutional! It's clear. You cannot use your 1st amendment right to violate someone else. This is why students have limited free speech in school.

"On March 26th, 2011, it was reported that the world"s greatest pedophile"...

Thats a specific situation. What if someone was running a blog, and posted pictures of children? Then the content should be removed. However, you don't think it should be apparently. So now there is a person in jail, and a traumatized toddler who will be faced with bullying the rest of his life.

"You mentioned the other types of censorship in your definition, but only talk about the internet is here. What about films? Books?"

I did not. We are strictly talking about the internet. However, I will let you know that I did that dictionaries are not written specifically upon the request of a word. There are many types of suppression. As you mentions earlier, with China and what not. Did you really not know there were other forms?

censorship of speech
censorship of ideas
censorship of the internet.

Thanks
Debate Round No. 3
J-man1442

Pro

  1. 1.“China is irrelevant. China is a communist country, give me an argument with a democratic-republic government, then that argument might become valid…”

So what if China is a Communist country? China is still full of living and breathing human beings, just like the United States. Also, what does a democratic-republic government have to do with anything? Last time I checked, our Pledge of Allegiance said, “…and to the republic for which it stands…” not “and to the democratic-republic for which it stands.” Finally, you end this statement by calling my argument not-valid just because I mentioned China. Need I remind you that at the end of that contention I stated, “Our internet here is not that bad, sure, but if censorship continues to exist, and we continue to let the government do what it wants, nothing will stop our Internet from becoming just as bad.”

  1. 2.“A parent does not have time to be constantly monitoring their children. Parents have to work.”

Internet Filter systems do exist, such as K9 Web Protection, Net Nanny, and more.

  1. 3.“[That’s] a specific situation….”

(That included 184 suspects, like teachers and police officers}

  1. 4.“…What if someone was running a blog, and posted pictures of children?”

My parent has posted a picture of me on a social media website; I am not bullied for it. Bullying is always going to exist, pulling content will not stop that.

  1. 5.“I did not. We are strictly talking about the Internet.”

I invite you to recheck your definition of censorship. We are strictly talking about, as the topic suggests, eliminating censorship. The topic does not say the word, “Internet.”

  1. 6.“As you mentions earlier…”

Mentioned?

Again, thank you very much for your time. I did enjoy this debate very much. May the best debater win!
(My apologies for the large amount of spaces)

AbandonedSpring

Con

"So what if China is a Communist country? China is still full of living and breathing human beings, just like the United States."

No one can do anything about the suppression. In cChina, there are many other forms in suppression. There is not first amendment for china. Us being democratic-republic allows for such a document that protects us. We elect officials who have similar ideals.

"Internet Filter systems do exist, such as K9 Web Protection, Net Nanny, and more.'

This are not free. Not everyone has money for a month-by-month payment.

"(That included 184 suspects, like teachers and police officers}"

But once again, it;s one situation. There are a countless number of others, and since you did not give a second situation, I am assuming you could not find another.

"My parent has posted a picture of me on a social media website; I am not bullied for it. Bullying is always going to exist, pulling content will not stop that."

Did your parents put nude photos of you online? Bullying will exist, but in varying degrees. A nude photo versus an embarrassing one are completely different.

"I invite you to recheck your definition of censorship. We are strictly talking about, as the topic suggests, eliminating censorship. The topic does not say the word, "Internet.""

clearly you don't understand how definitions work. I grabbed a definition off of a dictionary, and applied it to a situation. I did not make up this definition. I have only been talking about internet censorship.

You also dropped the constitutional argument, so i'm assuming that you just had nothing to come back with.

Voting issues:

My opponent failed to prove that the internet should not be censored. He gave examples of situation where it wan't, but he never said it shouldn't be. He never really said why child pornography should not be pulled off from the internet. Website owners would have the ability to censor things on their own websites to protect the overall experience safety of users.

Thanks
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by AbandonedSpring 2 years ago
AbandonedSpring
I never said he didn't. All I said was I was't arguing that side of the definition. Speech is speech, regardless of what form it takes.
Posted by J-man1442 2 years ago
J-man1442
I just want to point out that my opponent did in fact define bullying as, "the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts," and then proceed to ignoring that definition. This is not an attack, I am just being honest.
No votes have been placed for this debate.