The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Freedom of speech - must the law be stricter?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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: 3/28/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,981 times Debate No: 22384
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)




We started a new debate about the same subject as our last debate, we did this because we need to gather different comments and opinions about the same subject.

We are a group of 3 students, we have an assignment for social studies where we have to set up a debate online.
we hope that you will react on our debate seriously because it will be graded.

Our debate is about freedom of speech.
We think freedom of speech is a right we should preserve but we think the law should be adjusted because some people misuse their right to say whatever they want and insult people.
This has already gone so far that there is a politician in the Netherlands who is banned from England because of the discriminating things he has said.
We think that he crossed the line but he is not the only one who insults people without being punished because he has the right of freedom of speech and at the moment the law is not very strict.
We think the law should be stricter, limiting the people in what they have to say and stopping them from insulting and discriminating other people.

What do you think about this subject? tell us what you think and why.

Thank you :)


Why to be strict on freedom of speech ....because it is a right of human to express his views about a topic or a person .. if a person will not speak or express himself then what is the difference between a human and animal. As far as insult is concerned then i want to tell u that a confident person never feel insulted on other person's views about him and if a person is not confident then even if you tell politely about his mistakes he will take it as an insult...and if a person is abusing someone then only he getting insulted nor anyone else....
Debate Round No. 1


It is true that humans need to speak and express themselves but there is a difference between expressing yourselves and crossing the line of what you are allowed to say.
we think that saying that confident people won't be insulted by other people's view is not correct for everyone can sense when they are being insulted and that has one way or another impact on you.
But there is a large difference between insulting someone by pointing out his mistakes or discriminating someone.
Often when freedom of speech crosses the line, someone is discriminated. Discriminating is forbidden by the law and isn't feeling safe more important than saying something insulting or discriminating about someone.
Freedom of speech is a good thing, we agree, and we don't think people shouldn't be allowed to express themselves, we just think there is a difference between expressing yourself and discriminating people. And we think this difference should be pointed out more and crossing the line should not be tolerated.


Yes you are quite right that there is a difference between expressions and crossing of limits but the line which distinguishes them is so thin that , it is impossible to frame out any rule pointing that minute line and ask people to remain in that line also that limits differs from person to person i.e toleration limits of everyone is different if something is tolerating for you then it might be untolerating for others.
So how can you specify the toleration limit of something or some person. Even if you became successful in frame all such rules which is a quite tough task then the most hazadrous things arises i.e its negative impacts . since the line is too thin so it can also became a weapon for influencial people for harassing others under the law and if it will happen then it will have even more disastrous impacts because insult by saying something can't be physical but rule can bring physical harassment also.
Debate Round No. 2


The line is indeed thin but that does not make it impossible to keep the border and stop people from crossing it.
And even though the toleration limit is different to everyone, there is a limit for most people and we think the law should be adjusted to that limit.
Influencial people might harass others under the law but that already happened in the Netherlands, a politician said things about muslims which couldn't, in the eyes of most people, be tolerated but because there was no law about this he got away with it. if there had been a law which forbids this he perhaps wouldn't have said so much insulting things because with that he would disobey the law and that would endanger his job as a politician.
so making a law about freedom of speech would, in this case and probably in more cases make people think about what they say more because saying something that offends someone would have consequences for their lives.


You know what if law is made then instead of influential person, more harm will fell on innocent persons under the name of crossing the limit and what about media then even media will not be able to reveal the truth about politicians because they can give trial to any journalist under the law since I have mentioned the line is too thin.
Let me explain what will happen next if you being a common person will say something unpleasant to a politician it will come under law but viceversa will not since he is holding a power with him , then what will you do u cant go to journalists, cops etc. then your all doors will be closed . So its better to keep open some of the doors then to close all because now when you dont get justice atleast you can reveal all the things through media but if media will also come in censorship then where will you go. Tell.
As you have mentioned that politician said something wrong about a muslim family , you know now atleast you can protest against that politician but after the law, all laws will fall against you and you will not be able to protest because the second person has power and grip over the system. At that momemt you will feel as if you are trapped in your own web .
Thank you a lot.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by OneoftheYeshua 4 years ago
voltaire was nothing but a liar for he would not defend to the death anyone's right to say anything not even his own talk is cheap anyone can say anything but that does not make it true be discerning of the truth and you will find it and it will free you the words of the jesus god bless you and peace amen
Posted by darkcomedy 4 years ago
"I don't like what you're saying, but I will defend to the death, your right to say it." -Voltaire
Posted by OneoftheYeshua 4 years ago
Freedom of speech is dangerous, and I will tell you why. Freedom of speech is dangerous because there are some people in this world who do not care about nothing, and that includes what they think, say, and do. Now, what happens when you have someone like that in a society that believes that anyone can say anything anywhere anytime? That's right, you guessed it, abuse. Now, Jesus said in Matthew 12:36 the following: "[I] say but [to] you* for every word idle which will speak The Men [They] will pay about it word in day [of] judgment" Harness, Mark D. (2010-07-29). Accurate New Testament Second Edition (p. 14). Kindle Edition. Now, since we will all have to pay about it word in day of Judgment, (and this is in reference to idle words, not to offensive words), then how are we going to give an account for all of the offensive words that we have uttered? The only account that we will be able to give, is to say, "I cannot give an account." Like I said, this is in reference to idle words spoken, so, therefore, how much more worthy of punishment are offensive words spoken? Freedom of speech? How about changing it to Accountability of Speech? People would fare a whole lot better, in this life, and the next. Amen.
Posted by Dikkeamber 4 years ago
Amber het is een onschuldig meisje levende in Nistelrode.

Ze woont met haar broertje tim en pleegkinderen daar in een geweldig hijs met een erg lieve hond Amy, ze is misschien een beetje dik maar niemand maakt dat ook maar iets uit.

Groetjes Iris Arts
Posted by Dikkeamber 4 years ago
I agree with their statements
Posted by IrisArts 4 years ago
Thank you for your comment Henk, it is really helpful
Posted by henk96 4 years ago
I think it's a very good subject because it is very actual in the Netherlands nowadays. I agree that you may not insult people also when there is freedom of speech. Because in the first article of the dutch consitution stands that you may not discriminate. I think that the first article of discrimination is more important then the freedom of speech so I agree with your statement.
No votes have been placed for this debate.