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

How should the 1st amendment be interpreted? Why ?

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
kobe1998 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/21/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 261 times Debate No: 106049
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




Hate speech.


I am severely disappointed that you would post such a short ridiculous argument on a serious and controversial topic. First of all, all you"ve written is Hate Speech. According to the Supreme Court, "Hate Speech" is protected by the first amendment; whether you agree with it or not. As long as the words used don"t cause false alarm, violent provocative, or direct threatening material, it is completely legal. The first amendment protects our freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and to petition government materials. There is no debate on how it"s interpreted. The true debate is should it be changed. Better luck next round :)
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by YungCyka 2 years ago
Yeah. What position r u taking?
Posted by lannan13 2 years ago
Could you be a little more specific about the debate?
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.