The Instigator
Ienjoysaturdays
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
ConservativePolitico
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points

Internet Censorship

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 2 votes the winner is...
ConservativePolitico
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/2/2012 Category: Technology
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,967 times Debate No: 24015
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

Ienjoysaturdays

Con

Okay, second debate. I started this one literally right after my first, so I still am not 100% sure if I am doing this right, but I felt like debating this one too.

Internet censorship is absolutely ridiculous. We have freedom to express ourselves, and more government regulation is not something that we need.
ConservativePolitico

Pro

I accept assuming that Con means that he is opposed to all forms of internet censorship and is for a completely free internet.
Debate Round No. 1
Ienjoysaturdays

Con

I am against governmental input into where we spend our time and what we see on the Internet. I don't see
ConservativePolitico

Pro

Child Porn

So you agree that child porn should be allowed to be viewed on the Internet? Under a completely free internet things such as child porn could be viewed any where, on places like Youtube and with no age restrictions. You are in favor of this?

Excessive Violence and Obsenity

Websites like bloodshow.com would be visible by all. Brutal beheadings, which have been removed from the web before, would be visible again. You are in favor of this? Children could watch explicit material without any age requirements because requirements would be censorship.

Jihadist Websites

Websites organizing terrorist attacks and activites have been shutdown and censored here in the US. You're saying they should be allowed to flourish? Websites wishing the president dead, organizing jihadist attacks and praising things like 9/11 should not be allowed on the web.

Internet censorship is needed in these cases.

Debate Round No. 2
Ienjoysaturdays

Con

You put up a good argument, and I am actually torn, but still going to stand my ground here. Althought those things are horrible, there is still freedom of speech. People can post what they want. However, you neglected to read my response apparently, because you still wrote down that I am for a completely free Internet, which are words I did not say.

I am against government input on unneeded topics. Child pornography is illegal, so it's not unneeded to remove that. Freedom of expression exists, so the groups talking about murdering the president should be allowed to exist as long as they don't act on what they say. I am NOT saying that I am FOR these orginazations, I'm saying that they do have the law behind them. Having those up along with their plans could even help us protect the president.
ConservativePolitico

Pro

ConservativePolitico forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Ienjoysaturdays

Con

Ienjoysaturdays forfeited this round.
ConservativePolitico

Pro

I apologize for forfeiting a round but my opponent did also so we'll skip over that and call it even.

"there is still freedom of speech"

The First Amendment does not protect all kinds of speech. Hate talk, threats and obscenity are not covered under the First Amendment which is what my examples are well examples of. [1]

"Freedom of expression exists, so the groups talking about murdering the president should be allowed to exist as long as they don't act on what they say."

You do not have the freedom to express your will to kill the president. That is not protected under the First Amendment. Our freedom of speech doesn't cover hate speak, threats, defamation, libel or slander. [2] Those things are still illegal even with the First Amendment.

While adhering to the First Amendment internet censorship should be allowed to keep certain terrible things off the internet.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 4
Ienjoysaturdays

Con

Ienjoysaturdays forfeited this round.
ConservativePolitico

Pro

FF

Vote Pro
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by bossyburrito 5 years ago
bossyburrito
I would debate this. I am sure Alwaysmorethanyou would too.
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
Obscenity is not protected by freedom of speech
Posted by bossyburrito 5 years ago
bossyburrito
That forum was fun.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 5 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Down with internet censorship.

http://www.debate.org...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by THEBOMB 5 years ago
THEBOMB
IenjoysaturdaysConservativePoliticoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments trumped Con's bad arguments. Plus, extra ff. Better sourced, etc...
Vote Placed by MouthWash 5 years ago
MouthWash
IenjoysaturdaysConservativePoliticoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I think the government overreacts when some guy says he wants to kill the president. Why the hell does EVERYONE who would imply such a thing have to be investigated? It happened to Eminem a few years back, when he was still passionate about making music. Anyway, Con forfeited.