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

Political Correctness is threatening free speech.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
joeymiller1234 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: Select Winner
Started: 9/14/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 month ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 214 times Debate No: 95401
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)




In recent popular culture many social media sites are blocking or even banning users who are activist of unpopular opinions primarily supporting right wing views. It has become a social norm to accuse people who do not accept the use of modern labels such as the official 61 genders in New York. A recent example of this being Twitter drama in which Milo Yianopolas is banned from Twitter for "harassment" after posting a extremely critical review of Leslie Jones who recently starred in the new ghostbusters movie. In his review Milo refers to Leslie as a "attractive black man". Although Milo was extremely rude I believe he has a right to voice is opinions regardless of how offensive they may be.


I disagree with the resolution that political correctness is threatening free speech. As Jim C Hines once said, "But freedom of speech does not mean freedom from responsibility. Nor does freedom of speech obligate me to agree with your words, or to provide them with a platform." meaning that freedom of speech does NOT protect you from saying ignorant or stupid remarks.
Debate Round No. 1


Freedom of speech does specifically protect someone's right to say ignorant or stupid remarks. Anyone who speaks is taking responsibility for their words regardless if you agree or not, and the fact that people have the freedom of speech is their platform on which they can say whatever it is they feel so long as it does not create a clear and present danger. But when people begin to be censored because of their ignorant remarks that is when their first amendment rights have been violated. Take for example certain universities across the u.s have banned certain words that may be connected with "microagressions". The fact that we are banning specific words to protect people's feelings is a clear violation of the freedom of speech.
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
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by BackCommander 1 month ago
@Iacov The problem I have with subjects like this is that I have multiple opinions.
As a citizen of the USA I find that I want to agree that the rights laid out to us by our forefathers should never be infringed upon by anyone.
Yet, as a realist, I believe that keeping a facade going just for the sake of the facade, will only do more damage in the long run. Our society was founded over two hundred years ago, and eventually those basic rules will need to be gone over again. We cannot simply keep them because a bunch of guys a long time ago said we had to. On paper that actually kind of sounds insane.
Posted by StrtComm 1 month ago
Restricting free speech on social media is not a good thing, it is important to let everybody have there say in the issue, that is how you come to a good conclusion. For example, I have talked with a lot of anti Trump protesters, most of them young men and women. When asked why they hate trump they don't know why. This is a sign of ignorance due to lack of information. When people cannot express their opinion on the issue because it seems a little harsh, they get banned or blocked. This not only restricts free speech, it also creates a biased social media network which is what leads to ignorant one sided opinions among young people.

(P.s. Plz don't start a political argument in the comments, it was only used as an example)
Posted by Iacov 1 month ago
@BackCommander I agree society must change but something I believe should not be changed is the very foundation that that society was founded on such as the constitution that provides us the freedom of speech.
Posted by BackCommander 1 month ago
Pro, society changes. That's a simple fact. If our country just ran with the original rules that were set out and never changed them, we would have fallen long ago.
Posted by Whulfson 1 month ago
This debate seems interesting, hopefully con won't try to boycott it by censoring out Pro's arguments. (that was a joke. you can laugh now <3)
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.