The Instigator
GeneralMao
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
DarthKirones
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points

Political correctness damages political debate

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 1 vote the winner is...
DarthKirones
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/7/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 996 times Debate No: 58675
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

GeneralMao

Con

Political correctness damages political debate

Damage will be defined as limiting an individuals or groups ability to pursue their political ends.

Round 1: Acceptance only
Round 2: up to 3 arguments- no rebuttals
Round 3: up to 3 arguments- no rebuttals
round 4: rebuttals and conclusions. NO ADDITIONAL POINTS

no swearing (other than Dad jokes).
DarthKirones

Pro

INTRODUCTION

I accept this great debate and look forward to my opponents points.

CONCLUSION

All rules are fair and do not require changing.

I await your arguments.

DarthKirones.
Debate Round No. 1
GeneralMao

Con

Pundits and political partisans of a certain ilk often lament how the political correctness movement has severely damaged their ability to effectively argue their beliefs.

For example
  • I got a feeling about political correctness. I hate it. It causes us to lie silently instead of saying what we think.
    - Hal Holbrook
  • Political correctness kills discussion.
    - Lars von Trier
  • Whether it's people walking off 'The View' when Bill O'Reilly makes a statement about radical Islam or Juan Williams being fired for expressing his opinion, over-reaching political correctness is chipping away at the fundamental American freedoms of speech and expression.
    - Eric Cantor

I could post countless other lamentations from those who imagine that being politically correct somehow impedes their ability to communicate their message, as clearly no one would argue that political correctness limits a persons ability to think.

Perhaps the best place to start is to define what Political Correctness (hereafter PC) is (thanks to Google for this useful definition) - the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

This is an excellent definition, firstly because it highlights the knee-jerk negative slant that my opponent will be arguing, that is that being PC is somehow extreme.

I would argue that the notion that being PC is somehow akin to any extreme stance (usually defined as leftist) is flat our wrong and very much lazy thinking.

PC is nothing more (or less) than carefully expressing oneself, avoiding the use of classic patriarchal terms. I understand how some lazy thinkers rally against having to carefully express themselves. If a persons thoughts unfiltered are apt to potentially insult large swathes of ones audience, then perhaps one needs to examine ones thoughts more closely.

That PC is nothing more than framing ones arguments, not limiting ones arguments. It is akin to arguing that a polite debate cannot be a good (or proper) debate; or that being PC one cannot have a fiery debate.

DarthKirones

Pro

INTRODUCTION

Wow, what an argument. Let's see if I can match that.

ARGUMENT

Before, we can continue, we must all learn what PC means.

" conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated "

In a debate, both sides need to get equal says of topics before a decision is made. However, PC often restricts the speech of the side not in power, right now Republicans in the US are struggling with this. While I disagree of many things that the Republicans say, I do believe that their right to freedom of speech is sometimes restricted by PC.

" According to a new Army manual, U.S. soldiers will now be instructed to avoid any criticism of pedophilia and to avoid criticizing anything related to Islam. The following is from a Judicial Watch Article…"

There is a difference between challenging beliefs and forcing beliefs. Without criticism, there cannot be a proper debate. I am sure most people only challenge the beliefs of others rather than forcing their own beliefs on others, including soldiers, This is why PC damages political debate. Criticism allows people with an open mind to think, as it is only fair to listen to both sides of the story before choosing an opinion, Would it be fair to be pro-gay marriage without hearing the negative side? No. If you go to my profile and look at my stances on the big issues, you will see that some of them are not filled in, that is because I have not educated myself enough to make a formal opinion, as taking a stance on a subject I know little about is unfair. People who are "Politically Correct" force PC down people's throats, claiming that the other side is unfair, yet if these people choose to make an opinion based off of one side then I believe that political debate has been damaged.

Alright, yes. Maybe some stuff is offensive and maybe there needs to be protection of the offended group, but you cannot force the "offenders" to change their opinions, you can still protect minorities without censoring opinions. You can encourage people to change their opinions but not change them. The government can help change opinions but they should not force people to change them. Ultimately, there is one person and one person only who can choose what opinion you have: You.


CONCLUSION

I hope I have made my point clear.

Anyways, I am done for now.

DarthKirones.

http://endoftheamericandream.com...

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

http://patriotupdate.com...


Debate Round No. 2
GeneralMao

Con

GeneralMao forfeited this round.
DarthKirones

Pro

Huh, turns out I actually was able to get access to a computer, but I find it unfair to post an argument. Please so not vote on this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
GeneralMao

Con

GeneralMao forfeited this round.
DarthKirones

Pro

Again,

-PLEASE DO NOT VOTE!-

Thank you!

DarthKirones
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by DarthKirones 3 years ago
DarthKirones
I am representing both me and Con by saying that this debate may not be completed. Both him and me are going to be for a while. If we cannot finish the debate (which is likely) I ask that you do NOT VOTE. Thank you.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
GeneralMaoDarthKironesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF