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

Talking Should Be Illegal

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  
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: 1/12/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 519 times Debate No: 106621
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)



Hello! Talking should be illegal. People gossip, lie and cuss way too much, which is terrible.

We need to stitch everybody's mouth's shut so they won't talk, burp, cuss, shout, gossip, verbally insult people, or lie.

Please vote pro.


Seriously? I hope this is a troll, but I just want to see what you would counter me with. Your debate arguments are relatively amusing to read. Oh, and can we make a no forefeit rule?

I'm not sure if you mean figuratively or literally stitching people's mouths so I won't address it yet.
I believe that talking should not be illegal.
First of all, talking is our main way of communication. If we couldn't talk, there would be plenty of other ways to communicate, however they wouldn't solve the "problems" of cussing, lying, gossiping, insulting, or gossiping. They could easily type or write it out. Plus, talking is the most effective and fastest way of communication- writing of typing takes time, and blind people can't read.
Debate Round No. 1


I don't care, man!

People burp, still, which is very annoying, and I have friends who whistle so loud it makes my blood boil.

No, I am not trolling.

We need to make ban talking, just like diabetes or laziness, which should be illegal.

Also, are you Japanese? Cool! I'm 100% Russian.


Burping is uncontrollable. And you can just politely ask your friends to stop whistling. It would be a lot easier than to ban talking.
Sound does not affect boiling temperature.
Diabetes is hereditary or beyond most people"s control, and purely medical. It"s like saying anyone who needs to diet needs to be fined.
Laziness is subjective. Like, for example, being too lazy to type more than 750 characters.
Have you ever burped? Probably. Maybe even last week.
Anyways, banning talking is essentially stupid. Provide non personal arguments, please.
Debate Round No. 2


Look, you asinine people.

Whenever people talk, they lie, gossip, cuss, insult, or burp. That is all people do with their stinky mouths.

We have to stitch people's mouths shut so they won't make any unnecessary distracting noises, such as whistling or burping.

Talking, just like dating, is absolutely unnecessary.


People don't always, 100% of the time when they talk, lie, gossip, cuss, insult, or burp. What the heck does burping have to do with anything? People can sing, teach, compliment, and do plenty of other stuff. Stitching everyone's mouth shut is stupid and you wouldn't be able to breathe from your mouth. Noise is just noise. We can ignore it. Banning talking will not stop distracting noise. What, should we ban noise too? Making talking illegal is like banning cars. They aren't necessary, but without them , things would be much less convenient. It's the same thing with talking. You can choose not to talk, if you like, and politely ask people to stop doing annoying things.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Vvanadium 2 years ago
GAH thank you Virginia_Pine you sort of said what I wanted to. I can't wait til he posts the next round, I couldn't get everything I wanted to on the first one.
Posted by Virginia_Pine 2 years ago
One of the things that is supposed to make the United States a great country is that we are supposed to have free speech (except in very special situations, like emergencies, or covert / clandestine government work, or undercover crime investigations and the like).

To take away people's right to speak freely is to begin to control and possibly oppress people who disagree with you or with the majority opinion. It also limits our thinking on issues to the dominant view, when someone else might ultimately have a better idea or a healthy compromise that would benefit the situation the most. Worse yet, it can lead to extremist beliefs when the dominant view decides that those they disagree with are basically evil people. For example, I'm pretty sure that folks did not have free speech in Nazi Germany. You want to tell me that that was a good thing?

For what it's worth, controlling people's speech is one aspect that abusive, destructive cults use to control members. For anyone who has been in a cult or cultish group, they can tell you sometimes how bad it can get.

Now you might say: well, but you can still write. No, not really, because groups that practice censorship tend to censor the information and/or use it as leverage against the author -- in a worst-case scenario, possibly leading to the author ending up executed / assassinated.

This is why that while some speech is hurtful, our best bet is to learn to develop thicker skin, make light of it, and best of all, rise above it -- overcome evil with good. ; )

Perhaps you intended this argument as a joke; but I assure you, it is no joke when you have had to deal with it yourself. For folks who have had to endue censorship in real life, it is no laughing matter. I hope that you never have to endure censorship being forced on you -- but that you also learn to value the free speech of others. = )
Posted by reggee 2 years ago
we have freedom of speech
Posted by reggee 2 years ago
u guys have autism
Posted by Vvanadium 2 years ago
The character limit is quite annoying.
Posted by John_C_1812 2 years ago
Talking can be illegal. The people who had documented the United States Constitution, knew this as fact when those committing treason formed direction in writing for a chance others would be given opportunity to write it. This was done by the Declaration of Independence made before the United State describe with Constitutional principle.

Its Supreme power is only derived by the liberty of established, and documented impartial separation. It is not that they cannot do. It is how much distance provides liberty to others.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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