The Instigator
Con (against)
3 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
7 Points

Internet Censorship

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/2/2012 Category: Technology
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 22,487 times Debate No: 24015
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (14)
Votes (2)




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.


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


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


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 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


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 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Ienjoysaturdays forfeited this round.


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.

Debate Round No. 4


Ienjoysaturdays forfeited this round.



Vote Pro
Debate Round No. 5
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by redotexforsale 2 weeks ago
Redotex is a fat burning diet pill that boldly claims to help you lose 6 lbs in just one week. If you want this product visit website Redotex for sale. Buy redotex capsules is a weight loss diet pill made to Mexico and also can help you reduce up to 6 pounds of body fat on a weekly. Redotex is an amphetamine, Which means it may work to stimulate the central nervous system (CNS) and suppresses appetite.
https://redotexforsale. Com/
Posted by skrew00 3 weeks ago
How the hell does con even have any points?
Posted by DeletedUser 1 year ago
I was convinced by Pro. Child Porn is REALLY bad and as a Muslim I hate Jihadists more then anyone so getting them taken down is good.
Posted by sonicbro2000 1 year ago
Shutting child porn sites down and arresting people for having CP is against the 1st amendment.
Posted by deepalitayade 2 years ago
Branding Agency In Mumbai
Posted by Charlatte 3 years ago
Things that are illegal will obviously be censored but things that aren't shouldn't be.
Posted by BigTaller 3 years ago
@ConservativePolitico Internet Censorship and Government Shutdowns are two completely different topics. Shutting down websites because they violate U. S. Laws or operate illegally is not a form of censorship. Censorship is the suppression or denial of content, Whether legal or illegal.

e. G. Child pornography is illegal, Therefore the government should shutdown such websites. However, The BDSM lifestyle is legal and therefore should not suffer any shutdown, As long as they are operating legally. It would be unfair and an injustice to censor any legal form of expression.

The government already cracks down on illegal websites, So what exactly would you want censored? Curse words, Sex, Violence, Drugs, Etc. Keep in mind hate speech, Terrorist threats, Jihadist recruitment, Scam sites, Fraud retail, Etc are all illegal in the USA.

I feel if you're offended by legal content, Then you have the freedom to leave the site. The government doesn't need to make that decision for me. I know what and what doesn't offend me.
Posted by xx_TheMaster0fReddit_xx 3 years ago
i don't think ConservativePolitico understands what op is trying to say
Posted by master-de-baiter 4 years ago
so pro forfiets and he says "we'll call it even" but if con forfeits its a win? con destroyed you and you just wanted to gloss over it
Posted by DeletedUser 9 years ago
I would debate this. I am sure Alwaysmorethanyou would too.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by THEBOMB 9 years ago
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 9 years ago
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.

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