• I don't think it's right

    Kids can commit suicide because kid think it's a free country and they can say what they want well their wrong .It is a free country but u don't know how much it would hurt someone and this all leads to bullies. Bullies think they can say what they want but they never know how much their hurting someone. People getting hurt can lead to suicide I don't agree with with freedom of speech

  • Freedom Of Speech Is Dangerous!

    We could have people spouting homophobic, racist, nationalist and downright offensive views, their defense is usually "Free Speech". Without total freedom of speech, the KKK would not be able to legally exist, Neo-Nazis would be stopped, and racist abuse would be disallowed. The freedom of speech that was originally proposed died with the American dream.

  • Some restrictions are absolutely necessary.

    Hate speech, lies, and slander are not protected by the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution, as determined by SCOTUS. I feel, if I decided to threaten my opponent with death, I ought to be removed from this website. In worst cases, I might even face incarceration for severe hate speech and slander. Some regulation is absolutely necessary. Any Constitutional right can be limited; it's the degree that matters most.

  • Should freedom of speech have restriction

    Yes because some people like Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton use the right freedom of speech in a wrong way by criticizing each other and show kids and adults the wrong way to use freedom of speech it should restrictions from cruising /insulting talk back or be disrespectful to gossip to tempt or trick people it shouldn't have restrictions on evangelizing or to speak out against injustice

  • I think that there should be limits on freedom of speech

    I am not against freedom of speech, I just think that there should be limitations on what you can say in particular situations. I think that people shouldn't be able to say things that could offend someone or their religion. I also think that they should say thins that could cause people to do immoral things. Just think about what could happen.

  • Chicken nuggets ARE BAE

    I lovie mcdonalds even though others might say that it is discusting. I peronaly enjoy the fries but others say it tastes like cardboard.Gross gross grosss grosss grosss

  • There already are

    True freedom would mean we can say whatever we want, whenever we want, wherever we want w/o getting into legal trouble. With defamation laws and the laws behind verbal threats we cannot do that. I cannot tell the president i plan on murdering him w/o getting into legal trouble. I cannot run into a movie theatre and yell fire w/o getting into legal trouble. I cannot say John raped and killed Bridgette (knowing it wasn't true) and avoid legal trouble or lawsuits. These kind of restrictions are good. Just as long as they stick to these.

  • Where one freedom begins is where the other ends.

    We have our 1st Amendment rights given to us by the US Constitution. One of these is the freedom of speech. But sometimes there has to be restrictions on speaking, for instance swearing in public. Swearing in public is bad and is a public nuisance. It also hurts other people's feelings and embarrasses them. This form of freedom of speech should be restricted in public.

  • Words can hurt

    Many people suffer from racial discrimination, stereotypical opinions, and bullying. Freedom of speech is something that shouldn't be taken advantage of. It is hard to be free and kind simultaneously because many people tend to misuse freedom of speech. It is used as an excuse to bully, harass, and discriminate people rather than in a positive way.

  • Freedom has limits.

    Our freedom ends where the other's starts, one must be free to give its opinions, with coherence and respect, but must be consequent with the sensitivity of people. Americans wouldn't tolerate someone talking positively about 9\11 the same way Germans for example do not tolerate nazi manifestations.
    To use our freedom we must respect the other's freedom aswell.

  • As much as I disagree with a lot of the things people say...

    I disagree with a lot of people on a lot things either being religion, politics, hate speech, and so on they should not be silenced. They have just as much of a right, to say what they believe. That's we have the right to free speech. Just because I don't like or agree means it should be restricted. This also goes into if you say what you mean freely, you're going to have to deal with the backlash. The thing is free speech either get's people on your side and look smart, or have everyone hate you.

  • People have rights

    People have a right to say what ever they want to say. No one has the right to stop them. You may not like some of the opinions people voice, or the words that they use, but this is absolutely no reason to have the government trample people's natural rights.

  • Is this question even real

    "freedom of speech". Freedom is defined as the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint <<
    Freedom is about having no restrictions at all. If we limited what we had to say then it wouldnt be true. Formulating a false environment. No way! Keep it real!

  • Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is unquestionably immensely important. The Canadian and American constitutions quite explicitly state the various freedoms we are entitled to such as the freedom of opinion, conscience, and religion. And if free speech were limited or censored, 'to whom do we give the right to tell us what we should read or what we should say',as Christopher Hitchens commonly affirmed.

  • There isn't free speech now even

    Right now there isn't free speech of the full entirety you can not say under the American government some things which go agaisnt them ( I live in Australia so please don't say that i'm a stereotypical American who things the world runs around America ). But no there shouldn't be restrictions in speech as then like in the good old stargate movie people can control with restrictions on these things. So we should all take a stand and push for FREEDOM!

    Posted by: yvoo
  • No way! It's wrong to restrict freedom

    Freedom of speech and freedom in everything must be a priority as long as it's not physically harming another human being. If we take away freedom of speech, it doesn't matter what is being said, we restrict freedom. If I want to say I hate someone's car, and they beat me up... Who should go to jail? If I say I hate some one's religion I should have the right. If some one tells me they hate me, my race, my God, and my face... They should have the right to. If some one is too close to me while I tell them they are too close and they keep preaching to me, then that's harassment... Simple as that. People get too touchy, how about some self control? How about tolerance. What happened to tolerance?

  • What's the point of freedom of speech with restrictions?

    Freedom of speech is precisely freedom of speech for a reason, therefore there should be no restrictions on freedom of speech. Freedom of speech with restrictions is no freedom. What is freedom with restrictions? Speech is not harming, only action upon words is. It is foolish to think freedom of speech is freedom of speech with restrictions.

  • No, there shouldn't

    The basis of a democracy is free speech; if you can't say whatever you want, you can't vote for whoever you want, therefore it is not a democracy. As much as I despise racists, homophobes and anyone on the right side of the spectrum, they have every right to believe what they want and express themselves, too. It's our job to debate and help them change their mind where possible.

  • Speech is knowledge

    Speech is a word which carries emotions, anger ,happiness, joy and so on.In one's speech he is expressing his idea on a certain topic may be he is opposing some one . He is trying to bring that topic in front of people. So i strongly assert that there should not be a restrictions on freedom of speech

  • No but that doesn't mean free speech can be used as an excuse to validate other behavior.

    Arresting those protesting on private "no trespassing" property is not a denial of free speech. I really get irked about that kind of misrepresentation and people crying over first amendment rights. Death threats are not a form of free speech. They are a threat. Calling a soldier that has never done anything but served his country in good faith a "baby killer" is defamation of character. You say that to someone that is being tried or investigated, that is a gray area. You say that to someone that has been convicted it is free speech. Protest that the government should give amnesty to illegals? It's an opinion, and free speech as long as you don't do it on my private property.

    It's when freedom of speech isn't freedom of speech that the problem arises. "Hate Speech" is freedom of speech to the extent that the language used does not incite or encourage violence or violation of the law. There is a huge difference in toting a sign that says "No more (fill in the blank) and "Yes, send us more dead (fill in the blank)". One shows your lack of tolerance and opinion that there should be no more whatever. The second shows distinct encouragement for the acceptance of violence against the group being protested.

    Freedom of speech is NOT the ability to say whatever you feel like when you feel like it where you feel like it. Yelling BOMB in a theater is not freedom of speech. Advertising or protesting you wish someone dead or are looking forward to seeing a group of people dead is not freedom of speech. Reporting that gets people killed is not freedom of speech. Profanity & Sexual suggestions are not free speech.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

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