FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION CAN NOT BE ABSOLUTE

                                       DEBATE IN FAVOR OF TOPIC

 

Mr president, honorable judges and dear audience,

all of you must have heard a famous saying by Oliver Wendell Holmes "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins.
that means each and every person should have some limitations in his actions, in his speech, in his expressions etc etc.this is what we are debating here which is absolutely true that freedom of expression can not be absolute. and i m here to support the resolution.

sir as it is said that man is a social animal who lives with others. so sir you can not live peacefully without taking care of each other. we r not living in remote past where people used to fight with each other for survival without thinking of others . we r living in modern ages where we want to live happily and peacefully with others.this can only be achieved when we take care of others  and sir taking care means we have to think and care for others rights in addition to our own. if i have the right to express my piece of mind i also have to think that it doesn't hurt any body else.otherwise i would be selfish and provocative. so freedom of exp is not absolute right but it has to be balanced with other rights.

 sir ,a person can not order killing others by using his right of freedom of speech, in this case he will be guilty in the court.

The opponents of the resolution have forgotten in their rash thinking that we are not talking about an absolute ban on all kinds of expression  my friends! the resolution today only means that there should be limitations and rules for the sake of others rights. we should express ourselves in a manner that is permissible in our religion, in our society and in today’s world.

no society can live a peaceful life if it doesn't enlist certain rules and disciplines on its members. It is quite right that there should be a perpetual struggle to push the boundaries of what can be said in a civilized society. What and when are the two key variables. As are questions of how children, reputation, national security, social cohesion, truth and privacy be protected. Acts can be “evil” if they are dangerous to a traditional way of life, because they are immoral, or because they hinder the perfectibility of the human race & moral character of citizens.

Advanced societies that used to think giving freedom of expression to their citizens are now moving towards some restraints for example.

it was a popular justification to claim, "I'll say what I like. It's a free country". This has rather fallen out of fashion, to be replaced, in UK, with "I'm entitled to state my opinion", and in US, with "I'm only exercising my (Constitutional) right to free speech". An interesting word, here is 'right'.

Legal restraints operate in conjunction with social norms that change with the times. They cool an absolute freedom, which could otherwise become toxic. Testing the limits while preserving security and respect is a useful enterprise. The decision here seems to depend on the likelihood of personal injury; the more certain injury becomes, the more legitimate the intervention.we should respect all persons and their beliefs without vilification or discrimination. To protect our right to belief without fear,

Finding appropriate boundaries to frame freedom of expression is one of the constant struggles. Judgment is essential. There are issues of security and personal safety, the value of truth and honesty, the need to treat others with respect. It is not true that only sticks and stones can hurt; ignorant, dishonest, malicious, corrupt words can also do enormous damage.

Dear audience,

look at my friends across the floor who are touching insanity in contradicting the resolution. they say that freedom of expression is essential for democracy I want to remind them of hate speeches by politicians maligning each other Most of these are useless offensive, and some causes harm because these are deceitful, and aimed at discrediting specific groups. They also undermine democratic citizenship and the result in chaos that often engulf the whole society. Even if such speech does not cause harm or offense, it has to be limited because it is incompatible with democracy itself. The argument from democracy contends that political speech is essential not only for the legitimacy of the regime, but for providing an environment where people can develop and exercise their goals, talents, and abilities. If hate speech curtails the development of such capacities in certain sections of the community, we have a reason, based on the the justification for prohibition.

Here I also want to mention typical speeches or material about religions where according to george kateb, professor of politics ,a lot of religious speeches and other material is hateful, useless, dishonest, and ferments war, bigotry and fundamentalism. The discomfort that is caused to those who are the object of such attacks cannot easily be shrugged off. It also creates bad self-image and feelings of guilt that can haunt persons throughout their lives. The most recent examples are blasphemic cartoons and the notorious movie that stirred the whole Muslim world. Is this freedom  of expression that my friends want?

Again sir, I would dare to remind you of frequent incidents of misuse of social and print media that results in spoiling innocent lives of young girls and boys.Obscene material is destroying our youths morality and effecting the threads of our family and social  life. Nobody should have the right to publish any defaming material about someone else. Or to create hatred among different social groups through so called freedom of expression. Nobody should have the right to cause a mass panic by crying ''fire'' in a packed rushy street .Govt has to keep an eye on these activities to maintain law and order and to achieve calm and peace in the society.

Now sir, I wish to draw your attention to some more examples to prove my point. Have a look in any military organization that is considered most disciplined and successful institution. The basic reason of its discipline is the limitations that each and every person obeys & doesn’t dare to cross his boundaries of set patterns. Again look at other places like educational institutions both faculty and students have a set pattern of behavior beyond which we cannot go if we want to maintain an educational environment. On campus, there will be different levels of appropriate speech what a professor can say during a lecture. it would be completely inappropriate to discuss your favorite actor or politician when you are supposed to be giving a lecture on vectors and scales or organic chemistry. Almost all places in which we interact are  governed by underlying values and will have to fit in with these principles: “regulation of expressions is a defining feature of everyday. A campus is not simply a workplace where people have contractual obligations, assigned duties, administrative responsibilities of life.

Honorable judges,Islam is the religion of peace. It demands us to respect each other. and sacrifice for others. We are given golden principles on how to interact with others. It teaches us to love everybody and to hate nobody.

Sir  just think for a moment about our own homes. How parents take care of our way of talking, our dress, rather all our activities to help us grow into good citizens. They through check & balance teach us what is good or bad, acceptable or not in our social groups. Then our teachers at schools put their utmost efforts to make us shining stars through incentives and punishments. So my dear friends if you disagree these noble acts of bringing up the human beings then please plan to leave your children in some jungle but hold on even animals in a jungle have some boundaries set by them naturally and they obey the nature. And sir, THAT Nature has taught us too to be careful in all matters of our lives and not to discriminate others by calling them with bad names or making fun of them. These are the basic teachings of humanity. And sir humanity demands us that FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION CAN NOT BE ABSOLUTE. Thank you sir.