Freedom of speech should be practiced in all instances without exception

I hope you're taking notes, lads. Someone doesn't fancy a free conduct point."I'm sorry, but I believe that you couldn't be more wrong."And, I'm sorry, but I believe you couldn't be more wrong. Sound more credible?"Just because the right of free speech prevents a government from arresting or censoring whatever you say here, it doesn't mean that changing the resolution of a debate is right.""Ignoring the given resolution at the start of the debate is basically a concession, and not a simply conduct violation."Look at you shoving what's right in a debate down my throat. You know what's right in a debate? Citing sources. [1]You should mention at the end of that paragraph, that those are strictly your high-school teachers' opinions [2] - not facts - since you haven't cited even a single source for all that long blabber, which I'd honestly come to expect.Seems only one of us did our homework to check the rules of a debate. (Me. Applause.)"...it only protects speeches that are opinions, information or ideas, while hate speech is none of those."The article 20(2) of the UDHR controversially restricts the usage of hate speech [3] so, I'd rather stick to the First Amendment of the US Constitution which allows me to express myself freely in speech, seeing that I live in the US.The First Amendment's protection is extended by the federal law, which doesn't include protection from repercussions. Hence, the conduct violationHere's a list of Supreme Court cases, where the Constitutional Right of free speech allowed those accused of committing hate speech, or 'attacking' people verbally, insulting their dignity, to run free. [4]"But since you have allowed resolutions to be changed, even though that shouldn't be allowed, I decided to ignore the rules of debating too and play along with your "rules".""Rules"? When I said there's a lack of them, you're claiming I called dibs? To what, traffic rules?I've covered the rules of debating on this very specific website last round so, no luck there.Oh, and it looks like it's not just me who's deviated a bit off the point.Although, take note, your deviation isn't nearly similar to the original resolution which essentially knocks the debate over. Hold on, someone here wants to say something...Conduct point: "You shall not pass!""However, the president of the United States - recognized as the most powerful person in the world."The image of a balding muscular Russian schmuck comes to mind. "That's why I propose that we institute a symbolic piece of clothing that is so mighty and powerful that all the others leaders of the world will kill themselves out of envy: the Presidential Underwear."Don't think the rest of the presidential symbols need to be dropped to the knees, every time the president decides to take a dump.Also, swear I just heard the toilets scream they have the exclusive right to the 'actual' presidential symbol."Admit it, you would think twice before attacking the United States if Obama wore something like this."If he looks like a dandy like that, if I were Putin, I'd wouldn't think before attacking the States.[1] http://www.debate.org...[2] Writing debate with her.[3] http://www.article19.org...[4] http://civilliberty.about.com...