Religion should not have special immunity from criticism.

"- assuming this is my opponents definition of special?..." Hence the word definition..then special...then a definition of special. "This is the topic of the debate and stance my opponent must defend." Unsurprisingly known by me. "Legal definition of IMMUNITY; Exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment on certain conditions." Clearly not a definition compliant with the actual outlined debate, but I understand if you use semantics due to any lack of conviction on your part. "With "special" immunity, one must claim "special" criticism,.. I claim DESTRUCTIVE criticism." Special criticism? Are you cognisant of how sentence formation works? The adjective is applied the succeeding noun, the proposition again to the succeeding noun. Not the adjective to both nouns. From your website definition of choice. crit•i•cism Audio Help [krit-uh-siz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1.the act of passing judgment as to the merits of anything. 2.the act of passing severe judgment; censure; faultfinding. 3.the act or art of analyzing and evaluating or judging the quality of a literary or artistic work, musical performance, art exhibit, dramatic production, etc. 4.a critical comment, article, or essay; critique. 5.any of various methods of studying texts or documents for the purpose of dating or reconstructing them, evaluating their authenticity, analyzing their content or style, etc.: historical criticism; literary criticism. 6.investigation of the text, origin, etc., of literary documents, esp. Biblical ones: textual criticism. Nowhere is there any "destructive criticism," or anything closely compliant. You have simply tagged criticism onto destructive, and slander, hoping it will be accepted. Violence, destruction, restraint, none of these are criticism. "Religion SHOULD have "special" and protected immunity from prosecution, persecution, and infringements of rights to those religions being destructively criticized" Invalid terminology. Please choose from the above list as to how that applies to your: "physical abuse, property damage" "harassment" Which is not criticism. "and mocking or demeaning ones beliefs or religion" Which does not stop any one person from having a belief. "that would otherwise degrade, or devalue, and infringe on the rights of others based soaly on the religious views of said victim." Again, that does not stop anyone individual from practicing their belief. Unless the person was to physically stop someone entering a place of worship which then is not criticism. Even if you do contend that inciting hate speech should be legally prosecutable, then that would be relevant for all hate speech, not unique to religion. "It is ones right to practice and have religion" Yes. Never stated otherwise. "... it is not your or anyone elses right to infringe or degrade that right belonging to another" Again not something I argued. Unless you break the law as part of your religious practice. "... Thus "special" immunity and protection should be given to religion protecting it from destructive and cruel criticism." Criticism again is not destruction. Likewise how would this protection be special (unique) to religion? Feel free to address the debate in the clear form it was meant.