Video games should be censored

Actually, you are wrong. Nintendo does have first amendment rights. Why do they? Because they have an administration office (or HQ, whichever you prefer) specifically for America. So they do have the right to freedom of speech. Nintendo also isn't only a game DEVELOPER, it's a parent company. If your wondering what a parent company is, it's a company that starts up another corporation (subsidiary corporation), and the original (parent) company itself owns the shares of the subsidiary. The individual shareholders of the parent own the subsidiary, but indirectly. They are not, themselves, shareholders in the subsidiary -- the parent owns the shares. The one difference is that Nintendo doesn't start a corporation it provides advertisement and other services to the game producer. And, as it states below, Nintendo DOES already have censorship regulations, and it will not promote any game that does not meet these standards. I have found the following at: ~http://www.filibustercartoons.com...~ "The following Game Content Guidelines are presented for assistance in the development of authorized game paks (i.e., both Nintendo and licensee game paks) by defining the type of content and themes inconsistent with Nintendo's corporate and marketing philosophy. Although exceptions may be made to preserve the content of a game, Nintendo will not approve games for the NES, Game Boy or Super NES systems (i.e., audio-visual work, packaging, and instruction manuals) which: • include sexually suggestive or explicit content including rape and/or nudity; (1) • contain language or depiction which specifically denigrates members of either sex; (2) • depict random, gratuitous, and/or excessive violence; (3) • depict graphic illustration of death; (4) • depict domestic violence and/or abuse; (5) • depict excessive force in a sports game beyond what is inherent in actual contact sports; (6) • reflect ethnic, religious, nationalistic, or sexual stereotypes of language; this includes symbols that are related to any type of racial, religious, nationalistic, or ethnic group, such as crosses, pentagrams, God, Gods (Roman mythological gods are acceptable), Satan, hell, Buddha; (7) • use profanity or obscenity in any form or incorporate language or gestures that could be offensive by prevailing public standards and tastes; (8) • incorporate or encourage the use of illegal drugs, smoking materials, and/or alcohol (Nintendo does not allow a beer or cigarette ad to be placed on an arena, stadium or playing field wall, or fence in a sports game); (9) • include subliminal political messages or overt political statements (10)" The censorship regulations here proves that games are already being censored, and that it is up to the companies who manufacture and advertise the games to decide whether they should be censored. In short, companies have the right to make any game they want because THEY ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT. Which blatantly proves that GAMES SHOULD NOT AND CANNOT BE CENSORED UNLESS IT IS PREDETERMINED BY THE SPECIFIC PARTY! My opponent also states that we abuse and overlook ratings. Well that may be true for some of us, but at SEARS they have a policy that if you do not have an adult (over 17 years of age) with you at the time of purchase, then you cannot buy an M rated game which shows there is a restriction on who can buy them. And any way plenty of parents look over games ratings before buying them, I know mine do, and like you said they have a choice and if they choose not to then they probably don't care if their kids and teens are playing games that have such ratings, which is OK if that is their stance. And let me state that my opponent, although he has done a good job at trying to deter my case has not put forward one piece of evidence, but instead used assumptions, like when he said "there is no restriction to who can buy them" them being video games, to prove his point. Because of the evidence and points that I have presented that I firmly stand Con.