We should prevent a discriminating political group from rising in power.

Your arguments: 1A. It's unrightfull to just blame a lesser group for the world's crisis. This is to much of an umbrella statement for me to agree with, but in general i agree, and for the sake of argument i will accept your claim (so you have no need to spend next round proving this) 1B. we should prevent [Nazi-like] discrimnation from happening again in the future I agree 2A. All people are the same Again, i agree with what you are trying to say, my only objection would be that this is phrased on an individual level, and ignores distinctions which are functions of definition, such as black people are darker skinned than white people, but these are largely irrelevant semantics, and as long as you don't go crazy i won't worry about them. 2B. we shouldn't judge people from their looks and their nationality. I agree 2C. we should prevent [anti-Muslim] discrimination I agree You agree with all of these so theres no point in arguing with me about discrimination.You are also against discrimination so my question is now, what reason is there for you to defend such discriminatic parties? My Arguments: Your resolution is "We should also add a law where discriminating a certain group as your political group goal is forbidden" No, I dont want to add another law because a similiar law already exists. The Hate Speech. 1. This law would be, necessarily, a violation of freedom of speech. It basically says that people with certain views should not be allowed to peaceably assemble. No, its not a violation at all, actually why there is such a group makes no sense because they went beyond the border of freedom of speech. I think its called Hate Speech and Hate Speech as all you know is FORBIDDEN. 2. This law is discriminating against racists Yeah, so what? Are you gonna support racists now? Discriminating a racist or discrimination is normal as we see. 3. This law threatens everyones future rights It sets the precedent that it is ok to forbid certain views from politics, in your law i happen to disagree with those views (assuming it is properly enforced), but what happens when they outlaw something i do agree with. What happens when they outlaw everything they don't agree. That is exactly what happened in WWII Germany. Nice, you contradicted yourself, no one has the power to outlaw everything if he/she doesn't agree with. Also, outlawing everything they dont agree with is more something a discriminatic party would do, wont you agree? And no you got it wrong about the WWII. (i wonder where your source came from) The reason why NSDAP even came to power is because of the economic crisis. Countless people became unemployed and guess what they did? They were searching for a scapegoat and support.(Sole reason why everyone voted for NSDAP as they promised bread) And as you said in the beginning, you AGREED with me that blaming a lesser group for the crisis shouldn't be allowed, as that is what truly happened with Germany.[1] 4. The first amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Why do they have to create another law? All I want is that discrimination should be listed as Hate Speech. Oh and Hate Speech already exists, saving the trouble.[2] Source: [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org...