Debate: Should the government be regulating baby names?
Side: YES

Limited or restricted speech is not freedom of speech. People's freedom to voice their opinions trumps other people's feelings.So you'd prefer people to get bullied and eventually kill themselves more often? Are you actually supporting bullying/verbal abuse, also in schools?People kill themselves over words on the internet, but this is too far.Don't hide the word "authoritarian" behind the word "offensive"You're sickening for supporting bullying.Although the families are grieving it is still not grounds to take away anyone's freedom of speech. Again, limited speech is not free speech.Again, what is more important in this scenario? How the hate-mongerers feel about their rights, or the depressed/suicidal families feel? That is not to much to ask, it is to much to ask when you make it illegal for them to voice their opinions and take away their freedom of speech."Take away their freedom of speech"? Is that all it means to you? They can say whatever the hell they want but they do not have the right to spread hate.I sympathize with the people who are being hated, however, saying "please refrain from using your speech in a way we don't like, or we'll have to call the cops"Again, if there was a troubled child who was getting repeatedly getting verbally abused by bullies, would you have the teacher sued for stopping the bullies?Freedom of speech is a right, regardless of how bad these families feel, taking someones right to express themselves is not an option... well, for any free society that is.But i never said that people are not aloud to speak at all, I said that, the right should be flexible depending of whatever helps the most in a situation.ABSOLUTELY NOT! They were NEVER intended to insure order, do you know much orderly things would be if you had no rights? The government can take away your right to argue with it, suddenly, no political chaos and the politicians may do as they please without criticism. General happiness was also never intended, we had rights so that certain things could not be taken away, ex: Freedom of Speech, where no matter how much the majority wants it, no matter mow much the minority wants it and no matter how much the government wants it, you can't take away someone's right to free speech. That is not general happiness, we don't have freedom of speech to we can tell funny jokes that would other wise be illegal, we have them so we can debate and argue about the best way to run things, in case you haven't noticed, arguing is not generally a Happy thing.Think about it? They did not make rights for the soul purpose of screwing us over didn't they. It's to ensure people have an equal chance, therefore making mostly everyone happy, not sad? If they were made for the soul purpose of not aiding the progress of society, and bringing chaos, then they should be discarded, should they not?Democracy is a flexible system, this is why we have rights, so that if the population voted to install a king or legalize slavery, they couldn't. because even though the majority (who is usually very uninformed) voted or decided to make these changes, they can't won't be put into place.Although many people blindly follow these rules, I don't, I questioned them and support them now. If I didn't question them I would have said "well fuck you, I'm right because the rules say so" and blocked you.But you're treating them as something to not be questioned. Why haven't you given any exceptions to the WBC since their right to discrimination is doing more damage, and generally making people think the world is more of a shitty place than it is? If rights cause more damage than good in some cases, why not let there be some flexibility instead of mindlessly following the lines? These rules were made by fallible human beings, and they have so much cracks in between them. To ameliorate this, we need flexibility. Taking away free speech so that people have to conform to a social norm of "not hating" is conformity.But we aren't taking it away from everyone in the whole universe, aren't we?Didn't I just say that we need to look at what really helps us, instead of mindlessly following rules?Don't you support the best possible choices for the greater good?