Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
TOK - Freedom of Speech
Transcript of TOK - Freedom of Speech
She also claims that despite how discriminative of a speech that someone says is, that violence should not be used towards that person, and it will not be tolerated.
She states that all leaders - be they government, civil society or religious leaders - should draw the line at violence, and stand up to condemn it.
Clinton claims that as long as there is someone willing to shed blood and take an innocent life in the name of religion, the world will never know a true and lasting peace. Claims In some parts of the world, hate speech is outlawed, or at least severely frowned upon. A counter claim to Clinton's statement could be that a video such as this constitutes hate speech and so should be outlawed.
A counterclaim could be made to Clinton's statement that violence in response to discriminative speech is never permissible. This counterclaim could outline the possibility of a threshold being crossed that permits violence, which people who practice honor killing may agree with.
It can be claimed that sometimes a leader who supports violence is required for the progress of a particular society. An example is if a country is invaded, it's leaders should take steps to prevent this invasion.
It can be argued that though there exists the potential for violence in the world, this potential can be suppressed. There could be someone who is willing to shed blood for religion, but if the tendency is suppressed there could be a 'true and lasting peace'. Also if we continuously condemn those who express their freedom of speech it could open up a gateway to potential violence as well. Counter - Claims The idea of free speech to all appeals to our reason, and if the notion that all people are equal is subscribed to (the American government thinks this) then free speech must be an essential human right - a 'dignity'.
The idea of essential human rights also appeals to our emotions, because we are human and so integral rights granted to us would be greeted with a positive response. Thus we can be said to 'know' that human rights such as free speech are correct on an emotion level. WOK (Personal Response) Knower's Perspective