Students should be able to speak up in schools for what they believe.
Debate Rounds (3)
This isn't to say students should be automatically restricted, but it's important to remember that school is not an anarchic environment. It has structure which means students should be expected to prove why their questions are relevant, necessary, and germane to the topic at hand.
Otherwise, education will become a waste of time, energy, and attention. This is especially important beyond a 1:1 teacher:student ratio. Spending time dillydallying on one student can lead to the abandonment of others. That's selfish.
...to be fair, I was thinking of the exact opposite situation. For example, sometimes, schools expound social norms in English and history classes. In turn, a wise guy student will speak up about moral or cultural relativism.
The real problem in the situation you described doesn't seem to be that the faithful deserve the right to speak up, but that everyone else is speaking up too much, silencing the faithful out.
"Here's a nation, one of the founding pillars was freedom of speech and freedom of expression. And yet, we have imposed upon people restrictions on what they can say, on what they can think. And the media is the largest proponent of this, crucifying people who say things really quite innocently."
"A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything."
What do you say to these people? Students are citizens.
The problem with public education is it forces students to endure impression without consent. The solution isn't to increase students' freedom of speech, but to make sure that their freedom of assembly isn't violated. This pertains to both curriculum as well as bullying.
If we focus solely on freedom of speech, we basically turn schools into a warzone where students become exposed to information overload and bombardment. Weak, sensitive, thinskinned, exposed, and vulnerable students become forced to endure duress, intimidation, harassment, negligence, and provocation. Those who are bombarded with speech into submission will have their sensitivities disrespected, and they won't even be able to stand up for themselves.
You mentioned faith before. In Catholicism, this is called "universal reconciliation". Nobody is entitled to judge anyone else. This includes freedom of speech where people who engage intensely without manners judge others who don't consent to be impressed too fast, too soon.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by rross 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Interesting topic from Pro. I agreed with Pro at the beginning, but Con is right: schools are like workplaces. People aren't free to leave as they are in other environments. And the implied contract is that they are there to learn according to the official curriculum, so if "free speech" interferes with that it should be reasonably restricted.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.