About this trail:
In my mind, the controversy surrounding the teaching of controversial issues is overblown. In fact, I think the phrase "controversial" is somewhat of a misnomer. If a subject is taught well and responsibly, it's not controversial. It may be heavily debated. Many students feel very passionate about certain hot-button subjects: abortion, the war in Iraq, the Middle East, to name a few. But these subjects are not inherently controversial and can be discussed intelligently. However, too often professors can unintentionally promote an environment where harsh rhetoric prevails over logical, factual argument
1
In my mind, the controversy surrounding the teaching of controversial issues is overblown. In fact, I think the phrase "controversial" is somewhat of a misnomer. If a subject is taught well and responsibly, it's not controversial. It may be heavily debated. Many students feel very passionate about certain hot-button subjects: abortion, the war in Iraq, the Middle East, to name a few. But these subjects are not inherently controversial and can be discussed intelligently. However, too often professors can unintentionally promote an environment where harsh rhetoric prevails over logical, factual argument
2
There weren't any cheap shots in the class. Everyone had to provide factual evidence with their comments. This professor made what could have been an extremely contentious, politically-charged class into a welcome, challenging atmosphere where facts won over fiction. It was one of the best, most informative classes that I have taken at AU. And it was so good because the professor challenged all of us to defend our viewpoints.
3
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.
4
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) Several high school students were suspended for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. Although this case arose at a public high school, it is likewise applicable to public institutions of higher education. The Court held that students at public schools do not leave their First Amendment rights at the schoolhouse gate and can express opinions orally and in writing, as well as symbolically, as long as it does not "materially and substantially" disrupt classes or other school activities. The Court held that "First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teacher and students," and students "are possessed of fundamental rights which the state must respect, just as they themselves must respect their obligations to the state."
5
Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972) "State colleges and universities are not enclaves immune from the sweep of the First Amendment. . . . [T]he precedents of this Court leave no room for the view that . . . First Amendment protections should apply with less force on college campuses than in the community at large. Quite to the contrary, "The vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools." (Shelton v. Tucker, 364 U.S. 479, 487 (1960)). The college classroom with its surrounding environs is peculiarly the "marketplace of ideas," and we break no new constitutional ground in reaffirming this nation's dedication to safeguarding academic freedom."
7
The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, in fact, that "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."




