Skip to main content

Censorship

My class's journals and debates this week centered on censorship. Essentially, the debate was one of freedom versus security, as so many other issues in our culture are (think search dogs in schools, child vaccinations, gun control, etc., all of which relate to the conflict between individual freedom versus social security). Our specific question was whether a school library should allow middle school students to read controversial books. On the one hand is the First Amendment's promises of the freedoms of speech and press, and on the other a desire to protect children who might not be mature enough for the content. More often than not in debates, the debaters dutifully fulfill their requirements, making clear arguments and supporting those arguments with evidence. This round, however, the debate turned impassioned, to the point where a few students grew angry with one another. The exchanges were such that I had to step in fairly often to remind the debaters of debate rules.

In fact, the conflict that poured forth in that room yesterday was a fitting example of the conflict inside many teachers. How much, we may ask, should we censor the material we teach? On a personal level, how controversial should I make my debate topics? For my part, I want my students to be passionate about what they are debating, but I also want to ensure that they are civil. I realize that I must have a level of trust that my students will be mature enough to handle real-life issues, but I also know that I have a responsibility to maintain a peaceful class climate. For that reason, I try to keep a middle ground in the topics I choose: I want topics they care about, but not topics over which they may grow too vindictive. I purposely avoid abortion, evolution versus creation, homosexuality, and other sensitive topics because they are so incendiary.

This is not to say we haven't broached controversial issues. We've debated euthanasia, legalizing marijuana, gun control, war, burning the American flag, and other issues. Typically, students are civil, and yesterday was no exception. They may have grown upset, but on the whole, they remained on topic and avoided personal attacks. The conflict that did result, however, served to remind me of the larger issue that plagues (or blesses) teachers as they make decisions about curriculum and class discussion. On the beach of real-world issues, where do we draw the line in the sand? On one side of this imaginary line is educational enrichment; and on the other, unwanted provocation. Every teacher draws this line in different places because, of course, every class is different. A teacher must be aware of how mature his or her class is, and this should inform his or her decisions about how much to expose and how much to censor. The balance we try to maintain won't always be perfect, but I have no doubt that purposely tipping it one way or the other is reckless on the one hand and stifling on the other.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Heroes

Although we have several examples of heroes in our day, one of the best known is of a woman named Agnes Gonxhe Bojaxhiu (“Gonja Bojaju”), who devoted her life to sustaining the “poor, sick, orphaned, and dying.” Her venue was Calcutta, India, where she served as a teacher until she began to take notice of the poverty there. Seeking to do something about it, she began an organization that consisted of just thirteen members at its inception. Called the “Missionaries of Charity,” the organization would eventually burgeon into well over 5,000 members worldwide, running approximately 600 missions, schools and shelters in 120 countries; and caring for the orphaned, blind, aged, disabled, and poor. As her personal work expanded, she traveled to countries like Lebanon, where she rescued 37 children from a hospital by pressing for peace between Israel and Palestine; to Ethiopia, where she traveled to help the hungry; to Chernobyl, Russia, to assist victims of the nuclear meltdown there; and to ...

The Nice Guy Fallacy

I read part of a poem recently by one of my favorite poets. It reads: I envy not in any moods The captive void of noble rage The linnet born within the cage That never knew the summer woods. I envy not the beast that takes His license in the field of time Unfetter'd by the sense of crime To whom a conscience never wakes. Nor what may call itself as bles't The heart that never plighted troth But stagnates in the weeds of sloth Nor any want-begotten rest. I hold it true, whate'er befall I feel it, when I sorrow most 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. At base, Tennyson contrasted a life of risk, and consequent pain, with one of security. He sides conclusively with the life of risk, and says he fails to envy those who have faced no hardship. I agree with him; and, for good or ill, his words are just as relevant today as they were in the nineteenth century. Like then, there are those today who choose to live their lives with as little risk as...

Comparative Medical Care

One thing I'd like to understand is why there is such a difference between medical costs here and those in Haiti. At the time the book Mountains Beyond Mountains was written, in 2003, it often cost $15,000 to $20,000 annually to treat a patient with tuberculosis, while it cost one one-hundredth of that-- $150 to $200-- to treat a patient for the disease in Haiti. Even if the figures aren't completely accurate, the sheer difference would still be there. Indeed, the United States pays more per capita for medical care than any other country on Earth. My first guess for why the disparity exists is that there is a market willing and able to pay more for medical treatment, so suppliers see the demand and respond with higher prices. According to at least one doctor (go to http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2009/05/what_is_the_cause_of_excess_co.php), part of the reason is administrative prices here. People here have a higher standard of living, and so the cost of care is shifted to ...