Persuasive Essay Topics

The dissent argues that there should be a limit on expression in school to allow students

Topic: Do you believe that free speech as proscribed under the first amendment of the constitution should be limited?

I further believe that in order to teach children, school districts need a certain amount of authority and structure to keep students safe and effectively teach them. School districts need to provide a positive learning environments that includes free speech for both students and teachers for optimum learning. However, I have concerns that school regulations could have far reaching affects not originally intended and when school's regulations are not applied equitably. I agree with the Supreme Court's descending decision in this case and the District Court's decision that the action of the school authorities was reasonable.

Although the First Amendment is not that vague, schools have struggled to define what its limits are for the past 40 years. One may argue that a student’s Freedom of Speech should not be limited because of our First Amendment rights, the fact that so many schools struggle to define their limits and that they all have different limits, also, limiting a student’s Freedom of Speech brings totalitarianism to schools.

The functionality and success of the American democracy is dictated by the fundamental rights outlined in the Constitution. These rights have been utilized by American citizens on numerous occasions throughout the centuries when advocating for these critical rights. However, questions started to arise when high school students started exercising these rights in their high schools, specifically their right to free speech and expression. The right of high school students to freedom of speech became an issue when their speech began to disrupt the school day and, as a result, teachers began to restrict it. Tinker vs. Des Moines, the landmark case advocating for students’ right to free speech, as well as Bethel vs. Fraser, the case ruling that students don’t have the same first amendment rights as adults, have been instrumental in dictating the outcome of future court cases regarding the right to freedom of speech of high school students. The exchange of information and exposure to new and different ideas is critical to students’ education and should be protected. However, if the freedom of speech infringes upon the need to maintain a safe learning environment, should it be protected? In my opinion, interpretations of Tinker have proved to be too restrictive on the First Amendment rights of students. The right to freedom of speech is a core right of the American

School have the right to censor, limit, and band activities that disrupts the educational setting.

Ask students if they think any one of these freedoms could exist alone, without the

Tinker, 393 U.S. at 511. Thus, discomfort, hurt feelings, embarrassment, or disapproval of an unpopular viewpoint do not justify a school’s restriction of silent, passive expressions of student speech. Id. See Emmett, 92 F. Supp. 2d at 1090 (holding that a student cannot be suspended for non-school sponsored website featuring mock obituaries on the basis of fear of disturbance); and Tinker 363 U.S. at 512 (finding that a school cannot restrict students’ free speech to avoid discomfort and unpleasantness of an unpopular viewpoint when the school suspended students for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War); and J.C., 711 F. Supp. 2d at 1107 (finding that a school cannot suspend a student over a YouTube video because of a teenager’s hurt feelings, rather it must be something more than “ordinary personality conflicts”); and Burge, 92 F. Supp. 3d at 1060 (holding that a teacher’s upset or angry feelings about a student’s comments on Facebook, such as “she should be shot,” was insufficient for a substantial disruption). Any words spoken in class, the lunchroom, or on campus that deviate from the majority can cause a disturbance, but the Constitution asserts it is imperative that students’ take the risk of voicing unpopular opinions.

The subject of student rights has caused a lot of confusion and anger for decades now. There are two different sides that everyone seems to fall into. Some people want the constitutional rights of students to be fully protected within the school. The other side believes that, as a public institution, schools should regulate what is said or done by students to protect everyone involved. This is where it gets confusing, because it is hard to draw the line between what is allowed or not. The three most interesting topics that I chose to cover are a student’s right to free speech, religion within the school and student privacy.

“The mere fact that I exist, means that I deserve to be here and to express myself any damn way I please.” said Euphoria Godsent when talking about the First Amendment. On December 15, 1791, our founding fathers accepted the First Amendment as a part of the constitution. Today, people twist the meaning of the First Amendment to form loopholes in situations, with one of the most guilty being public schools. Most kids go to school from a young age until they transition into adulthood where they also become their own boss, unlike their childhood. Teachers enforce a dress code telling the students what the school allows and denies students the right to wear, which acts as a great example of this. For the most part, students despise the dress code, for a plethora good reasons.What students decide to wear to school acts as a form of symbolic speech, which the First Amendment covers. However, schools claim that the teachers formed the dress code for the benefit of the students. So in the battle between teacher and student, everyone asks whether or not dress codes violate the student's First Amendment. Schools should get rid of dress codes because the way student's dress is a way to express themselves, dress codes can psychologically hurt students, and they violate the student's’ First Amendment.

Most educational institutions all across the country implement restrictions on what students wear when they are on school grounds. These restrictions include dress codes that address what students can and cannot wear and uniforms with similar outfits. The argument with dress codes and uniforms is that it helps students perform better in school by limiting distractions, while others claim that restricting what a student can wear at school can limit their freedom of expression. The immediate answer to the question “Should schools be able to control what students wear?” is a yes, all schools must-have control over what students wear in the school premise within the bounds of a dress code to establish an

Source: CDC, National Center for Health Statistics, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Health, United States, 2002. Flegal et. al. JAMA. 2002;288:1723-7. NIH, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults, 1998.

“Your assignment is to write a persuasive essay and present it to the class in a week. You will be graded based on how convincing it is. Today we will be choosing topics,” announced Mr. Bowerbank, my 7th grade English teacher and ruler of classroom 110. My class simultaneously groaned at the prospect of work. I simply lifted my head with intrigue as it was already May and about time we had our first essay. He then proceeded to give examples of topics we could choose and gave us some time to think before we had to tell him our topic. My classmates were already rushing to tell the teacher their idea lest someone else steal it. That meant the usual abortion, death penalty, or drug use topics were out. I really couldn't think of anything and the teacher was slowly making his way through the remaining students like an executioner beheading criminals in a line. I have always thought that he would make a marvelous supervillain if he had a curly mustache, a tophat, and a cape. Eventually my name was called. I slowly dragged myself over to his desk. Even sitting down, he still seemed to tower over me. “What is your topic Cindy?” As usual in such desperate times, my mind turned to food. “Waffles are better than pancakes.” I figured that a waffle was just a differently shaped pancake with a nicer texture. “Hmm. Excellent topic. I look forward to your essay!” I survived to live yet another day.

Why spend money that is really needed for other things? Why live uncomfortably? Why be trapped in this hole called a home that belongs to another person? Why not live free and peacefully? When a person rents he or she usually throws away money that could be used to purchase something that belongs to them. Money is not easy to come by so why pay out hundreds toward something that is not benefit to the person paying it out. There is no good explanation for making a decision like this. The best option in a situation like this is to buy a house. Buying a house is a better option than renting an apartment.

Having escaped rule from a tyrannical British government, the United States was founded on ideals of freedom and equality for all people. These fantasies of universal egalitarianism turned out to be merely that: fantasies. American history is full of stories of the oppressed struggling to get the rights they deserve and of the controversy over these issues that consequently ensues. “The Hypocrisy of American Slavery” by Frederick Douglass and “We Shall Overcome” by Lyndon B. Johnson are two speeches made confronting two of these issues. Douglass’s speech, delivered in 1852, condemns the institution of slavery and maintains that slaves are men and are therefore entitled to freedom. Johnson’s speech, on the other hand, was written in 1965 and discussed the civil rights movement. In it, he implored local governments to allow all American citizens, regardless of race, to vote. Despite the significant gap in time between these two addresses, both speakers use similar persuasive techniques, including ethos, pathos, and parallelism, to convince their audience that change needs to be implemented in America.