In this contentious election year, it seems almost quaint to hear someone insist that its socially incorrect and possibly illegal to criticize the president of the United States as opposed to a candidate for the office.

Quaint, except that: The misguided guidance came from a high school teacher in North Carolina; her statements were flawed on the socially incorrect point and plain wrong as to illegality; and her words were aimed at young people whose rights to freedom of speech dont disappear when they enter a classroom.

The exchange began as students discussed reports of schoolhouse bullying by both likely Republican nominee Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama. The teacher went on a rant, saying Obama was off-limits. It was captured for all to experience on a YouTube video. A teachable moment, surely though more for the teacher than the students.

And perhaps for all of us. Lets go back to school ourselves for a moment and study those three points.

A social studies teacher ought to know more about the First Amendment, the five freedoms it protects, and how prized dissent, critical thinking and critical opinions should be in a representative democracy.

A teacher should know that divergent opinions yes, sometimes harshly stated or socially incorrect are more than merely tolerated or grudgingly permitted. Differing views, however freely expressed, are embedded in the political DNA of this nation.

We need look no further than the Federalist Papers or the Declaration of Independence, and the debates about both, for political expression that was politically incorrect to some in their day. But documents and debates helped our nations Founders coalesce around what came to be our core ideals.

It should be obvious that even as the First Amendment protects dissent, it just as certainly does not mandate respect. Nor does it require politeness, majority approval or impeccable logic.

Certainly the office of president, many would say, ought to deserve a measure of respect for the duties it entails and the responsibilities it imposes on any elected occupant. But reverence is nowhere required by law.

In fact, we did try once to make it a crime to publicly criticize the president (and Congress). That was in 1798, with the Alien and Sedition Acts, enacted a mere seven years after the Bill of Rights was adopted in 1791. Some newspaper editors were jailed for their dissenting views. But public reaction was so sour that the four laws making up the acts were repealed or allowed to expire in 1802.

Read the original:
Gene Policinski | Teacher flunks First Amendment 101