The students do the discussing, and I never thought it was my place to silence them, though I'll grant there's a substantial body of opinion that insists the function of education is to prevent thinking. I'll further grant there are those who think that the teaching, specifically, of writing should avoid dealing with ideas, especially difficult ones, and stick to grammar and punctuation. But it is very difficult to find any such who actually teach composition. A lot of them teach business, and would not be happy if I were to insist that economics courses should stick to teaching these people to balance a checkbook. Occasionally, they will approve controversial prompts like: "Resolved: dogs on the loose are a nuisance" (actual topic from my high school text). And most of the people who think this way are, no surprise, cultural conservatives, Republicans.

Composition is the inheritor of rhetoric, and discussion of controversial topics is used to explore the arts and techniques of proof, demonstration and persuasion, what's valid and effective, and what's the reverse. I assure you, 80% is no exaggeration. The current generation is remarkably blinkered. But when the disproportion is on the other side, then the socratic method/devil's advocate role requires me to switch. For classroom purposes, I do my best to check my own beliefs at the door -- if I'm doing my job as I think I ought, they'll end the semester with no clear idea what my beliefs are. But that doesn't stop me from expressing my frustrations elsewhere.

Adam