A teacher in Colorado has been put on leave after a student in his American history class, tired of his "left-wing rants" recorded 20 minutes of discussion in class about President Bush's State of the Union address and brought it home to his father. An investigation is being made into what was said, and whether or not it violated school policy against teachers expressing their own beliefs.

That this happened in a history or social studies class caught my attention. Certainly teachers should refrain from expressing political opinions in class. In a math class or an English class, it would be inappropriate, deliberately manipulative, and superfluous. And when a history teacher argues with a student, disparaging the student's beliefs, it's inappropriate.

But, perhaps what is happening here is something different. Could the teacher have been attempting to present an objective critical commentary on the State of the Union address? Have we reached a point where we are intolerant of hearing any other opinion than our own? What happened in the forty minutes of classtime not recorded? Did the teacher open the floor to discussion?

My senior year in high school, I took a required course in Government, what some schools call Civics. I lived in town with a mix of conservatives and liberals in a primarily conservative state. Our teacher, Mr. Garland, was a hard-line conservative. He stood up at the beginning of the semester and announced that, in this one class, he would express his opinions to provide balance to our discussions. His rationale? Six of us were the children of active Democrats. His assumption was that we would dominate the class with our opinions, and intimidate anyone else who wanted to speak.

In fact, he was wrong. We were all intelligent kids, who had been raised to believe in fair political discussion. Sure, we had our opinions, but we voiced them respectfully, and listened to other students' points of view. We also listened to Mr. Garland's opinions, and argued with him. He challenged what we believed, and forced us to defend our beliefs beyond mere rhetoric.

If we lose the ability to think critically about our government, we are in danger of losing the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. That teacher, in an appropriate setting, should be allowed to apply critical analysis and alternate viewpoints to any partisan speech that takes place in the political arena, and teach his students to do the same thing.

I just wonder, though: If he had ranted against the Democrats, and in support of the president, and a student had complained, would he have still been put on leave?