Never in my life have I seen a teacher punish a student for holding or arguing a viewpoint.

Quite to the contrary, I find that most professors preside over quiet classes wishing desperately for someone to voice an opinion on anything, which is why I'm always curious about where these stories about liberal bias in classrooms come from.

I'd like to think they come from a simple misunderstanding about the nature of learning. Let me let you in on a little secret: All learning is conflict.

No great idea has ever emerged into the human sphere without conflict. Universal suffrage, capitalism, communism and the heliocentric solar system have all been debated and fought over from the moment they appeared. They've been debated in laboratories, coffee shops and battlefields. People have burned at the stake for voicing their opinions.

There are times, and they are many, when you will pay a price for taking a stand for what you believe in. The classroom is simply not one of them.

The classroom is specifically designed to encourage free and vocal debate. So what is it that all these kids are complaining about? A smart, educated professor who challenges us to examine new ideas and rethink the ones to which we already cling is what we're supposed to want most.

I was able to talk to a professor who fits this mold the other day, and he told me that he found it difficult to create a space where kids feel comfortable getting into these kinds of debates. This idea sounds reasonable and fair. It is of course utter madness. More than anyone, I understand that the world of debate and argument is a blood sport -- but that's not changing anytime in the near future. If we teach kids that you don't have to be able to defend your views with skill and passion, then we won't be preparing them for the realities of the world.

In that spirit, let me tell you what I think really motivates this cry for censorship. It's not fear of being penalized or ostracized; it's a fear of losing. Conservatives in this country have found that it's much easier to simply move the goalposts and declare victory then actually win the game. This attack against professors is simply another step in the game to try and end debates before they begin. Professors who ask whether or not Karl Marx might have been onto something when he wrote his Communist Manifesto are accused of brainwashing and indoctrination. Politicians who attempt to engage in serious debate about our foreign policy are called unpatriotic or even terrorist sympathizers. I watched the U.S. Senate majority leader come out last week and claim that by debating our foreign policy we gave aid and comfort to our enemies.

It's been staggeringly effective. If you follow politics, you'll find that the most common theme associated with the minority party has been spinelessness. They've managed to remove themselves from the political debate entirely -- claiming that the majority party will simply self-destruct and people will be forced to vote Democratic. It's this kind of bold, powerful thinking that produced an impressive electoral track record.

Just because our leaders are abandoning public debate, that doesn't absolve us of our responsibility.

Our country faces serious problems, including foreign policy that has turned the world against us, staggering deficits and the highest poverty rate of any industrialized nation. The solutions to these problems aren't going to fall into our laps. They're going to evolve and grow out of serious debates -- the ones we should be having right now.

It's very rarely pretty; it's a game that is hard and ugly. You'll lose as many as you win, probably more. That's just the price you pay to be part of the continuous struggle that is humanity's slow crawl into the future. I for one came to play. If you didn't, do us all a favor and get out of the way.