Merriam-Webster defines a “safe space”, as “a place (as on a college campus) intended to be free of bias, conflict, criticism, or potentially threatening actions, ideas, or conversations” In theory, this idea seems to prevent emotional abuses and any inappropriately used language; however, in practice the implementation of safe spaces tend to shelter students from rational discussion and debate. For this reasons, I do not believe that safe spaces should become a common entity found at institutions of higher education. According to a study conducted by Pew Research, 39% of Americans believe that the purpose of college education is to help a student grow personally and intellectually. However, growth intellectually requires a debate between …show more content…
The purpose of a rational discussion between two opposing viewpoints is to produce a greater thought or ideal and to prevent the prevalence of weaker arguments and stances. With the availability of safe spaces, certain viewpoints can be shut down or completely ignored, not based on merit but rather based on opinion. In addition, hiding from debate from weak arguments and even detrimental racist or sexist opinions (that safe spaces are supposed to prevent) emboldens the poor reasonings that they present. By banning or hiding from these types of thought, the perpetrator gains a sense of legitimacy, as no one will counter their points in these spaces, making their harmful arguments seem reasonable. These arguments of the negative intellectual impacts and effects that safe spaces can cause, do not begin to mention the constitutional issues that safe spaces violate. In the conception of the first amendment, the founders considered speech to be an absolute right, as their speech was often punishable by the British Empire. This strain of thinking is reinforced by Ben Franklin, declaring ““If all printers were determined not to print anything till they were sure it would offend nobody, there would be very little printed.” With this constitutional