School laws ought not to limit civil rights

First, I would like to ask two questions to my opponent:(a) What positive outcomes would occur if schools were to strongly enforce these limitations?Surely you as well as everyone else, know the tendency teenagers have to rebel. If they want something that they will be deprived of, such as this debate goes it would be the freedom of speech, they will find a loop hole or even more likely they will just do it anyways. I have seen many incidents of opinion stated arguments in my high school that has resulted in suspensions and referral, but we all know those people that just do it becasue they morally feel it is right to be able to state their opinion no matter how many times they get suspended. So by enforcing these limitations on students we could be merely worsening the situation by having rebellious students continue their strong voices.(b) What negative outcomes would occur if we eliminate these limitations?Once someone is happy with an outcome they will not usually attack it again. Once the daughter has begged and bothered her father enough for the new Iphone, she doesn't bother him for it anymore because she has it. Providing the best for the greatest number of people is classified as utilitarian and if the greatest number of people want the limitations eliminated then doing so would maintain a utilitarian society, as i already stated in round 1. My opponent attacked me with saying that our first amendment only extends to the point that we would encounter these so called "barriers". So I will attack these "barriers". (1)"Insight of violence", an opinion is defined as a personal view on a situation of person, and opinions are expressed verbally. Violence occurs physically, and this topic discuss freedom of speech which does not involve physically actions. So, by saying i am atheist and that anyone who believes in god is stupid, I am verbally stating my opinion that follows my first amendment, when it becomes a punishable problem not following the first amendment, is when I say that i am atheist and go around town punching and beating up anyone who believes in God. But, that is not following the topic, so I have proved this barrier to be false. (2)"causes damage", again verbal opinions can not be classified as causing damage. Damage is referred to as physical, so it would be moral to say my opinion is that I hate people who believe in God, but it would be immorally wrong for me to shoot those who believe God, and again I not will go into depth of this because we are discuss freedom of SPEECH. (3) "conflict with other groups", since the start of man kind certain groups have disapproved of other groups, it is merely nature. If it is verbal, the conflict would be moral because we have the right to state an opinion. No where in any historical documents does it say "you shall not say anything that could upset someone else". I can freely say that I am atheist and if the person next to me is Christian and is offended, he has a right to say something back if he feels he wants to. So the first amendment is not saying you have a freedom of speech and the other can't do anything about it. Being an American citizen you can have a freedom of speech, and schools should not deny that because when you are on the schools property which is still America and these rights ought to still apply to you. To sum this up, I will refer to a statement I made in the first round "Say what you will and one will not be punished, but enforce the act to prove it, you will be punished". It is moral to speak your mind because even if you do offend someone its not like they don't have a right to say anything back, because they can, because ALL American citizens are entitled to the freedom of speech.My high school is very opinionated, and many people in my school believe that woman are of a lower status in the social structure and that men have the right to control them. Being a freshman female, I have had many encounters with this. I will and I have expressed my opinion that woman are equal in this world and men have no right to disrespect us. And I have had principles confront be about this. But, they shouldn't confront me about it because when i go to school everyday from 6-2, i should feel like an equal member of society that I am under my civil rights out in public. And coming to school and not being treated equally is like stepping off American soil. My first amendment right should not be limited on school grounds because I am an equal member of the society and I should have the right to say that if I am being treated any differently. This is just one example of what I have encountered, and I strongly believe that on school ground or town property, if you are on American soil all your rights apply the same way. I should not be punished for saying what I think as long as I am not physically enforcing them as I stated earlier. By lifting these limitations the positive will be that we maintain utilitarianism and provide the students of schools their right of individuality, freedom, and the right to use their voice.By keeping these limitations the negative will be we continue to have unfair treatment of our freedom of speech and freedom to express an opinion and we will also continue to have rebellious students that morally believe what they are doing is right and at one point may turn out to be more than the school can handle. It is morally correct to eliminate the limitations that our schools have placed on our first amendment right.