To maintain one's individuality while attending an institution of compulsory schooling requires a conscious, dedicated effort. Schools are bastions of peer-induced conformity and schoolmaster-imposed oppression. Accordingly, thinking for oneself means risking alienation from classmates and "discipline" from school officials.

    Most students find it easier to accept the system and just "fit in." Some, however, strive to break free from the mold by questioning conformity, challenging authority, and standing up for principles that they believe in.

    That's exactly what Rachel Patzer did when she had an opportunity to deliver a commencement speech to her high school's graduating class. Her intended topic -- individualism -- was too controversial, or so she was told. Teachers and administrators were threatening to censor her ideas. Despite the fact that authority figures, and even her peers, were pressuring her to give in, she refused.

    The result: on May 23, 2001, Evansville, Indiana's Central High School was treated to an inspiring speech extolling the virtues of thinking for oneself and living for oneself (see the full text of her speech).

    Patzer demonstrated her commitment to those principles in her battle for the right to deliver the speech. Below is the story, in Patzer's own words, of how she fought for her principles:

    At my high school, like most other schools, speaking at commencement is a great honor. The commencement committee carefully reviews each speaker application and judges each candidate on grade point average, difficulty of classes, extracurricular activities, and an essay. This year, the commencement committee chose me to speak at the ceremony with three other individuals. Also, as a group, we all decided not to follow a theme this year; instead, each individual was given the opportunity to speak about "anything [we] wanted to say to our graduating class." So, taking that to heart, I thought about the possibilities of a speech topic. I knew exactly what advice I could give to the jock, the intellectual, the band geek, the pregnant girl, the druggie, etc, because my advice could be applied to all 291 of us.

    The first draft was due about a month and a half before graduation. I presented my speech in front of the committee and the other speakers for the first time--and no one said a word. The teachers did not say anything for several minutes...finally one teacher volunteered, "I don't think your message is coming across clear enough. You don't want people to get the wrong impression..." The committee agreed that my message needed to be clearer. But I saw absolutely no problem in my message--it was as clear as day but they just refused to acknowledge what I was saying because they did not agree with it. I asked my brother to review the speech to see if he understood the message. He advised me not to change anything.

    The next meeting, I came back with my second draft, which was almost identical to my first. Again, the teachers claimed that my message was being misunderstood. Several of them made other suggestions this time. My old history teacher, an extreme liberal, advised me to completely remove the word "selfish" and change it to another word, like "self-reliance." But as I saw it, changing that word meant changing the meaning of my speech. To review, "selfish," according to the American Heritage Dictionary, means "concerned chiefly or only with oneself without regard for the well-being of others." The committee had a problem with the definition, and basically, the philosophical ideas I was implementing. I was not advocating caring only for yourself at all times -- I was advocating selfishness toward one's own goals and dreams. But this is stated explicitly in my speech.

    Another teacher advised me to change each "you" to "we." Of course, I refused. That would change the meaning entirely, and contradict exactly what I was saying about individualism. Finally, the committee gave me an ultimatum: change the speech topic completely and write about what the committee wanted me to write about, or "resign" from the speaking position. I remained firm to my decision not to change the idea of my speech. Why? Because I shouldn't have had to. They were trying to censor my speech just because they did not agree with the content. I was speaking for my classmates, not the committee.

    My next step of action was contacting the Indiana Civil Liberties Union (ICLU) to find out exactly what my rights were. They jumped at the chance for a case like this for the publicity and because they were so sure of a win. But by the time any kind of case could be heard in court, the ceremonies would have ended. So I put the ICLU on hold, as a last resort.

    First, I spoke to the committee members as a group, and let them know my decision: that I still would not change the content of my speech and that I also refused to technically "resign." So one of the committee members called me down to the principal's office so the principal could tell me exactly what the committee had told me. As he put it, "I have to support the decision of the committee. If they think that the speech is 'out of place' or 'too negative' at a formal ceremony like commencement, I must trust their judgment." I basically did everything I could do on my own. No one wanted to listen to a seventeen year old.

    The next step I took was talking to my parents. My father was irate about the whole situation, so I gained his support. He also talked to the ICLU about our options. Then my father called the principal and let him know that if he did not reverse his decision, we would take legal action and submit the situation to as many newspapers that would grasp the "censorship" story to run. My father advised the principal to talk to his lawyer. In fact, the principal did just that. He called me into his office the next day and said, "We would be honored for you to speak at commencement with your original speech." I had won.

    For me, the fight wasn't just about speaking at graduation -- it was a fight for my individual rights. Along the way of this battle, I lost a lot of friends who, for some reason, fought for the censorship of my ideas. I also lost the respect of many teachers in my school. Regardless of the "friends" I lost, or teachers' "respect" I lost, I know I did the right thing.

    How do I know? Because so much more good came out of the situation. After so much controversy for two months, almost all of the surrounding community had heard something about my speech (mostly negative), so when the night of graduation came and I stood up to the podium to speak in front of hundreds of people, the auditorium was so quiet you could hear a pin drop. Everyone was anxious to hear what I had to say and everyone listened attentively. After the ceremony, many people congratulated me and told me how much they loved the speech. Some people even claimed that they admired me for standing up and fighting for what I was so passionate about. The most important part was that I was more proud of myself than I ever had been. It would have been so easy for me to just change one word for them, but I didn't.