Introduction
Use this lesson to explain the human rights debate around LGBT rights and the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia. Students will analyze the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and determine whether or not LGBT people are protected under the provisions of the UDHR. Finally, students will evaluate and argue the merits of extending or not extending provisions of the UDHR for the LGBT community. This is part two of a two-part lesson.
Subjects
Social studies, human rights, geography, politics
Estimated Time
60 Minutes
Grade Level
Middle and high school
Materials
Warm Up Activity
Structured Academic Controversy planning time: 10 min
Give each group time to meet with their partner in order to sketch out the main points of their argument, after which the debate will begin.
Main Activities
Structured Academic Controversy Debate: 20 min
Directions:
- Each pair of students should be sitting in desks touching and facing the students of the opposing viewpoint for the debate.
- Quickly review the SAC student procedures. Tell students that they must take note on the opposing viewpoint on their note-taking sheet as the arguments are being made.
- Instruct one side to begin the argument.
- All the groups in the room will be discussing at the same time, so teacher should walk around from group to group observing and directing if necessary.
Fishbowl deliberation, 15 min
After about 20 minutes, stop the debates and randomly invite 6-8 students into a “fishbowl” discussion at the front of the room. In a “fishbowl,” students discuss a question amongst one another while the rest of the class observes. Whenever someone outside the fishbowl wants to enter the discussion, they may do so at any time by walking up and tapping a participant who has already spoken on the shoulder. That person must give up their seat to the new participant and so they can join the discussion.
The purpose of this fishbowl discussion is to deliberate and come to an agreement about whether or not the UDHR should include provisions directly protecting the rights of LGBT people. Here, students do not have to take the position they held in the debate. Instead, the group should work to try to come to a consensus on the question.
If the discussion stagnates or the comments and arguments are too generic, the teacher may pose some questions to stimulate the conversation:
- Russian officials would (and have) argued that LGBT people do not have to worry about being prosecuted, as long as they do not promote LGBT “lifestyles” in front of minors. Is this a fair concession? Would it be in line with UDHR provisions? Why or why not?
- How can the UN go about adding to the UDHR? Are there human rights abuses against the LGBT community that merit doing so either within this Olympic games or otherwise?
- Should UN Declarations “trump” the laws of the host country? If so, who should be in charge of enforcement?
- Are the Olympic Games an appropriate place for political protest?
Debrief and Reflection, 15 min
Ask students some of the following questions and discuss as a class:
- What are some of the things that you learned about the Olympics and political protest?
- Is your view of LGBT rights in comparison with human rights different after completing the Structured Academic Controversy?
- Does the UN have any power to enforce Declarations like the UDHR?