The 6-7 Craze of 2019

“freedom of expression should not be limited”

“6 7 has been a mark of youth bringing together the children of many countries”

“It's absolutely a frustrating and annoying craze for teachers. But to legally ban it is lunacy; we can't enforce, or reasonably demand, that young people stop saying something purely because it's irritating. We have far more pressing global issues to contend with.”

“We must never impose our will upon free speech.”

“The ban is practically unenforceable. It is part of youth culture to express themselves in different manner and we should not forbid their creativity and expression of self.”

“Though as much as we don't enjoy this "craze" it is a mere part of the cycle of new generation Vs old generation. Banning it is illogical and waste of time and space for schools. Schools focus should be on teaching and enriching the youngest our societies, not restricting them just because we don't understand it.”

“Kids are gonna kid. Banning this is a hopeless, and illiberal, idea. Doot Doot.”

“The opposition wants to ban a harmless numerical chant because they're terrified of the youth having a voice. Populist alliance voted to LET THEM COOK! We will always defend freedom of expression in Javosca, even if the classrooms get a little loud. 6-7 forever!”

“This chant does not harm anybody, and so unless it actively disrupts lessons it is none of the government's business. Allow teachers to discipline their own classes when required but for the most part it is none of the states business.”

“We stand for freedom of speech above else. Politicians should not interfere in this matter.”

“To ban such “trend” tends to limit the freedom of expression.”

“Government should exercise restraint. While schools should maintain order, banning a harmless chant nationwide is unnecessary and unenforceable. Our focus remains on the real priorities: strengthening healthcare, education, housing, infrastructure, national defence, law and order, welfare, and creating more opportunities for every citizen.”

“Labour believes freedom of expression amongst children and teenagers should not be limited and as the older generations had their own jokes and slang, this is the one for the young generation”

“Banning 67 is only suppressing young peoples free speech. why should the next gen have their rights taken away so young. banning it is unreasonable.”

“It should be left up to the teacher's discretion, no nationwide blanket ban is needed”

“I don't like those numbers, but I don't see any reason why it should be banned, especially since it goes against freedom of expression. Students deserve to say what they want as long as it is respectful”

“Its a supportative and connective trend which should be kept. 67”

“Freedom of expression must be protected at all cost let them cook”

“let them coooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooook”

“We must protect the the youth from corruption by odd and brain destroying memes.”

“You can’t outlaw a trend just because teachers' unions are annoyed. Banning expression is a slippery slope. Red Green Labor stands firmly for personal liberty and free speech. Let the youth chant, let the classrooms buzz, and let them cook!”

“This idea is mentally damaging for our youth. As such we will not accept this frivolous trend. In Levonia we advocate for the teacher's right to teach children appropriate, educational content.”

“We must protect the freedom of expression”

“This trend has already stated to fade away; it just phases the children grow out of it. Let the kids have fun”

“We must defend the freedom of speech of working class kids!”

“Let them cook, politicians should do the trend to kill it.”

“We do not consider to ban in all the sense this word has. Nevertheless, we do agree that it touches our kids so hard and makes them more vulnerable to bait and other type of shit. Somehow, our great nation remembers our ancestors heroic sacrifices and enjoy a lot more with history lessons.”

“Banning a simple chant should not be the role of the government and sets a dangerous precedent.”

“This chant is ultimately harmless to society at large, certainly to a point where it doesn't warrant a nationwide ban on it. Furthermore, a nationwide ban on a single viral and indeed harmless trend sets a dangerous precedent for freedom of speech nationwide, if not worldwide. If saying a mere two numbers in succession is warrant enough for restrictions on speech, then that is not the supposed "safeguarding" of a some nebulous definition of order that was never in threat to begin with or so called properness, that is the death of freedom of speech itself, for if two numbers aren't safe from censorship, then nothing is. Baffling as it may be to older citizens, this kind of expression from our youth should not be limited, especially not if there is no real broader societal harm in allowing it to continue.”

“The question is not whether we will ban it or not; rather, whether we will be able to stop them at all.”

“I do not understand it but whatsoever. It did not harm anybody.”

“We believe that this is necessary to protect the central nervous system as well as the autonomic and somatic nervous systems of our children. THE GREAT MEMES RESET!”

“Ban it!!!!!!! I have 67 reasons for the ban but I won't list them.”

“Individual liberty is something that many people do not have! If a trend as simple as '67' is not affecting anyone else, then why ban it?”

“We cannot call ourselves a free nation while we stop our citizens from speaking freely, if the youth wish to chant some ridiculous phrase, it is not for the government to tell them to stop.”

“lol I thought we discus importang things”

“While many may not agree with the saying of this phrase including within our own party, banning it is undemocratic and undermines civil liberties.”

“Such trends have always existed, they come and go, and barely last over a few months. Imposing an unenforceable and wildly disproportionate restriction on such a trivial annoyance is not only contrary to the principles of free expression, but also wouldn't have any meaning within a year as the trend will inevitably die down and be replaced by something else.”

“Banning a harmless slogan is neither consistent with individual freedom nor likely to solve the issue: on the contrary, as with all prohibitions, it would probably only make it more popular. Instead of opting for censorship, we should engage with students, understand why the chant has spread and encourage dialogue to try and reach an agreement tolerable for both teachers and students. Open conversation is almost always more effective than prohibition. Furthermore, it's likely these chantings won't go on for much longer, as it's most definitely a fad.”

“Demons will take control on us if we don't ban this thing.”

“We must protect our teachers and make sure they would be able to do their jobs of education our children; the "6-7" debacle acts as an impediment to their ability to do so, without significant meaning or messaging behind it to even justify it. As such it is the stance of the Collective to ban this to prevent this from unnecessarily damaging Solania's future.”

“Protect our freedom let them cook we oppose banning it”

“Modern Alliance believes governments should focus on real challenges, not harmless trends. Laws should be practical, enforceable and proportionate. This is best left to schools, teachers and parents—not the state.”

“If the government can decide to ban two numbers, they can decide to restrict any of our rights. Therefore, let them cook”

“let them have fun, the trend will stop one day anyway.”