This article first describes and then proposes a practical solution to the professional dilemma between the duty of impartiality and the duty of human rights advocacy that many teachers experience when teaching and talking about politically sensitive issues with students. The article begins by presenting an analysis of the source and signification of the tension between impartiality and human rights advocacy based on evidence from research on teachers' perspectives, the conceptual literature on teaching and learning about controversial issues, and the legal and ethical framework of education. Then, drawing on scholarship on respect for students' right to freedom of religion, the article advances and defends set of basic pedagogical guidelines for teaching and talking about politically sensitive issues that permit teachers to maintain a professional stance of impartiality without abrogating their responsibility to act as human rights advocates. Key to squaring the circle between impartiality and human rights advocacy, the article argues, is for teachers to strive to remain descriptive in their treatment of politically sensitive issues and insist on high standards of reasoning and evidence while at the same time respecting students' right to an opinion, no matter how mistaken that opinion may seem.