No one would want a report home telling your parents that your son cursed from profanity in a book. Books with profanity cause children to use words that aren’t allowed in schools and many other places of the world. Cursing in books could change a kid’s whole appearance. In conclusion my opinion on book banning is that books should be banned based on their sexual content profanity cursing violence and more. Book banning is a necessity schools need to keep their children from cursing violence and many other things some books could contain that could cause a scene.
Some books do have profanity in them which children really should not read. That can be easily fixed by taking out those parts, but leaving in the negative and real world parts so children can learn about the real world early in life and they will learn the difference between good and bad actions. Books should not be banned; banned books can have an important lesson for kids to learn for the life they have ahead of them. Some people believe books should be banned from society, because some books have profanity. Correspondingly vulgar language is everywhere, children know
"("Censorship") This can happen whenever kids want to watch movies. Companies put ratings on the movies to help parents decide whether they would be allowed to watch a movie. "The PG rating indicates in the view of the Rating Board, that parents may consider some material unsuitable for their children, and parents should make that decision. "("Media Violence") Another way that parents can censor what their kids are exposed to is censoring what they read. Books are being banned and taken out of libraries.Parents are starting to not trust libraries
Students should not have access to books that promote inappropriate language. But, on the other hand, according to the article, Censorship: Who Should Decide What Young People Read? It states how when kids are facing issues, books relating to the issue help them better understand their own personal life. In addition, censored books are mostly engaging books. Banned books usually show issues that people can relate to.
As children began grow, they began to make their own choices and learn to deal with the consequence of their mistakes. However, some parents will try to protect this process which can harm their child by them not accepting responsibility on their own. An article by Dr. Nathan Lents has given the audience a view about those who tend to be overprotective parents are actually not
Rind, Bauserman, and Tromovitch’s (1998) meta-analysis of childhood sexual abuse was controversial and challenging to read. The article challenged many of my preconceived notions about how trauma is manifested in children who have been sexually assaulted. There is a very wide range of incidents that could fall under the umbrella that is considered childhood sexual assault. This wide range could potentially cause a large margin of error in findings of research on effects of childhood sexual assault. However, I would disagree with Rind et al.
The idea of Censorship and book banning is to protect the youth from potentially harmful ideas or thoughts, but some would argue that in doing so it goes against the First Amendment rights. On one side of this argument we have people who disagree that books should be banned.
Parents mostly view holding back the truth from their children as a simple means of protection of their children (Bridges, 2010). Parents seek to protect their children from being hurt by information that they view their children cannot handle (Lott, 2014). Matters such as separation of parents have seen to contribute a significant share of the lies that parents feed children. Parents assume that they can withhold the truth from their children about their marital issues thinking that they will tell the truth to their children later in life when they can understand the complexity of the matter at hand. Taking this example, when the children enquire about where their parents are when they are not at home.
If students are “protected” from real world situations they will not succeed in life. If someone has an unrealistic expectation of the world they will not know how to handle hard situations that come their way. Schools should educate their students about the world not “protect” them from it. It is not only am educators job to teach academics it is also their job to prepare their students for their life ahead of them. In conclusion this shows that banning books shelters students from the outside
Students should not have to worry about a grade being dropped because a teacher does not like them, They should get the grade the earned and deserve. In West Virginia, a straight A student spoke out and ended up suing her teacher for this exact thing: unfair grading. She received an F on Biology project that she turned in late because she was on a school approved trip. (Parent) Things like this are not okay, something needs to be done. Whenever unfair punishment in school systems is brought up, the response is something along the lines of if we punish certain people, it could make them depressed because they are already fragile and could snap.
Banning books would deprive children of a real education about the world. If children don 't know about the world and what other people say and think or what others ' cultures and beliefs are how could they possibly grow to be informed, intelligent, and well-rounded individuals? True, some texts may promote damaging lifestyles to young minds, but again parents and teachers are more than capable of teaching their children what is right and not allowing their children to be exposed to harmful content with age restrictions. You can always teach your kids to be smart and make right choices. If they grow up believing certain things because they only have one narrow perspective, how will they be able to learn who they truly are as a person or what they really believe as a person?