Some people believe books should not be banned in schools/libraries but just because you do not like it does not mean it should be taken away, that is the authors freedom of speech. Also, some say that you should not be exposing bad behavior or language to students but in reality they hear and see these things everyday, and by banning a book, that is not protecting them. Writers have the freedom to write whatever they want and that is a part of the First Amendment, so why banned their book? “The First Amendment allows individuals to speak, publish, read and view what they wish, worship (or not worship) as they wish, associate with
This quote means that any citizen of the United States have the freedom of speech. With that being said, authors or writers should not get their books banned or challenged since they have the freedom of voice to state his/her opinions or thoughts on some paper. The article “I’m With The Banned” states, “Challenging a book is an attempt to remove it from a school or public library is a threat to your amendment rights.” (“I’m With The Banned”). This quote connects to banned books because whenever authors get their books challenged or banned it is a threat to their amendment rights. Therefore, this quote is very important because people need to realize that
The author shows this with all of the feelings, facts and descriptions he uses. This book is very important because it teaches the reader things they didn’t know well or proves to them that they are wrong if they believed that the Holocaust was not harmful. No one had the right to treat these people in that way and no one has the right to ban this book because this will be censorship. Night also shows the truth about the Holocaust and teaches us that this period in history should be prevented from happening
Children and teens should be able to access literature “free of restrictions” (70). Censors of young adult literature “fail to see” the similarities between their “desires to suppress information” about sexuality, violence, and religion and the “successful attempts by dictators to control their countries’ population” (70). Countries who have tried to implement censorship are practicing control over their citizens, which is why Canada should not suppress the population from any literature. If children are told they are not able to read books they are interested in or curious about they will be deterred from pursuing leisurely reading which limits their intellectual
Banning books has always been a big debate if it’s acceptable or not in the field of language arts… most Americans believe people should have the freedom to choose what they want to read. By banning books, our basic rights as US citizens are kind of taken away. Book banning affects the people who read books to the people who write them. I feel that most people banned or try to ban books because they want to protect others from different ideas and information. Banned books are basically books that are thought to be “unsuited” for their intended age group and are therefore challenged by parents to be removed from a school or any local library shelf.
Why are Books Being Banned? There are multiple books around the world being banned. One reason books should not be banned is because books can teach a lesson. Another reason is that every book is written and published for a reason, if the publisher did not think the book was worth something or could have taught something, they would not have taken the time to publish it. Also that books can be encouraging and inspirational.
The idea surrounding censorship should not be avoided since it can give readers a better understanding of the consequences that comes with it. Avoiding the discussion surrounding censorship can leave a negative impact on people, especially young teenagers. This can be justified in the article, "Censoring Student Newspapers: An Overview" as the author argues that "Censorship prevents students from debating controversial issues in an open forum and does not prepare them to graduate beyond school and into life as an adult citizen, nor does it allow them to freely discuss the realities of teenage life" (Aliprandini and McMahon). Banning the book is similar to censorship as both prevent readers from viewing a published medium or book. This limits one 's construction of knowledge, ideas, and imagination.
Some think that certain chapters of this book should be banned from the public eye. I disagree with this, citizens have the right to be able to read the works of their past leader and all of the sickening thoughts that went through his head. They should not be limited to these things and held back from the total
Should art be censored? Throughout history, many have felt the need to remove or suppress material that they consider to be morally or politically objectionable, such as books, films, or other materials. They feel that these materials should not be taught in schools or shown in public museums. These people believe no one should be subjected to something that may be against their teachings or beliefs. Others, however, do not feel that these or any works of art should be suppressed.
Books can create portals to different life experiences and encourage reading. A few schools and libraries have challenged the educational value of some books, however, therefore leading them to eventually be prohibited in a particular place. Each reason may be different depending on the book and the location of the exclusions. Books are icons of literature and their value should outshine the occasionally offensive topic. Be that as it may, there are multiple reasons why books should be taught and included in a curriculum.
By examining that this book is a fantasy, Harry is a hero, and that the message has nothing to do with why it was banned, it is clear that Harry Potter should NOT be banned. I have found sources that tell the reason this series is banned. Would you agree? Or would you keep this fantastic children’s fantasy book on the shelves? Deji Olukotun wrote the article The Banning of Harry Potter of which the main idea Harry Potter should be banned for certain age groups, but not for everyone.
Books allow you to learn and become smarter which makes you apparently better than your neighbor. "I don 't want to change sides and just be told what to do. There 's no reason to change if I do that." Montag does not want to change to become equal to the rest of the people. He would rather keep breaking the law by hiding books so that way he could be different.
Censorship The United States Government is finding new ways to censor citizen’s freedom. Are they taking it too far by removing online content and books that might be considered offensive to the general public. The government should not take away offensive reading content for three reasons. Firstly all citizens should not be limited to what books they are allowed to read considering we have been granted freedom from the government with the first Amendment. Secondly, books are people’s best teachers and provide real life knowledge for kids and adults who are trying to comprehend subjects that we not taught throughout the many years of education.
Even though it censors inappropriate material that influences impressionable minds, we should not ban books books because it filters realism and limits our ability for an open mind. It would deprive students of an education about the world around them. Banning books would completely get rid of our freedom of expression and it would restrain our usually infinite imagination. If we allow for books to be banned, it would limit our ability to have imagination and have an open mind about the world around us. Banning books would deprive children of a real education about the world.
What they did was put it in the library instead of teaching it in the curriculum. Yes the book might be appropriate for some children, but for others it might be too intense. So putting it in the library lets you decide whether you are ready for the book, if not don 't read it. Like where it says in paragraph 3 of the article where it says, “It’s still in our library”. The school leader in Biloxi thought that the morals taught from the book “to Kill a Mockingbird” could be replicated in a less offensive form through another book.