|
Books should not be banned, books are a form of art, do you see paintings being banned from museums.
However, I think that there should be a guideline, similar to being 18 to get into an R-rated movie,
you should have to be 18 to buy or get a book containing explicit material. (By explicit materials i
mean large amounts of sex or drug use.) |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
In my community, the 4th grade teacher had to get permission from every parent individually before
reading the original "Harry Potter" with the class because the community might be upset about the
witchcraft!!!!!!!!!!! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yes it is wrong to ban books in school libraries, because once it is allowed to ban books in school,
not only would they ban obscene, violent, and pornographic books, they might also ban books which
have different ideas from their own, such as a book about a person's life as an Atheist. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I think that if you are 11 years old and you pick up a book in a library, and read it, and you find
pornographic content, eg. Sexual scenes you are probabally never going to go to that library again.
There are some books that should be put in libraries with an age label, and unless you are
definitely within that age limit, you should not be allowed to take out that book. However, if it
isn't pornographic (or violent) then it is unreasonable to take a book away from anyone. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I prefer to offer more freedoms and liberties, rather than institute more restrictions, even at the
risk of potential abuse of such a liberal system. The problem with censorship in school libraries is
that decisions to take books off the shelves have often been based on a very Victorian understanding
of morality and propriety. For example, many American libraries banned J.D. Salinger's "Catcher in
the Rye" for decades, primarily because they felt that the book's sympathetic, but wayward
protagonist used inappropriate language and raised controversial issues, notably sex and sexuality,
that some believed were taboo topics for middle and high school students. The book was also believed
to foment rebellion among teens and make such behaviour seem admirable.
Yet students who attended schools where libraries removed Salinger's legendary work from their
shelves and where it was struck from the syllabus of literature courses missed out on one of the
greatest coming of age stories ever written in the English language and one that is best read and
studied when one is still a teenager. Other iconic twentieth century works were also banned at
different points in US high schools, often for trivial reasons. These included Ray Bradbury's cult
classic, "Fahrenheit 451" and even John Steinbeck's "Grapes of Wrath." Yet no high school literature
curriculum is complete without these books. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Censorship and lack of censorship can lead to wrongs, but on the balance, I suppose it is better to
error on the side of no censorship. Realize that one cannot object to books promoting homophobia,
racism, sexism, and nazism, etc. If there is no censorship. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If it's a public school then my tax dollars are paying for it.
Who is to judge what books promote pornography, immorality, violence etc.? I don't trust you, the
parents, the teachers, politicians, and definitely not the president. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Great point made by the_atom, censorship is communism. And we all know that communism is a bad
thing. Plus, books are essential to opening up new ideas; the only way to progress in society is if
we support new ideas, whether or not they are inappropriate. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I think for kids a lot of reality can come from books for instance a book know as junk, and in
America i think it is called something different but the point its about young heroin addicts, two
teens really who run away meet new people and get into heroin.
This book is aimed at young adults and many would say it was a bad thing, but it isn't, i read it as
a teen and it made me want to avoid heroin, because although it deal with them having fun on it it
also deals with the horrors of trying to get off it and all the bad things it can do.
Now some of you who may have read some of my other post will say but you did become a heroin addict,
so that's not true.
But that's because you don't know the full story.
But this book probably helped me to survive. As i was homeless myself once at the age of 15 because
of that book i had an idea of how to stay warm and how to stay safe, to a degree i was how ever
taken in by a man i though ran a hostel when in reality he sold girls for money, and we were drugged
with heroin before hand to make us more manageable, i thought like hell when i saw he was going to
drug me, i knew what it was because of that book, it didn't help me against a large group of men of
course, but i wasn't completely oblivious to what was happening to me and that is because of that
book.
The point i am trying to make is that books like that if written well can help children so take away
the porn but don't take away the books that can help them learn and grow, and can also help them
know what they are dealing with if anything such as this happens, not all kids have rosie lives some
of us are abused beaten and worse, for those kids these sorts of books can be life savers, junk by
marvin burguess certainly saved me. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yes its fine for things such as pornography or even violence but morals? Do the big business leaders
who make all the money have morals? Do the presidents who send bomb strikes on foreign countries
have morals? Morals are not logical. If i see a man who just killed 20 people but i let him live
under terms such as insanity he might try it again. Right and wrong are purely opinions and should
be avoided while making big decisions. One person might think that killing people of another
religion is right but if those people were never causing a negative effect on anyone would there be
a use to kill them. Another thing we as humans tend to use the excuse for killing animals as a right
or wrong thing to do by saying we must control the population because if it grows to large it will
destroy itself of disease. Is it not logical then to assume that we must kill humans to control
their population so they do not eventually use all their resources and kill themselves. That's not
right or wrong that's logical. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Banning certain knowledge is called censorship. Censorship can also be known as communism.
So in a free country, this is unacceptable(unless of course the books happen to be pornographic, and
in that case it would be okay). |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
My school library only ever banned one book, something about how to commit suicide. My point...
Some books are unsuitable for children or adults for that matter |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Depends which book. Depends which school. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Banning a book completely is wrong in my opinion, but censoring certain offensive, explicit,
unsuitable books in school libraries is perfectly reasonable. Films/programmes aren't available to
all ages and neither should all books. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Censorship is justified for the protection of youth. Books that promote pornography, violence,
immorality, and etc. Should be kept away from them at least in school where proper education is
required.
...Though you know, they can get those books from the city public library too, if they really are
interested in those subjects. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
There are many books that are considered to be inappropriate for our youths. So these books should
be banned in order to prevent our youth from early exposure to mature content. Censorship is done to
protect our youth and for the better of children. By banning these books, there wouldn't be much
harm to the children if they're just missing a few number of books out of the large number of books
available. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
10 Jun 2008 03:15
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity