Confucius says “No matter how busy you may think you are, you must find time for reading, or surrender yourself to self-chosen ignorance” (Yarbrough, 2012). The First Amendment protects our rights of free speech, but people do not respect that and challenge it. Book banning violates academic freedom and diversity of thought, but some think it is wrong for children to learn about sex, and slavery. While book banning discourages creativeness and critical thinking, libraries have the right to remove a book if it is put on the banned list. So think about how you feel about books and what they mean to you.
Dystopian novels like "Fahrenheit 451" contain themes and messages that cannot be suppressed. The value in not banning "Fahrenheit 451" substantially outweighs any reason to ban the book. In a world where "Fahrenheit 451" is banned, the population would not be able to see areas in society while require improvement and therefore, the individuals would be unable to incite change. Moreover, if the book was banned, the people would become monotonous and deficient in their ability to synthesize innovative ideas. Supporters of the ban often cite religious reservations as their reason to ban the book.
A book that has been banned is actually removed from a library or school system. The actual contextual reasons as to banning them is use of explicit violence, gore, sexuality, explicit language, religion, or dark times in history. On the non-contextual side of the reason why they are banned books are usually because with the best intentions to protect people, frequently children, from difficult philosophies and information. Teachers, or even more common adults, often censor books from children if they feel that the books have maniacal or controversial ideas in them. In some scenarios, those who are censoring books think that a book might be appropriate for a certain, or several groups in society.
You are not forced to see or hear the offensive speech. Opponents of the "first amendment view" believe that "just saying no" is not enough. For example, children most likely will not say no. This is why these people believe that the government should at least have the right to censor what children see. Some people believe that censorship is the answer, others do not.
Evidently what my point is coming to that in my opinion the main aspect to Censorship is to protect children to content that they should not be exposed to at such a young age. Censorship in some circumstances is not needed. In one circumstance books have been banned because they have been too inappropriate. For example Naked Lunch by William S. Burroughs, this book was banned because it contained obscene language and controversial matters. I do not think this booked should have banned in this case.
Nazis, communist governments, and extremist governments in the Middle East ban books from their citizens. As Americans we see this as an attempt to violate our First Amendment rights by giving the people little option on what they can legally read, and administrators banning books from students is no different. According to administrators, their responsibility is to keep their students from reading or viewing unsuitable material. John A. Miller gives his opinion in his article “Banning Books Is an Affront to the First Amendment” stating “I doubt that any teenager much above the age of 13 is unaware of the words and situations most frequently cited as that the evils in banned books” (Miller). Students already hear this violence or inappropriate language at home and even at school from other students.
."). Although the burning of books simply for the sake of eradicating them is a futile effort today, as Bradbury stated, censoring or banning them is basically the same thing. However, should literature be banned for offending a few? Many people don't think so, and they have U.S. laws to back them up. Not only is the censorship of literature in violation of the U.S. Constitution's first amendment, but it also deprives the American people of culture and knowledge.
That in itself is unconstitutional and cannot be done. It is important to understand this because if a constitutional amendment is passed, our free speech would be restricted. So, if after reading this, you feel as if your first amendment is in danger of being violated, then contact Diane Feinstein. Tell her how you do not agree with her advocating of the Flag Protection Amendment. Make your voice be heard, and if she does not change her position, then do not vote for her at the upcoming election.
A book represents an idea, thus limiting access to a book is banning the representation of an idea. The banning of books in American schools should not be allowed, because banning books will prevent students from learning the reason for the controversy and alternate viewpoints they can come to on their own. As the American Library Association notes, books are usually banned "with the best intention…to protect others, frequently children, from difficult ideas and information." (Brunner). If a book has frightening or controversial ideas in them, adults willing often censor that book from children.
Censorship in School Libraries The most debatable and controversial form of censorship today is the banning of books in school libraries. Banning books that educate students is wrong and selfish. Censorship of books in school libraries is neither uncommon nor an issue of the past. Books with artistic and cultural worth are still challenged constantly by those who want to control what others read. The roots of bigotry and illiteracy that fuel efforts to censor books and free expression are unacceptable and unconditional.