Censorship - A Clash of Wills and Morals Essay

According to “Freedom of Speech” by Gerald Leinwand, Abraham Lincoln once asked, “Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its people, or too weak to maintain its own existence (7)?” This question is particularly appropriate when considering what is perhaps the most sacred of all our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, freedom of expression. Lincoln knew well the potential dangers of expression, having steered the Union through the bitterly divisive Civil War, but he held the Constitution dear enough to protect its promises whenever possible (8).

Most who argue against censorship believe that it goes against a person’s right to freedom of speech. Within this argument, most people wonder “just when, and on what grounds, the state is justified in using its coercive powers to limit the freedom of individuals” (West). When thinking in this mindset, individuals tend to antagonize the government, because they come to believe that it suppresses their individuality and fail to consider the fact that it unites people who share its similar beliefs. As a result of the recent spike in technology and use of the Internet, the public must continually alter its definition of freedom of speech and expression. As the media offers more and more methods of communication, many of which are relatively self-regulated by users, more methods of expression develop, which may render other forms of expression obsolete, or even socially unacceptable (Qazi). Without understanding how much freedom of speech one is entitled to, one may never hope to defend that freedom if it ever comes under attack. Because technology develops so quickly that one definition will hardly suffice for a short period of time, people will find it increasingly difficult to understand how much right to expression they are allowed and will therefore fight for any and all that they may attain, never considering the benefits of censorship in the slightest. In America especially, people idealize the idea of democracy, the investigation of truth, and independence (Fieser). In

There has recently been a renewed interest and passion in the issue of censorship. In the realm of the censorship of books in schools alone, several hundred cases have surfaced each year for nearly the past decade. Controversies over which books to include in the high school English curriculum present a clash of values between teachers, school systems, and parents over what is appropriate for and meaningful to students. It is important to strike a balance between English that is meaningful to students by relating to their lives and representing diversity and satisfying worries about the appropriateness of what is read. This burden often falls on teachers. The purpose of this research paper is to discuss

     Since this country was founded, we have had a set of unalienable rights that our constitution guarantees us to as Americans. One of the most important rights that is mentioned in our constitution is the right to free speech. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the

Censorship is defined by Caso as the suppression of speech or any other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive politically incorrect as determined by the government or any other control body (3). Censorship may be justified from the conservative view whereby the free speech can be maltreated where it undermines the customary principles and communal solidity as withheld by a particular community.

What is the true cost of knowledge? Throughout history, books have been banned for an array of reasons ranging from inappropriate content, offensive language, and sexually explicit material. When proposing a challenge in hopes of banning a specific book from schools and libraries, those in favor claim children’s’ innocence should be preserved and that children should not be exposed to inappropriate material found within some books simply because it is part of a school’s required curriculum. In defense of these challenged books, many say the ethics of free speech and the important life lessons gained from reading books should be considered. Several books are banned within schools and libraries because of their potentially offensive or sensitive content; however,

Censorship is a concept with several different meanings. To each individual censorship has its own meaning. Is it a violation of our rights or is it a protection for our well being? Censorship in the generic sense refers to the suppression of information, ideas, or opinions. It occurs in all forms of communication from technological media to print media. Each society, culture, or individual's belief is violated by the codes of censorship that our society instills.

Connelly, Deborah S. "To Read Or Not To Read: Understanding Book Censorship." Community & Junior College Libraries 15.2 (2009): 83-90. ERIC. Web. 10 Nov. 2011.

Censorship within the United States is not only an immoral and "big-brotherly" practice, but also an insult to each and every one of those who call themselves US citizens. Every day, censors attempt to sanitize TV, radio, music, print, and even the Internet. In their infinite wisdom, they deem what should and should not be viewed by John Q. Public. Censors succeed in suppressing our free spirits and restraining our thoughts in virtually every medium.

Censorship has been a touchy topic over the past few years. Everyone has their own opinion on the topic, but the fact is censorship is way more damaging than people may notice. First off, the definition of censorship is to restrain, block, and censor ideas and information that some may find offensive. The basic definition of censorship completely violates the First Amendment. We, as Americans, have the right to Freedom of Speech. Censorship blocks that by blocking anything some may find offensive. It’s not fair because they’re blocking out how people feel/think just because someone found it “offensive” or wrong. It completely contradicts the First Amendment. People have the right to know about the world and what’s happening. Keeping the

Children’s innocence must be protected by censorship. The debate on whether censorship is beneficial to society often compiles to a few main reasons. Subjects like freedom of speech, women’s rights, and children’s innocence is brought into question when discussing censorship. It is an important debate because what is censored influences societal beliefs of what is right and wrong. It decides what truths are revealed publicly. Some people think censorship is beneficial because it supposedly protects children, but it is actually useless because it underestimates children’s tolerance, witholds information, oversexualizes women, and sugarcoats the truth.

Censorship may be protection from inappropriate materials, but it also limits free speech. For the limitation of free speech, it is reasonable why people are emphatically against censorship. It is understood that there is a need to filter some of the materials released in today’s society, but too much is being done by people who have no right meddling with everyone’s rights. Civilization has always been plagued by a never ending battle being fought over what is deemed right and wrong. In today’s culture, censorship oppresses everything in the media. From movies and music to television and even news stories, most of the content viewed today has been filtered one way or another. Restrictions have been in place since early societies have been

The freedom of speech that was possible on the Internet could now be subjected to governmental approvals. For example, China is attempting to restrict political expression, in the name of security and social stability. It requires users of the Internet and electronic mail (e-mail) to register, so that it may monitor their activities. In the United Kingdom, state secrets and personal attacks are off limits on the Internet. Laws are strict and the government is extremely interested in regulating the Intern et with respect to these issues.10 Laws intended for other types of communication will not necessarily apply in this medium.

Remember the day when you could say anything you wanted without worrying about someone telling you, “That’s not correct”or “don’t say that.” Yes? Everybody does. Many long to live in that era once more; they long to be able to speak their mind in public without anyone thinking they are weird or crazy. Lately it seems as though you have to retain your thoughts inside your mind and not say anything. Many college campuses and websites have started to establish rules which prevent people from saying what’s on their mind and writing or saying something which may harm others.

The parameters of the term censorship have been changed and manipulated very much over the years. Television and movie ratings have become more lenient against violence and indiscretion because these things are now seen as entertainment. Is this appropriate for our youth? Should children be exposed to these images so early on? How does censorship in the media affect adolescents? Children are the future of our society and need to have some understanding of real world occurrences. Ultimately, censorship can only be determined by the parents. The media cannot filter every bit of controversial images. What rights does the media have in this situation? How are their First Amendment rights applied here? As an aspiring political science