Censorship Debate

I believe censorship is permissible in certain circumstances. I find it necessary to censor violent and sexual movies for young children. Im one for scary movie and action & adventure, theyre fun to wacth, its excting. But theyre has to be an age restriction on some of these movies espicially now a days where we need more violence and fighting to find somehting exciting and fun. We have become totally immune to all the violence ont elevision. Children however need to be cesnured frmrom thi immunity. Not only will it be more likely for them to have violent tendencies, i find it inhuman for us to put a child through a scne where someone is getting sawed in half. Thta to me is a form of child abuse and torture. Putting your 2 year old child in front of a saw movie is outright torture, children are delicate beings they can face trauma this way. Everythign we see on the media effect our lives in one way or anpther this efdeec is even greatr when started at a young age.

It is probably no accident that freedom of speech is the first freedom mentioned in the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The Constitution's framers believed that freedom of inquiry and liberty of expression were the hallmarks of a democratic society.

This guarantees every individual the freedom to write and read what they choose. Yet in the past twenty years, thousands of books have been challenged in almost every state. This censorship is against the American ideals of individual freedom. While most censors intend to “protect” others from things they consider objectionable (Time, p.85), they are still taking away the rights of others to choose for themselves.

On the other hand, some people argue that book censorship is a violation of their constitutional right to freedom of speech, and the right to self expression. One article puts its effects this way, “Permitting restraints on literature sets the stage for attacks on all expression that is artistically or politically controversial or that portray unpleasant realities of life.” This,

“A word to the unwise. Torch every book. Char every page. Burn every word to ash. Ideas are incombustible. And therein lies your real fear.” Ellen Hopkins. The government in this society is burning all of the knowledge. The books may be burnt but ideas and your imagination are unretrievable, that can be passed down through generations. The government has the real fear. Censorship is bad and takes away from your imagination and creativity.

Censorship is a problem that has popped up throughout the world. “Censorship takes place anytime a book is removed from its intended audience” (Whelan). The banning and censoring of books puts a pall on the eyes of children and adults alike. Many novels have been banned and challenged, dredging up controversies that now plague the entire world. Carrie by Stephen King is a novel that was challenged by schools and libraries.

The history of the world has undoubtedly been dominated by an endless struggle for power. However, after a brief glimpse into the pages of history it should not take long to realize that the trick to maintaining power lies in the control of information. Even the most fearsome military generals of the past acknowledge the power of the mind and ideas over lethal force. Former Soviet leader Joseph Stalin once said “… [Ideas] are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, then why should we let them have ideas.” Stalin’s quote personifies the main concept of this literature review which will be discussing the history of government censorship and its effects that are

Freedom is a delicate balance. A society can only support an individual’s rights so long as that individual does not infringe on the rights of another. In regards to hate speech, it is hard to understand why one person’s (or group’s) right to freedom of expression should override the right of a group not to have hateful things said about them. This is a notion that I will look further into during my research, especially in both countries to determine the reasoning and arguments that have been made in prior years.

Many people have gone to court questioning exactly what freedom of speech means, and through these cases, it’s been made clear that this freedom does not exist in all situations. For example, you cannot say something that would put people in danger or create disorder. A common example of this being yelling fire in a movie theater, but it also includes things like destroying draft cards and making public private material. Another point is that, although the government might not punish you for saying certain things, other people may have the right to. For instance, if a school tells you not to say something, and you do, the school has full right to discipline or expell

A novelist, John Mortimer, once said “I suppose that writers should, in a way, feel flattered by the censorship laws. They show a primitive fear and dread at the fearful magic of print.” John Mortimer thinks that in most of the writer’s books, it shows a bit of too much truth and meaning that could cause people to express differently of the books and others. In addition to his words, the way the government works, and how society may take its toll on themselves or several people slowly of what they really feel about the situation. Just like in “Fahrenheit 451” by Ray Bradbury, the government chooses to forbid books and reading the contents of it, since they have a perspective of no fighting, no conflicts, and disagreements within the

In her essay, “Censorship: A Personal View” Judy Blume gives readers insight on the impact of censorship based on her personal experiences as a young reader and then later in life as a censored writer. She provides numerous examples of educators who were affected by censorship and chose to take a stand against it (345). Although the piece lacks evidentiary support for these accounts, and draws on sarcasm for emphasis, the original objective remains clear and strong. Blume succeeds in exposing what censorship is capable of, what this means for readers and writers, and how activist groups like the National Coalition Against Censorship [NCAC] can

Have you ever heard the word, censorship? If not, this is what it means. Censorship is the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts. That is what people are trying to do to videos of stunts on YouTube, and they shouldn’t.

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

There have been many discussions about the unnecessary conflict by censoring things it will reduce the amount of conflict and keeping a good relationship with one another. The term unnecessary conflict refers to censoring hates is also help to promote peace. The population of the people is also greatly reduced. For example, freedom of speech opens to everyone there are no right or wrong answers. Legislating by provoking unlawful behavior or urging people to behave unlawfully (19 Ed, 2014). Furthermore, it can also be clearly seen from censorship have the right to preserve free speech. For example, in India people with different skin color makes the topic hypersensitive that might annoy and hurts others religion. Censor will filter all the

In modern society, the issue of free speech vs. censorship often comes up. It is a hot topic among those interested in social issues, and represents two well meaning but very different arguments. The argument for freedom of speech says that communication and connectivity promotes progress, while the argument for censorship says that silence and isolation promotes security.