Censorship Is Not Freedom, Morality, And Safety Of The People

The Catcher in the Rye. The Scarlet Letter. Huckleberry Finn. Harry Potter. The Diary of Anne Frank. Animal Farm. To Kill a Mockingbird. The Da Vinci Code. The Grapes of Wrath. These literary classics have been vital to the education of many, especially children and adolescents (Banned Books). These great novels both teach important values and educate children about world affairs and classic themes. Unfortunately, each of these novels has been banned at one point in time. In a country where freedom is so adamantly advocated, it is a wonder that an issue like censorship would even come up, that such a controversy would sink its claws into the minds of states’ boards of education across the nation.

All around the world, certain books are being banned or challenged in school districts often because the material is considered sexually explicit, unsuited for the age group, or includes offensive language or actions.

The American Library Association, ALA, is an organization that, among other things, compiles a list every year of the most frequently challenged books. “The American Library Association actively defends the right of library users to read, seek information, and speak freely as guaranteed by the First Amendment.” (ALA) Many times, the books on this list are challenged by parents with the want to protect their children from things they don’t believe to be appropriate. “Only parents have the right and responsibility to restrict the access of their children” (ALA) Even with these good intentions, by challenging a book, they are trying to challenge the authors’ thoughts and words, their First Amendment rights. These books usually contain

Censors typically feel as though the subject material of controversial books in the high school English curriculum is too much for teenagers to handle (Shen, 2002).

It covers adult themes … that most students have not been exposed to and should not be provided by the school. It is a novel that has no life lesson to be learned”(Gomez). A middle school in Minnesota had this book in their library and parents did not approve of their children reading it, because it has explicit scenes in the book. The parents of this community had a meeting in December 2015, talking about if the book should be banned or not. When the meeting was over, the book Just One Day, was banned in Minnesota schools entirely, and parents were happy that the book was finally

According to the American Library Association (ALA), young adult novels are challenged with the best intentions. In most cases a parent will read a book that their child might be reading in class to find out if the book is hazardous to their child’s well-being. If the novel seems problematic, the parent then challenges the book. Even though the purpose of challenging a novel is to keep children from reading about issues that may not be seen as appropriate for their age group, censoring children from difficult subject matter is not always the solution. There is always controversy when difficult issues arise in adolescent geared novels. Even though there are many concerns with Lois Lowry’s The Giver,

Banning or challenging books is an occurrence that has been taking place for years in America’s school systems, but often parents and teachers are not in agreement concerning censorship. The National Council of Teachers of English position statement is “We can safely make two statements about censorship: first, any work is potentially open to attack by someone, somewhere, sometime, for some reason; second, censorship is often arbitrary and irrational.” One such challenged book is Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson, which was “banned from an eighth-grade classroom in Arizona due to profanity, sexual content, and rape theme” (Lesesne and Chance 48). Even though it presents difficult topics, Speak could be a benefit to students in a

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.

There are many great books nationwide, but some get banned or restricted on who can you read them. “Always Running: La Vida Loca: Gang Days in L.A.” happens to be one of the many books that get banned from many schools districts. A parent named ‘Martin Roger’ wants the book banned from San Diego County from the schools because it's “pornographic”. San Diego Superintendent understands where he’s coming from but the book “Always Running” is protected by the first amendment. The book is banned from elementary schools, because one parent opposes for their child not to read this particular book, doesn’t mean all the children in the district don’t have the right to read it.

Books are censored in public schools for many reasons. Sometimes because of language, themes and religious viewpoints that the school district may not want to teach or expose their students to. The NCAC (National Coalition Against Censorship) talks about how “ individual sensitivities and concerns, restricts the world of knowledge available to students . . .” (“First Amendment in Schools”). Without necessary information about what is happening in the world students will be left bewildered about other ways of life. Crystal

There are various reasons as to why censorship is used. They include: security purposes, prevent hate speech, to protect vulnerable communities and also to counter unethical religious and political views. Censorship is currently being used for both political and social purposes. Most of these reasons for censorship are not absolute because they hinder people’s freedom of expression and speech. This confirms my argument that censorship is bad in the modern world. Despite some aspects considering censorship to be good, there are several aspects that promote my argument that censorship is bad thus its advantageous nature.

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

Censorship is the suppression of free speech, but we may at times need to use censorship for

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

Proponents of censorship seem to believe that they alone can determine what is and isn’t offensive to everyone. They believe that their own freedom of speech will remain intact when they have successfully silenced those that they oppose. They don’t seem to understand that once one group’s rights are taken away, we are all subject to loss of our constitutional right to speak and think freely.