Banning Books Essay

Teenagers are canvassing more intensitys than ever this instant, and some(a) plenty theorise that we pass water Harry Potter to thank. merely surrounding teen sustains is the myth of appropriate criminalise. Some may think that yet old books were forbidden, and that they are now back on the shelves of schools and libraries around the country. This is non so. Not only stool old classics such as The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger been out(p), notwithstanding newer books are macrocosm ch every last(predicate)enged as well. The controversy of book forbiddance stems from the pursuit of knowledge.though Hitler did m both bad things in his lifetime schools understood inculcate about the Holocaust, and yet now parents are requesting that their peasantren do not learn what certain books score to hiter in the focus of knowledge. But some parents do not stop there. Books are being taken off school shelves, depriving altogether students instead of just virtuoso . Can unrivaled person influence a whole school or t give birthsfolk? Is this even fair to every iodine involved? The answer is no. Book banning should be illegal because leaseing a book is an individual choice, some books are banned without much thought, and sometimes books are banned without all parties involved reading it.People cheer books to each other all the time, but reading books is another matter. Sure, a friend may say that a book is good but that doesnt mean that you lead read it. But by banning books schools and libraries are fetching outside(a) the choice to read the book whether it was recommended or not. While some people think that foul language in books is a perfectly lucid reason to take them off the shelves not every bingle shares this idea. But if libraries and schools only gain vigor one groups side of the story they are more equivalently to ban the book.The process of banning a book seems at first to be simple. A parent (probably the most common ecc entric) goes to their childs school and gets a form with several boxes to check off Do not assign this book to my child. Withdraw it from all students as well as my child. Send it back to the proper department for reevaluation. And whence What do you object to in this book? What material do you recommend to replace this book? Sounds rather easy, right? And then theres the vote. In some cases those voting on the outcome havent read the book.If the book is banned what example are schools setting for the students? They are basically saying that it is alright to take knowledge, no matter what it is, outside(a) from someone or several people. Would it be right to not teach anyone about Hitler? Would everyone support less(prenominal)ons about wars and discrimination being removed? nearly likely not. But when books are banned that is what schools are doing, they are fetching away something that was never theirs in the first place. They are labeling something inappropriate base on the ir beliefs or the beliefs of one person.And this is undermining the individuals choice to read the book. And sometimes they seem to not realize what they are even doing. If you depend up why some books have been banned in the historical its likely that you will find some pretty disgusted reasons. The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger was banned by one group of parents because they thought it would turn their kids into communists. The Lord of the Flies by William Golding was challenged because it demoted existence to the level of animals. 1984 by George Orwell was banned because it was pro-communist.The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkien was banned for being satanic. More recently the book The Bermudez Triangle by Maureen Johnson is being challenged in an Oklahoma school for being inappropriate for teenagers. According to the pay back of a student at the school the book has Homosexual content, exposed sex, underage drinking, and reckless promiscuity and that is why the book s hould be banned. Though these can all be viewed as appropriate reasons to ban a book those who took this claim seriously seem not to have affiliated all the clues.The book in question does have homosexual content, as does the real world that teens live in everyday, but there is not sex in the book, unprotected or not. The mother also states that the book has no moral fiber which is not true. The Bermudez Triangle is the story of iii girls and their friendship when two get into a relationship together. No moral fiber? But instead of taking these things into account, the book was removed from the shelves. This case could turn into countless others all over the fall in States and it needs to be stopped.Taking away a book without even assessing the reasons to see if they establish sense when applied to the book is lazy and unfair to the author and those who need to read the book. Taking a book off the shelves because several or all parties involved want to is a bad thing, but what if only one person objected to the book? How is that fair to the rest of the people it affects? If one person said they didnt want to go to a characterisation but five others wanted to what would happen? If one person didnt want someone to be president in the United States but the majority did what would happen?The outcomes of these two situations are relatively the same in general because the United States is based on Democracy. But what if the situation was this What if one person thought a book was inappropriate for children and the rest had never read the book but still had to decide? What would happen? In some cases those voting on the books banning (usually the formula of the school, the Director of Human Resources and the Director of Instruction) have not even read the book. And what position does this put the book in? A bad one, thats for sure.If only one person has read the book and are complain about it then what are the others to think? That the book should be banned of course This is by no means fair to students, the author, or any other patrons of the library. It is blindly stealing knowledge from others and not acknowledging it. It is, in essence, like teaching that Martin Luther King Jr. was a bad person because he held marches but not telling why he was dimension marches because you dont even know. It is informing someone (or misinforming someone) because you have no idea what you are talking about, which is better known as lying.The Bill of Rights says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the put right Banning books is certainly not keeping with this statement. Freedom of the press includes books, and taking books off the shelves is therefore prohibiting the reading of them. This makes book banning against the Bill of Rights and unconstitutional. If the United States keeps book banning legal the country is going against its ver y own fiber that people have certain rights, that the press has rights, and that this freedom is important.A parent keeping their own child from reading something is their decision, but to bare their child of reading for their education is not in any way wise or good, and keeping other students and children from reading books is just as bad. Book banning should be illegal because reading is an individuals decision, banning books is often done without much thought or reason, and sometimes book banning is done unfairly because those voting on the books banning have not read the book in question. Teaching children to steal is thought of as wrong, and a country strengthened on freedom should not permit any stealing, much less the stealing on knowledge.