Banning books

[Heen]

Book banning occurs because one person or a collective of people don't like what a book says, I remember a few years ago there was a dispute over one of Stephen King's story, the subject of that story being, a teenager goes into his high school with a gun. The dispute was that this story would encourage individuals to do the same, but my feeling is, its all about free thought, your will as a person. a book can't make you do something you don't want to do.

[DanteAzrael]

Does anyone remember the movie "Demolition Man?" They showed the "future," which consisted of examples that showed people getting arrested for using foul language - sex was illegal - there were no weapons - etc.

That is the direction we are headed, and there's no way around it. All of these people who have voices are going to say "This offends me" which will be the end of whatever action, book, organization, blah blah blah - the list goes on.

It's almost inevitable, which sickens me. But it's obvious.

I do not agree with book banning. If something offends you, then don't read it. If it's a book that explains how to make bombs, then I agree with the person up there somewhere who said it should be up to the parents to pay some damn attention to whats going on.
People are going to do what they're going to do. I highly doubt that a book about magic is going to influence a child to not be a christian, and so on.

I think I'm becoming disgusted with society as a whole - because it actually goes above and beyond just banning books.

I agree. This country...and the rest of the world is heading toward a state of over-sensitivity and self-righteous individuals who believe they have a moral high ground though they are acting more immoral than murderers. They get the voice because One) They are part of a majority and Two) Governments pay attention to emotional rampages of over-sensitive, self-righteous idiots (this can also be seen through such things as the voting for state amendments to ban gay marriage.) It's coming to the point that this country is becoming a Pure Democracy: Where the majority rules...And once the government allows the majority to have power over the minorities, then you're going to see a major growth in this same type of over-sensitive ideology.

I disagee with banning books entirely. I don't even believe parents should have a say in what their children read except under their own home. If the parents dislike it, they can take their child out of the class or try to negotiate something with the teacher instead of enforcing the entire group to suffer because of one person's ideas on morality. I do not believe any type of media should be banned. It's up to the individuals. If they don't like it, don't read it, watch it, listen to it. I'm sick of this over-sensitive propaganda which is brutally fed by liberal ideology. Baby the people instead of tell them to shut up and learn how to accept the freedom of choice. Sometimes it makes me wonder if these type of people really want freedom. They want control of their own and at the same time total control over everyone else.

I believe you're right that this world is heading towards a Demolition Man type society where freedom is destroyed. It's fed by liberal ideology, socialism, and fantasy mind worlds not based on reality or individuality.

It sickens me too

[sleepydumpling]

As a librarian, I don't believe that books should be banned. I do believe that they should be age restricted if they contain content that is too complex for a child or young person to understand. I really feel that adults should be able to read books and make up their own minds about them, but of course children aren't ready to understand adult content, so it's best that books are restricted to them that are age appropriate.

[DanteAzrael]

I never really thought that there should be an age restriction since most children cannot understand or even know the contents of whatever book is restricted to them. Their minds have already restricted them from reading it so it's utterly pointless to ban them from children. If the child can read and understand the book, then good on them. I'm not saying they should be out reading erotic stories or pornographic materials. But, if they want it, they'll figure out someway to get it.

Age restrictions ultimately do not matter. If the parents parent their child well enough, it doesn't matter. Besides, most children hate the opposite sex anyway

[sleepydumpling]

I have to disagree with you there Dante. At 8 years of age I had an adult reading standard, and my parents never bothered to check what I was actually reading. I can remember reading books that were far too old for me in content (complex themes, sexual or violent scenes) and just being very confused and sometimes upset by them (the violent stuff). If anyone had bothered to restrict what I was reading at that age, to more age appropriate stuff, I might have avoided reading things that either confused me terribly or traumatised my very young mind.

I have since read a lot of those books as an adult and can now of course understand and process what I am reading, and I still find them very intense.

Never underestimate the reading skills of children - you should see some of the kids we get coming into the library borrowing adult books. In most cases, it's fine the books are innocuous enough. But I know letting an 11 year old read American Psycho is not a good thing - where I have no problem with an adult choosing to read that book.

[DanteAzrael]

I don't think I underestimated the reading level of children since

If the child can read and understand the book, then good on them. I'm not saying they should be out reading erotic stories or pornographic materials.

I pretty much left open the possibility of children being able to read and understand the books...but as yourself said it confused you. Ultimately, if it confuses you, it really doesn't matter because you can't understand it. And, like I said before, if children want to read those things, they'll find a way to figure out how to get it.

Age restrictions are meaningless because it doesn't prevent children from getting the books they want to read. Most kids really do not care to read that sort of garbage.

I really have no problem with kids reading whatever they want because they're not my kids. I'm not their keeper. It's not my job to create age restrictions to violent books. Besides, the kids nowadays are getting access to violent video games or cartoons. If you're going to create age restrictions over books, why not cartoons? Plenty of the weaker cartoons still have some sort of violence in them. Video games have their restrictions, but it doesn't mean they still cannot access them.

As I said before, it's not up to the world to declare age restrictions, it is up to the parents. If the parents are apathetic morons, then so be it.

I'm not awefully worried about an eight year old child who gets confused reading a book they can't understand.

Maybe I'm just not as hypersensitive as everyone else. I don't expect a child to read an adult book, actually understand its contents, and then get mentally screwed over because of a book. I expect them to be mentally screwed over by family or parents or peers. Not books they don't know how to process thoroughly.

[knightss]

well tv has that now 2. they show the proper "age level" that a person should be to watch the show in the little black box at the begining of the program... atleast that's what cable does? not sure about other companies.

i remember going to buy a video game in the mall when i was younger and not being allowed to buy it because it was rated mature... i then walked to another store in the mall, bought the game and then walked pass the original stores window holding the game up. yeah i guess i was a bit of an ass but it goes to show that even if you put age restrictions on things there are always loopholes.

[DriftwoodJames]

I personally believe that banning any material is a strike against free speech. Even if it is damaging, which is wrong, freedom of speech is one of THE most important freedoms we have. The instant censorship takes control, that freedom is compromised. Bans on books is a very serpantine quality to such forms of censorship, and silencing freedoms.

[DriftwoodJames]

[quote="ktmayo05"]...That is the direction we are headed, and there's no way around it. All of these people who have voices are going to say "This offends me" which will be the end of whatever action, book, organization, blah blah blah - the list goes on.

It's almost inevitable, which sickens me. But it's obvious....[quote]

An interesting point, but I believe KtMay here is mistaken. While her assessment and perspective of the current situation concerning censorship is educated, I believe that it is only a bit short sighted. Consider that WWII greatest villain of all time, Adolf Hitler, incited book burnings, and banning, and censorship beyond control of the people. Then when the US got involved, finally... that all stopped. I do understand that the US joined into the war under different circumstances, however, the fact is this: Never understimate the human spirit, or its need to be free. Two hundred years ago (Well a little over two hundred years ago) censorship, and tyranny ran rampart in England. To put it simply, people who didn't like it, left. Settled eslewhere. Then. England came abroad hitting us with Taxation without representation, and laws that our people did not agree to. They fought, and we fought back.

If it ever came to that again, we would fight back. Where laws are made, laws can be broken; a revolution. People will take oppression for a short time, but every man, woman, and child in this country outnumbers the forces within it.

If it came to blood, people would fight. Never, ever underestimate a being's will to survive; to fight back; to take back what is theirs.

J. Edward Nolan

[sleepydumpling]

Sorry Dante, but a rude attitude does not constitute an intelligent debate. If you would like to discuss a subject, do so without the juvenile attitude.

knightss, you're absolutely right, television, movies and video games have age restrictions to what is appropriate for different age groups. That's why they don't play certain shows or movies until after a certain hour of the evening. Bookstores and libraries can and do age restrict books - a child cannot buy or borrow a copy of The Clockwork Orange, or Black Lace erotica for example. And for good reason - they are not age appropriate.

Again, I never condone the actual banning of books. Grown adults should be able to read books and make up their own minds about them. I just believe that the current process of age restricting books is wise for a reason.

Great points DriftwoodJames. Opression only lasts for a finite time, no matter what the culture or geography of a people. It's human nature to seek for freedom of thought and life. So while we go through periods of time where attitudes become more conservative and restricting, it's our role as humans to seek the freedoms that we need.

[DanteAzrael]

Sorry Dante, but a rude attitude does not constitute an intelligent debate. If you would like to discuss a subject, do so without the juvenile attitude.

I didn't have a rude attitude nor a juvenile attitude. I typed what I said with the calmest attitude in the world. It was simplistic and calm.

[Kiki]

I don't think any book, words, opinion, idea should be banned. Its derogatory to suggest that the populous is too ignorant to make their own minds up about what they do or don't believe or agree with.

However, as with all other rights, freedom of speech comes hand in hand with responsibilities. I believe that so strongly I think we should join those two words together - 'right-onsibilities' or sommat!

Whilst I agree that no idea or opinion should be oppressed, I can see the logic in restricting the timing of publication of the information. This is mainly journalistic, but for example, if the British Press had published the full facts during WWII, the morale of the UK would have been lost to disastrous effect.

There were occasions when, for example, Churchill had to chose between letting the Nazi's bomb Leeds (major city) knowing there would be huge casualties or warning the civilians there and thereby giving away the fact that we had cracked the Enigma code. Churchill let them bomb Leeds, which was ultimately the right decision and access to the code saved hundreds more lives afterwards. But imaging if the press had published that story - as they no doubt would in our current climate. Sometimes it is in the people's best interests NOT to know (or at least not to know until later).

That said, banning books because you don't agree with what's expressed is wrong and ultimately draws more attention to the subject you're trying to avoid! All of us, children included are entitled to choose what we believe and that involves knowing the alternatives. All you do by restricting an individual's understanding is cheapen their choices. They do 'xyz' because they know no better, not because they choose to.

It almost links to 'if there is no evil, how would there be good?' - If there is no alternative, how can there be a decision?

[butterflykisses427]

I absolutely hate when they try to ban books. If you are worried about what your children are exposed to pay closer attention. Don't take away someone else's chance to read amazing literature just because you don't agree with the content.

To someone who said Christians are banning. That is a gross over generalization. I student taught at a catholic school. They had Harry Potter, Go Ask Alice, and Forever by Judy Blume on their shelves. Not all religious people are into banning this material. It is the small faction of zealots that give people that idea.

[lifelongreader]

Check out this website about books that are banned - it will shock you.

Argeed. Don't think it happens much anymore unless it;s a communist / dictator country, or a hardcore religious group / society.

[/url]

[lifelongreader]

I agree with you kiki - banning books is the thin end of the wedge.

Great literature would slowly disappear if we did not resist - did you know that To Kill a Mockingbird (which is on many a reader's top 10), has been on banned lists for ages, and is still attacked.

What a great loss to literature that would be if we could not talk about and discuss that.