One of the most important reasons to why library censorship is unacceptable is that it limits our information resources. In other words, we will not have the right to receive and source our assignments with quotes and information from banned books, nor will we have the right to read certain books from some of our favorite authors. There are many books that are banned from people or more likely students under the age of 17 (Koss 29). One of these books is
Firstly, it violates the privacy of the student. Secondly, it violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Lastly, unwarranted searches like these break the valuable bond between student and searcher. There are locations in Canada that allow search and seizure, but this is not the correct thing to do. Only for certain reasons can the teachers search a student.
Dear Editor: Censorship in public libraries is inconsiderable, unreasonable, and absurd. It must be eliminated from the minds of our town council. If a book is not acceptable for patrons under eighteen, I feel either the patron’s parents or the patron himself should decide so. The town council and the public library have no idea whether a patron is responsible enough to read a book with possible adult themes. Censorship is also ridiculous because most classic novels involve questionable language, or somewhat violent material.
The school board has every right to ban this particular book from being used in any schools. In this book there are a whole lot of examples to use as far as evidence of the offensive language used in this book. For example, when Scout asks Atticus, “Do you defend niggers, Atticus?” (Page 85) or when Cecil Jacobs says to Scout in the schoolyard,
In the course of discovery, the School Board members who voted to remove the books acknowledged that they had not read many of the books and that they removed them because they exposed students to the "religion of witchcraft." The ultimate questions: Do students have a right to read? Does book censorship violate the First Amendment and at the expense of who? As the final verdict on April 22, 2003, the Supreme Court ordered the return of the books back to library shelves. Background Information The Court cited the Tinker case and ruled that there was no evidence that reasonably showed substantial disruption or material interference with school activities if students were allowed unfettered access to the books.
It should stay the way the author intended it to be. Racist language in old literature is very uncomfortable for many people to read. It can be offensive to African Americans. Many books are banned from schools just because of the racist language. We just need to understand that these books were written a long time ago and that was the language they used back then.
Books are constantly being banned from all different places for all different reasons as well as from all age groups. Books are usually banned because of content such as profanity, sexual situations, or even witchcraft. But should they be banned to everyone just for these reasons? Books should not be banned to high school students and older. Student in high school are exposed to many different things, good and bad, as a part of growing up and maturing.
It does have a very rich meaning behind the text that opens a conversation with adolescence about date-rape so, if anything, it should be banned against a younger crowd that wouldn’t understand the entire message the author is trying to portray. There is a difference between banned and challenged books. ALA states that a challenge is an effort to remove our resources and texts based upon the objections of a person or group of people. On the other hand, banning a source is the complete removal of those materials. (American Library Association 1).
Now this is an extreme case, but it’s not so far off from what may be occurring in schools. In recent years, the question of drug testing in the American school system has grown into an explosive controversy. Many think random screenings will discourage drug abuse. If random drug searches are allowed, this will open many opportunities for other constant surveillance, and thus interfere with their freedoms as citizens. Mandatory drug testing in schools is proven to be ineffective, costly, and a violation of privacy.
Should schools be allowed to drug test students? No it should not. Imagine yourself having to take a mandatory drug test just because the school suspects you might have done drugs. It would be a huge violation of your privacy. Random drug tests should not be allowed in schools because they are a violation of our privacy, it is against the fourth amendment, they do not deter use, and the drug tests are not always accurate.