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.
No books should ever be banned because for each book that is banned, there possibly could be one life lesson that will not be learned by the next generation. Censorship of books in schools and libraries is wrong for it limits what students can potentially learn. Books such as To Kill a Mocking Bird, Of Mice and Men, and others teach valuable life lessons, which is why they are considered classics. Books such as these are being banned for they have questionable material. In the same book introduction as the opening quote, Judy Blume wrote, “Those who were most active in trying to ban books cam from the ‘religious right’ but the impulse to censor spread like a contagious disease.
Books with artistic and cultural value are still challenged every day by those who want to control what others read. These people that put all their effort to censor books and free expression are unacceptable and unconditional. By censoring school books in libraries, our basic freedoms that are guaranteed in the First Amendment are violated. In other words, to be told what is were allowed to read and what is not is a direct defilement of the First Amendment, which states: “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 press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”(Asato, 287). The quote clearly states that the congress will not take away our freedom of speech.
The colonists living in the 13 colonies had to deal with British Parliament controlling their settlement without representation and many acts were passed along with the Writs of Assistance. The Writs of Assistance angered many colonists because it allowed for British soldiers to search any house at any time without evidence for smuggled items. James Otis, the Kings advocate general, resigned instead of implementing the new policy, and later argued against it in court. He claimed that it threated the privacy rights of
Haley Coles Theissen SPH 131 17 November 2013 U.S. vs. John Lennon My overall reaction to the movie U.S. vs. John Lennon was that the government was wrong and acted unfairly towards John Lennon and Yoko. Before watching this movie I was not aware of any of the incidents that had happened. I had heard of John Lennon and that he was part of the Beetles but I didn’t even know that he was dead or was murdered. I was very shocked to find out how the government had treated him and the lengths they had went to, to try to get rid of him. It was very interesting to learn about the story of John Lennon and Yoko.
Response to Wendell Berry’s “Why I an Not Going to Buy a Computer.” Wendell Berry is a very good example of a writer who questions the status quo. In this case, the status quo is about consumerism and our dependence on technology. His apparently personal essay about why he refuses to own computer makes us think carefully about our relationship with this miracle machine. However, there are also some problems with his arguments. Let us have a look at his key points and the problems with them.
However, there are regulatory policies preventing its use in theaters, on radio or on television. Additionally, there are policies developed by self-regulatory boards in the music recording industry prohibiting use of subliminal messages in filmed, recorded or broadcast productions meant for the public. Further, the federal government rules against subliminal technology use but is less likely to pose any charges. There have been a number of laws introduced in US congress but dies before the live the committee to the senate or the floor of the house. This is because it has not been proved that subliminal messages are influential.
$ 700 is seven times the average monthly salary in Iran. In Saudi Arabia, Saudi religious police were raiding toy stores and gift shops to seize Barbie dolls. One reason for banning Barbie is a belief that Jews own the American company that makes them, Mattel, Jews and Christians are not normally welcome in the kingdom. All potential visitors have to state their religion on their application forms and Christians are forbidden from holding services. Also, the Saudis feared an American presence there would stir up more Islamic radicalism.
The establishment clause says that Congress won’t make a law “respecting an establishment of religion. For many, many years there have been many controversies over the issue of prayer in public schools. The main argument is not necessarily about whether students are able to pray or not but if the teachers and people in charge at the school are allowed to lead students in prayer. Prayer can affect students in a good way but can also interfere with the rights of people from the 1st amendment. The United States was built on the Supreme being by the Founding Fathers.
In my opinion, parents should not vaccinate their children if they want to protect them from developing autism. First of all parents should not vaccinate their children, if they want to protect them from developing autism, because families all over the nation are pointing to childhood vaccinations as the cause for autism. Despite what government and medical authorities say about the safety of vaccines, parents are wise to hear what the parents of autistic children say about their children being normal until vaccinations (Attkinson, 2011). Even though this is not official scientific proof, it is definitely loud enough to make any parent think twice before vaccinating their children. Secondly, parents should oppose vaccinating their children as a way of protection from developing autism because of the significant step of banning mercury from being included in vaccines, which was taken by the US government related to this matter (Campbell, 2004).