All the tragic gun violence-related events that took place recently and not so recently led not only to grief but to all sorts of speculation on all levels. The topic has become so widely discussed that everyone has something to say on it:
Hire Writer My second reason specifically addresses the last right stating that cltlzens should have access to he press.
The government should not restrict books from being published or Interfere Into personal affairs as this Is an Infringement of the First Amendment. Finally, I believe that parents should monitor what their own children read, but not have the authority to ban other children from reading these novels.
For these reasons, conclude that the government should play no role in the issue what citizens do and do not read. At first glance, the debate over banning books appears unimportant. Book banning essay outline, his debate has divided our nation into those who favor censoring books to protect their impressionable adolescents, and those who argue that education should be open for everybody without interference from the government in restricting the publishing and accessing of these books.
Denying the rights of the consumer, in any area, is one of the hallmarks of uthoritarianism. The First Amendment protects the freedom of expression and speech, and by prohibiting certain messages, the government clearly infringes upon public rights.
Though I concede that parents do have the right to monitor what their children read, they do ot have the right to remove books from public libraries or monitor what other children in the city read.
Those who protest against these books have clearly not studied them in depth. While I agree that parents should play an active role in educating their children and as their primary guardians, have the legal right to monitor what their children read, I disagree that this legal right extends to controlling what other children in the eighborhood read as well.
Prohibiting children from reading a book will not enhance their moral values. Rather, banning a book more likely will increase curiosity for reading it.
I also empathize with parents who ban books with controversial or uncomfortable subjects because they are unsure as to how their children will react or how to explain such topics. A good way to discuss these subjects with children is to read books with various views on the subject so that children can experience multiple points of view before forming their own opinions.
Our society, especially our younger children, needs to read these books since fully understanding a topic requires knowledge of both sides. If we choose to disregard even a highly unpopular opinion, we intentionally choose to live in ignorance, only partially ducated in a topic we claim to know so well.
Take for consideration the controversial books that tackle difficult, touchy social issues like homosexuality. While this may seem like a valid argument, really it is Just skirting around the actual issue.
It is not only elfish, but also harmful to the overall education of their children. These two books are issues that Healey brings up in her argument on how groups were upset about the way these books informed their children of homosexuality.
Homosexuality and other touchy social issues are part of everyday life, and for a group to attempt to censor this subject from younger society is almost absurd; these issues are not monstrous and the censorship of them ot only shows prejudice but lack of respect.
Banning books seems to be the most public solution for a private matter- not everyone should have to suffer restrictions because one group feels uncomfortable with the book.
That being said, there are often books that contain graphic and often highly inappropriate material; I do consent that these books should be censored at the discretion of the parent, or anyone involved however, no one is forcing books upon others, so we should not be forced to remove them.
Banning books from public congregations is not what the government was intended to do. Topics that seem socially outlawed in public, let alone published, have been banned because their immoral content may have a negative effect on younger children.
The child would never be able to learn these things if the book was banned, nor be able to form his or her own opinion about that certain topic. However, having these stories banned all together would Just further shelter a child whose parents may not be willing to discuss these issues with them at all.
Even though hese books center around scary topics, they are educating children on real life matters that they will be exposed to once they venture into the world themselves. Healey goes on to make the point that the books should not be banned as well, since it is a matter of private opinion not one to be made by the public libraries of a community.
How to cite this page Choose cite format:Book-banning cases usually concern the protection of children and their innocence, but all that is happening is sheltering parents showing an awkward avoidance of their children’s confrontation with uncomfortable matters.
GUN CONTROL PERSUASIVE ESSAY. Persuasive essays are largely similar to argumentative ones, so much that it may be difficult to pinpoint the difference at first. Banned books are books or other printed works such as essays or plays which are prohibited by law or to which free access is not permitted by other means.
The practice of banning books is a form of censorship, from political, legal, religious, moral, or (less often) commercial motives. GUN CONTROL PERSUASIVE ESSAY. Persuasive essays are largely similar to argumentative ones, so much that it may be difficult to pinpoint the difference at first.
Essay, term paper research paper on Gun Control.
Gun Control Gun control is an action of the government that is supposed to reduce crime. I. Medieval Icelandic crime victims would sell the right to pursue a perpetrator to the highest bidder. 18th century English justice replaced fines with criminals bribing prosecutors to drop cases.