Essay about Banning Books

Is banning books unconstitutional? First amendment has a lot to do with this subject because of the freedom of speech and freedom to read. First amendment makes it harder for people to ban books because of all the freedoms, which should not make it a problem but obviously it's still a problem cause some people find certain things offensive. But that's why I say if you don't like what your reading, then don't read it but it's not that simple… Banning books expresses more about the censorship than the book itself. In which, Most parents should be aloud to say what their child can or cannot read or even censorship theres some inappropriate books that some people shouldn't be reading such as minors. But in which freedom of speech comes and changes the whole perspective.

Freedom to read and of speech means that you are able to read what you would like to read, and freedom of speech means you are able to say what you would like without somebody stopping you. Which could mean you can write what you want to write because writing is basically speaking in which there's freedom of speech. Most freedom of speech is true, but would you want your child reading about something very inappropriate just because of freedom to read or freedom of speech, no. If a parent or person doesn't like the book, maybe he shouldn't read it or let his children read it. But banning books takes the books off the shelves, causing children or just people in general to not have the right to read anything they want to read. But in this case if you ban books from one person you would have to make it fair and ban for all, in which some people might want to read certain books, but if they get banned they cant do so.

In most cases not all people should be banned from reading certain literature. Maybe instead of banning books the constitution can make it illegal for authors to even right these censored books. But if this is the case back comes the freedom of speech and freedom to read and freedom to write, because the first amendment, so authors should be able to write their stories how they would want to write their stories. Banning books might not be such a great idea but even tho its not it may help the generation we live in now, it may help censor certain things or topics from a minors reading.

So mostly this makes banning book not unconstitutional because it should be your choice to read the books you would like to read, and if you find it offensive don't read it.Like, people/ authors can write what they desire and its your choice to take offense to the opinions of the author or just the writing of the authors. The First Amendment states that you can write anything you would like or say anything you would like, then it should be ok if you write what you want and say what you want. But this should mean that it's ok to read what you want to read also. Most people should be able to write and or read what they want to read or write, but still some people shouldn't have the right to read certain things. It doesn't matter if another doesn't want to read a book because the author said something that was offensive, this is part of an author writing what the author pleases, and should teach a person to not read something that may offend you.

In my opinion, if you may be offended by a certain writing or book don't read it. Most people need to understand that there is such thing as freedom of speech weather something offends you it freedom of speech and people cant be offended by another's opinion. And everybody should have the right to read what they please besides minors because they are still minors and shouldn't have the right to read something that may be inappropriate for their minds. Most censored books should be for people 18 and older in my opinion because 18 and older have the right to have an opinion and are more of a mature audience to read something censored. And minors may not take certain things the right way.

Cite this page