Banning books
Please elaborate, if possible.
2006-09-28 05:19:45 · 36 answers · asked by Phoenix Rising 6 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
This is a question forum and I asked a question, Acquiredstoy. Breeding among 1st cousins is banned, but I see your parents had no problem.
2006-09-28 05:24:47 · update #1
Books should NEVER be banned. Freedom of speech isn't just an American thing...
Granted, we should know what our kids are reading, and limit bad influences in that way, but in past years, writing was the only way that people could make a lasting, uncorruptable impression on society. Anyone who wants to, can read what Orwell (or any other writer) wrote, and it's word for word, unchanged after all these years. What would we know of Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, if someone had decided it was too violent 2700 years ago?
Of course, with music being banned years ago, and various people suggesting book-burnings again, I think it won't be long before they actually start trying to ban books again. And who knows what they'll try to do to regulate the internet?
Good question.
2006-09-28 05:28:12 · answer #1 · answered by 42ITUS™ 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Banning books is basically promoting ignorance.
There is something intriguingly interesting about groups & societies who ban and burn written testimonies, simply because these books do not fit in their own little points of view...
The Nazis did alot of book burning, thinking that getiing rif of the written evidence would make the concept and ideas disappear forever.
What I find funny is the fact that people appear to be threatened by the availability of information. This is a concept I must admit I do not understand. If you do not agree with a book or the ideas it promotes, then you have a choice to NOT read it, pure and simple. Why would you forceful prevent others to read it by banning it? I think it's a very closed-minded and selfish way of dealing with the fear of information accessibility.
The best technological advancement human beings have done is not the ipod or the laptop, nor is it the polluting automobile or nuclear missile... It is the invention of the printed/written word.
It is though books that cultures survive...
Cheers, hope this answers your question a bit!
2006-09-28 05:47:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am against banning books. I fell that no one has the right to ban something that is for the enjoyment of everyone. It is freedom of speech, and if you dont like something in particular, then dont read it!
I know there are books out there that I may not necessarily agree with, but who am I to say what everyone in the world can or cannot read?
I figure there is no reason for me to pick up a book and complain about it if I do not agree with its contents- its a personal choice to read.
2006-09-28 05:26:43 · answer #3 · answered by glorymomof3 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Books should never be banned. If I don't like a book I don't read it. The notion of banning books indicates that someone is having difficulty minding their own business and allowing others the same privilege.
I find it interesting to see if those who want to ban books can spell, punctuate, and use good grammar.
2006-09-28 05:25:23 · answer #4 · answered by connie_mspt 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
against, if people dont like the book then they shouldnt buy it, Life is free speech, you should be able to say and write whatever the hell you want. But that doesnt mean other people have to listen or agree. Sure certain books in school shouldnt be read, like violent ones, but otherwise. People should just let this subject go. I think we should do a ban on idiots. before a ban on books.
2006-09-28 05:22:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
you cant bann books
if you do not many people will finish school and colledge with degree's
even though the net may have them online
it wont bring the same learning as a book which is in your hand will bring
plus if you came online to study there will be so many distraction that you wont do your assignments to the best of your ability
also think of it this way
if you wanted to have a page or more to come back later, to finish the study and you cant get to a computer right away
if just doesn't make sience
even if you printed out the page
it can get loss at anythime
a book is less likely to get misplaced
2006-09-28 05:40:06 · answer #6 · answered by annie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Against it. Books are freedom of speech, but in writing. There are amazing books out there that people want to ban because of controversy or "hidden meanings." If they are going to do that, then they should probably start banning certain paintings too. The whole thing is, no one is MAKING anyone read these books. If you want to read it, and you get offended, then that's your fault for reading it.
2006-09-28 05:22:26 · answer #7 · answered by Danielle M 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It depends. I personally think books shouldn't be banned it's where we get our informaiton from. It's a part of our lifes and people should stop trying to ban. Because probably the only reason why they do chose to ban is because they don't understand the material.
2006-09-28 05:23:10 · answer #8 · answered by chedderapples 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I'm not. I believe that people have a freedom of speech, and that this applies to printed material as well. If you don't agree with the book's contents then don't read it. I do think however that schools should have a right to control what material goes into their libraries. There are books out there that are not suitable for children or younge adults.
2006-09-28 05:25:02 · answer #9 · answered by b_luvedbaby 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am against banning books. They banned books in Nazi Germany, then banned books under Stalin. During both of those times many books were burned...no one can know what knowledge might of been lost because of it
2006-09-28 05:30:36 · answer #10 · answered by SKully 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋