Do you think the practice of banning books should be illegal?

Answer 1

The First Amendment already "makes it illegal" to ban books outright. However, this does not mean that in private places books cannot be banned. For example, families can lawfully ban books in their homes, private schools can ban them too, etc. The legal battle occurs over places like public schools, where elected school boards are presumably given the job to decide on the educational environment. It is for this reason why schools have power over student publications, for instance, sometimes leading to the absurdity of schools censoring student articles on free speech protected by the First Amendment!

Answer 2

I don't know that it should be "illegal"... Who "bans" a book anyways?

Libraries, school districts, and such can choose to not spend money on a book - thus "banning" it... But, the book is still available to people from outside sources... The real problem is the national book chains power... there are very few independent bookstores anymore, so if a book chain (Waldenbooks, Barnes & Noble, etc) chooses not to offer a book, that's worse than a ban... but isn't illegal... we have free enterprise, they aren't required to sell EVERY book written.

So in summary, no... banning books should not be illegal. You have to take a "ban" with a grain of salt. There is no book I'm aware of which can't be found as long as it's still in print somewhere - and many used bookstores around the country have copies of those... Maybe someday, books will become available online once they go out of print.

Answer 3

Well I am not to fond of some of them personally, but yes I feel banning books should be illegal. Anything and everything one can possibly read is right here on the computer. So why ban and burn books?

Answer 4

YEAH! Ban the Ban Man!

Answer 5

No, i wouldn't in any respect ban faith. maximum human beings use it as an emotional crutch. I pity them.... yet i would not harm them by employing having rid of their toddler blankets. greater than a number of folk choose faith to help them sleep at night. Bonus question: No, i would not create a regulation a pair of specific concept prepare..... that's in simple terms basic experience. human beings like to disagree on faith. in case you seem at any faith-- that's going to splinter with the aid of the years into distinctive factions-- so whether I did institute a definite faith or concept-- human beings could promptly splinter off from it... and why no longer? Why no longer enable human beings have self assurance regardless of non secular nonsense floats their boat. as long as we've separation of church and state.... i'm cool with all that. that's a large freedom that the founders of united states of america have been clever sufficient to permit because of the fact no it is elementary to agree on that besides.

Answer 6

I think instead of banning, books should have ratings, just like movies.

Answer 7

Definitely, in public organizations, buildings, etc.
But I don't know that we could really tell private organizations that they cannot limit themselves. That would be like us telling the church they had to carry the koran.

But no group should have the ability to tell another group what they can or can't have.

Answer 8

Yes. There is several books which need to be banned now.

Answer 9

yup

maybe ok to keep young people from reading some things

adults should have access to anything they want to read or that has been written

Answer 10

yes