should the banned books be banned?

Question

banned books must had been readen insoafter by then?

Answer 1

To answer your first question, No. No way in this country should any book be banned COMPLETELY. However, there are some situations such as, let's face it, "The Joy Of SEX" should not be in a grade school library.

To answer your second question, ...huh?

Answer 2

It's important in this kind of discussion to carefully define your terms. Many people automatically say "books should NOT be banned, that' censorship.... what about the first amendment?'

Those are all valid concerns, but they are not necessarily what's going on whenever someone raises the "that's censorship!" cry.

Suppose we're talking about (for example):

a) the decision of a school library to purchase a particular book (and therefore NOT another, since budgets require them to pick and choose) or

b) a teacher's decision to require the reading of a particular book for 8th grade English

If a number of parents object to the contents and 'message' of this particular book and express their concerns, and the decision is subsequently made NOT to buy this book, or not to make it required reading... is that actually "banning" the book? (And it is certainly not book BURNING, as one answer seems to suggest.)

Now, let's suppose a public school class made the Bible (not just a chapter of two but the whole, or let's say, the entire New Testament) required reading? If some people raised some objections to this would you call THAT "banning" the Bible? Probably not (I'm sure the ACLU, great champions of freedom that they are, would fight for the Bible-readers.. don't you think? Not!)

Consider that

a) the first amendment right to free EXPRESSION, does not carry with it a requirement on anyone to purchase or read your work! (If a publisher decides not to print a particular book is that "book banning"? Maybe it's a reasonable business decision!)

b) that choosing NOT to read, stock or require a book is not automatically "censorship". Even more than that NOT choosing the book.... need not be censorship.
(I wrote it that way deliberately -- in some instances we specifically choose that we will not do something, in others we simply don't make the choice for it, perhaps because we chose something else instead)

c) that "censoring" a book or MOVIE (R-rated, X-rated), let's see --that is, deciding not to make it easily available, esp. to minors, is not quite the same as completely "banning" it, much less removing someone's "free expression" rights

I have a strong suspicion, most who have answered this question do not yet have children.... they may find themselves thinking this all through a bit more thoroughly in a few years. . .

---------------------

I'm afraid your second question is not at all clear. I'll guess that you are asking something like -- doesn't SOMEONE have to read them first to even talk about 'banning' them?

The obvious answer is yes... though if the kind of "banning" we're talking about is something like what I described above, it would NOT be an 'absolute ban' on the book, etc. So there really isn't a problem.

But perhaps you are thinking about the problem of someone's objecting to a book being used in their children's school, though THEY have not read the book. Of course, in that case, it is quite possible wrong ideas about the book will spread, and it will be evaluated unfairly. That's a legitimate concern, and we should certainly seek to have such decisions be well-informed... but do consider:

a) not EVERY person must read a WHOLE book to have some idea whether it will be suitable for, e.g., a junior high English class

b) we can not and do not stock EVERY book printed (your public school library is no the Library of Congress!). And so we have to evaluate and make decisions about which books to buy, and which not to. That usually means a book has to EARN the right to be considered. IOW, there must be good reasons for GETTING it. (Some complaints about "banning" assume that a book should automatically be bought, etc., UNLESS there are clear strong objections to it. That MAY very well apply to restricting someone's freedom of expression, but it is NOT how we want to choose what WE will buy, give to our children, etc.)

Answer 3

Most banned books are banned because they offend the sometimes puritanical views of the repressed yet very vocal minority. I want to laugh and cry when I see books like Harry Potter on ban lists because "they deal with witchcraft". Give me a break. They teach good lessons, and are not some anti-christian dogma.

Answer 4

Banning books is just plain wrong. And FYI, many times those who want to ban these books don't read them to begin with.

Answer 5

Books should not be banned, ever.

Answer 6

It is wrong to ban books.

Answer 7

Nothing should ever be banned.

Answer 8

um, helloooo, freedom of speech, etc!!! i hate banning books, thats so wrong

Answer 9

Absolutely not.

"Where they burn books, they will, in the end, burn human beings too." - Heinrich Heine