Censorship: Opposing Viewpoints
Censorship is one of the gauges of civilization; it is a measure of the rationality and liberalism of an individual in an evolving society. Its origins are unclear, however, it is certain that it has been around for thousands of years. Fustel de Coulanges said in his writings: the citizens of the ancient city-state "knew neither liberty in private life, liberty in education, nor religious liberty. The human person counted for little against that holy and almost divine authority which was called the country or state" (Intro xii). The powers in charge during these pre-Renaissance times controlled what the everyday person saw or heard often because the opinions of a few could challenge this "divine authority" that was never questioned. "Often the church's attempt to keep the gospel out of the hands of their congregations was based on a belief that untutored minds might be led into heresy by reading the Gospel, through misunderstanding" (Intro xiv). Today, the nature of the community determines the goals for the selection of library and classroom materials. "In public libraries, the curriculum can be equated to any topic with sufficient community interest to warrant inclusion in the collecti
on" (Intro 1). Occasionally, some of these materials are challenged by a person or group concerned with its appropriateness. "The results has two opposing points of view: one believes that more suitable materials can be found...the other maintains that intellectual freedom can be upheld only if students are given an opportunity to examine any available relevant materials in order to gain the insights needed to reach their own conclusions" (Intro 1). "Reasons for cited censorship have included drugs, governmental or administrative criticism, language, morals, politics, racism, religion, sex, and war. The materials involved have been described as being biased, communistic, controversial, filthy, immoral, inaccurate, lascivious, lewd, obscene, poorly written, pornographic, pro-Chicano, or pro-Negro, questionable, racy, radical, risque, sacrilegious, "smut," un-American, and violent" (Intro 10). I can come to the personal conclusion that I am against censorship after going through the censorship unit in class. Taking into account the pro-censorship arguments based on morality and the anti-censorship arguments bases on one's intellectual freedom I have come to realize that any knowledge, bad or good, is our right to obtain if we want to do so. If I oppose what a book has to say I will put it down, and if I do not agree with what I see portrayed in a movie I will not watch it. However, who am I to tell others not to enjoy these things just because I do not like them? Children should be allowed to make up their own minds about what they believe; keeping things from them could possibly do more harm then good. Restricting anything from a child makes him or her attracted to it just that much more. I feel the real joy from something may be from the excitement one gets from going against someone else's wishes. Watching Harry Potter has not turned any child to Satanism and learning about the reproductive system and sex in school has not added in any way to my normal teenage hormones. I feel the arguments of the censors are purely based on opinion and not fact, they are trying to keep their feelings of what is right and wrong in the mainstream and kicking down anyone who voices a different opinion. Expanding on Jerry Falwell's ideals is founder of the conservative group Eagle Forum, Phyllis Schlafly. She also wants to bring religion back to our schools and wonders, "who gave the curriculum dictators the authority to select books that challenge the children's religion, values, or parents?" (Schlafly 183). Schlafly suggests censors who ban educational materials are just concerned people "exercising their First Amendment right of free speech and their parental rights to protect the faith and morals of their children" (Schlafly 184) and goes on to give a sampling of these complaints including parents in New Hampshire objecting to the use of "Dungeons and Dragons" in a junior high school because it promotes Satanism and community members in Texas objecting to the Invitation to Psychology textbook because it "very blatantly tea
Some common words found in the essay are:
Viewpoints Censorship, Supreme Court, Jesus Christ, Madison Palestinians, Card Unlike, Scott Card, Guardians Plato, Phyllis Schlafly, Bernard Shaw, Kurt Vonnegut, academic freedom, moral upbringing, phyllis schlafly, jerry falwell, card 71, falwell 165, restricting materials, intro 1, intellectual freedom, divine authority,
Approximate Word count = 2058
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
