There is an epidemic in our country, and
it is growing stronger daily. Someone is not
being allowed to
live her/ his life to the fullest degree because of this disease. Its traits
can be
found in every
city, town, and state across the country. No, this epidemic is not AIDS or
cancer:
however, if left
alone, its long term effects can be just as detrimental. The name of the
epidemic is
censorship, and
last year, the number of censorship cases in the school systems across America
reached a new high
because certain interest groups feel they know what is best for students to
think. The
censorship of academic materials must be banned because no group has the right
to
impose its ideas
of politics, morality, or religion to a group of students who have the right to
inform themselves
on all subjects and to exercise their own sense of reason.
"The injustices of censorship were in
full force at least as early as 1644, the year English
writer John
Milton wrote his famous Areopagitica to defend freedom of the press" (Tax
154).
Last year alone,
there were more instances of school censorship than any year since 1982 (Clark
171). The most
challenged books deal with the following subjects: sex, feminism, teen
rebelliousness,
AIDS, homosexuality, the negative African-American experience, and
non-Christian viewpoints. The overwhelming majority of book objections come
from parents in the
community who
have no authority on what should be censored and what should not be censored
(Clark 54).
Deanna Duby, director of educational policy for the American Way, expects
censorship to be
on the rise in the future. (Solin 98).
The fundamental purpose of schools is to
allow everyone to have the opportunity to learn,
Thus, whenever a
school system denies a student materials because of censorship, that school
system is acting
against its original purpose. School libraries are a distinctively American
institution,
invented to insure that lack of money to buy books would never mean that anyone
was
denied the chance
to learn. "The American Library Association has long believed that it is
the
responsibility of
libraries to furnish to the public widest range of materials" (Opp. Views.
141). It
is right to
expose children to the weaknesses of our society and encourage them to improve
society. Students
should be taught objectively in order for them to make unbiased decisions. That
is why it is in
the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest
diversity
of views and
expressions, including those which are unorthodox or unpopular with the
majority.
The school
systems do not need to endorse every idea or presentation in the material they
make
available. It
would conflict with the public interest for them to establish their own political,
moral,
or aesthetic
views as a standard for determining what materials should be published or
circulated.
Educational
institutions serve their educational purpose by helping to make available
knowledge
and ideas
required for the growth of the mind and the increase of learning. They do not
foster
education by
imposing themselves as mentors for patterns of their own thought. It is wrong
that
what one man can
read should be confined to what another thinks proper. What is obscene to one
person may merely
be tiresome to another (Alpert 66). Therefore, if we were to censor every
book that someone
found obscene, then there would be nothing left to read.
Censorship violates our fundamental rights
and our sense of dignity. Parents have a right
to determine what
their own children read, but not what others read. Students should be allowed
to determine for
themselves whether they agree or disagree with what they see, hear, and read
based on values
instilled by their families. In society, everyone is guaranteed the right to
life,
liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness. In order for these rights to be protected, the government
devised the First
Amendment. The First Amendment absolutely ensures that Congress shall make
no law respecting
an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the
freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peacefully
assemble
(E.W. 57). The
censor is always quick to justify his functions in terms that are protective of
society. But the
First Amendment, written in terms that are absolute, deprives the State of any
power to pass on
the value, the propriety, or the morality of a particular expression.
Therefore,
censorship
contradicts the First Amendment. Censorship robs the individual of his or her
sense of
dignity because
censorship, in any form, represents a lack of trust in the judgement and
discrimination of
the individual (Opp. Views. 171). Censorship means that a majority seeks to
impose its
standards on a minority; hence, an element of coercion is inherent in the idea
of
censorship.
Without considering censored material and using it to question what is thought
to be
true, the true
material will lose its credibility, In other words, even if something is entirely
true,
without
questioning it and seeing the other side of an issue, it will lack the
essential backing and
become idle.
Today, there are many signs that our
society is in trouble. This is nothing new. All
societies are
always in trouble. However, as long as the First Amendment is in effect, as
long as
individuals have
the opportunity to examine all the evidence and to make informed judgements,
there is a chance
that we will find ways of reforming our problems. Education is set up to
benefit
the student,
censorship does not allow for this to happen. Censoring academic materials is
presenting a
greater evil because it is not allowing for students to maximize their
guaranteed
rights.
Censorship hinders a student's ability to progress into the future and take
responsibility for
his / her
actions; therefore, censorship must come to an end. If the epidemic of
censorship
continues to
flourish in our societym we will lose all chances of reforming society, When
censorship wins,
everybody loses.
WORKS CITED
"Burn, Baby,
Burn." Entertainment Weekly 6 Mar. 1992: 54
Clark, Charles.
"School Censorship." The CQ Researcher Feb 1993: 147-156
Hollis, Alpert.
Censorship: For and Against. New York: Hary, 1992.
"Is School and
Library Censorship Justified?" Opposing Viewpoints Jan. 1985: 137-174.
Solin, Sabrina.
"Don't Read This." Seventeen September 1994:98
Taz, Meredith.
"Keep Censors Out of School Libraries." Parents Magazine April 1995:
171.
No comments:
Post a Comment