Essay: Banned Books

Imagine if your favourite book was banned because of a religious belief, or because it was outdated. You searched the entire library in your school and the public library too, yet your book is nowhere to be found. The world is constantly banning books, and by doing so, they are taking away our power because knowledge is power.

First of all, the reasons for banning books are weak and only linked to personal beliefs and ideas, such as religion. An example to support this idea is that Dr. Suess' "Hop on Pop" was banned due to a mother thinking that it encouraged kids to hurt their dads. I think this is a very ridiculous reason for banning a classic book. Also, I do not agree that it would teach kids to hurt their dads, even though the books' contents can relate to that idea. Another reason why the reasons for banning books' ideas are weak is because another classic, "Charlottes Web" was also banned because people did not like the idea of speaking animals. Finally, Shel Silverstein's "Giving Tree" was banned because some groups said that the book was sexist and stereotypical.

Secondly, the people banning books are a minority in size, not a majority. There is no reason to fall victim to banning books. For example, in North Carolina (N.C), a mother protested on a book about U.S History in the perspective of a coloured man, and it got the book banned because it was outdated and it was inappropriate for kids. This proves how sometimes, the people banning books are a minority, compared to the majority. Another reason that supports the reason is that in the U.S, there is a annual book banning competition where most of the time, the book banned is voted off with the majority of people. However, one year, the votes for the banned book were only 1/5 of the votes. Finally, The Catcher Of the Rye By J.D. was also banned in 1960 Oklahoma with a small amount of votes. It was banned because a 11th grade teacher assigned it to his class.

Finally, some people might say by banning books they are saving their community. Firstly, this is false because when people take away our right to read books, they are taking away our power because "Knowledge is Power" from Sir Francis Bacon in Rome. This means if they will take away books, it will be the equivalent from taking away our power. Next, some people may have beliefs such as religion that may offend them, but they can avoid the books and choose other books. This is because some people may enjoy the book, and to have the book taken away from them is a serious offence to the community. Finally, because a book is banned, it may affect the GDP of libraries if the book is popular.

In conclusion, the reasons for banning books are weak and only linked to personal beliefs and ideas, such as religion. The people banning books are a minority in size, not a majority. There is no reason to fall victim to banning books, and some people might say by banning books they are saving their community. I believe that banning books is wrong and should only happen if many people agree with the ban, the reasons for the ban are strong, and it will truly save their community.