Banned Books

[Espionage 113]

After watching the Rainbow Dash reading episode and subsequently over analyzing it for any ultra deep philosophical meaning...I realized something. Lots of books around the world are banned. Maybe if it was a country like North Korea, I wouldn't mind as much. I expect it of them.

 

But what about the United States? Yeah, the U.S is turning into an aristocracy or fascism or statist worshipers or whatever viewpoint you hold. But still, there hasn't been a second revolution and the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights stands.

 

Here's a list of books that were banned at one point or another in the U.S: http://www.adlerbooks.com/banned.html

 

Here's a list of the most frequently challenged books of 2000-2009: http://www.ala.org/advocacy/banned/frequentlychallenged/challengedbydecade/2000_2009

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So what's the brony community's opinions on this? Personally, I find it absurd and truly appalling that a society that hails itself as a free society (at least by its people) have to resort to banning books because some people don't like what it says.

 

Free Speech - It doesn't matter whether or not you don't like or are offended by what other people say. They have the right to say it. Just as you have the right to call B.S.

 

Especially books like Harry Potter or The Giver. The former is a great seven part saga with lore that's on par with worlds like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars. The latter is an incredibly insightful book on utopias and statism. Maybe books like Mein Kampf, I can sort of understand (it's still history and no matter how much we stop talking about it, it happened either way).

[Chigens and Kay 3,831]

I don't really read books so my opinion go could either way. I mean I'm swaying more towards the side of no because of the free speech and freedom to express ourselves and whatnot. Also, America is a pretty bad country if you look at it so I'm not surprised books are being banned more often now anyway.

[Big Bill Hell 123]

nothing to see here, folks.

Edited December 23, 2015 by Big Bill Hell

[Nah 3,181]

Banning books is up to dictatorship governments, religious institutions, concerned parents, and people who don't want others to think freely.

 

Free country, books shall never be banned, no matter how offensive, immoral, or opposing, just don't read it. In fact if you ban a book, years later, classes nationwide are reading it. (To Kill a Mockingbird, The Great Gatsby, Catcher in the Rye, etc) While others become worldwide phenomenons or best sellers (Harry Potter, Twilight Saga, Hunger Games, etc)

Edited March 15, 2012 by Darkshadow Dash

[Mr. Wobbels 664]

Maybe books like Mein Kampf

 

I believe that the group that owns the copyright for Mein Kampf won't actually allow it to be printed, so kinda like self-censorship.

[Sepia-chan 495]

Twilight,Hunger Games, etc)

 

Don't you dare compare The Hunger Games to Twilight.

Anyway, I don't think books should be banned. It's just silly.

Also, on those pages it mentioned Goosebumps for being 'too scary'. That's a laugh, in second grade I was reading them and laughing at the ridiculous plots!

[Slendermane 474]

Wait a second, Fahrenheit 451 is banned in some areas? A book about burning books and the decay of society because of the destruction of the written word is being banned? Does anyone else find this funny?

 

I don't think books should be banned. With many of the books that I've heard about that have been banned, I just don't see why. To Kill a Mockingbird. It was banned because it uses the N-word a few times. But it only does this to speak against racism and intolerance. Bridge to Terrabithia. Because of the death scene? That was beautiful. It shows the fragility of life, and shows how we all affect one another. I loved that book (I need to get a copy).

 

Really the only book on that list that I can understand why it was banned was the His Dark Materials trilogy. That one has atheist themes, and is about killing an angel (being from another dimension) who is pretending to be God. I usually like Multiverse books and I'm pretty open about different religious ideas, but even I was a little insulted by that. I still don't think it should be banned though.

[Skullbuster 1,906]

i dont reallyread books, but i did lol at the fact it said huckleberry fin was banned,

 

which leads me to doubt the authenticity of that list

[Key Gear 6,662]

Books should not be banned. Period.

 

If a book offends people, then they should not read that book. They have the freedom to make this choice for themselves, but they should not be allowed to take the choice away from others.

 

Banning books is a slippery slope. Are we going to ban everything that is "offensive"? Who will be the one to control what is offensive and what is not offensive? One person's offensive reading material could easily be another person's work of great literature.

 

Even if a book is extremely controversial, banning a book is just hiding from the controversy. It is cowardice. Instead of banning the book, it makes much more sense to talk about the book and to discuss why the book's perspective is controversial.

 

If society bans everything that some group finds controversial, then we would eventually have no controversial literature whatsoever. The only reason that books are controversial is when they mention of include controversial matters. If we ban these books instead of discussing them, then we, as a society, will eventually lose our memory of these past controversies.

 

 

Eventually this would lead to a society that is controlled by a very small number of intellectual and political elites. Why would this happen? It is very simple. If you take controversial books away, then all that remains are books that conform and that enforce the ideal of conformity. People would become complacent because their beliefs are never challenged.

 

I would never want to live in a world where banning books is accepted as a solution. I find it very sad that so many books have been banned right here in the country that I call home.

 

By the way, the first list is authentic. It is a list of books that have been banned in the U.S. that also includes books that were banned in the past but were unbanned later.

[DashingRainbow36 263]

The institution of reading shouldn't be touched. Thats why I also find book burnings to be appalling.

 

It also pleases me to see that everypony has said "no" on the poll option.

Edited March 16, 2012 by DashingRainbow36

[Raiyny Day 71]

Books shouldn't be banned. Period.

[Luurilka 325]

Banning books = limiting certain free thoughts = government controlling what people think = government prevents people from getting the idea of having a revolution = government can abuse the people = the government abuses the people by becoming tyrants and making the people life horrible lives.

 

Okay, maybe the result wouldn't be this drastic, but still.

[Stoner Spike 185]

I'm so sorry about this, but when I read this title, I was instantly reminded of an episode of South Park...

 

 

BOOKS SHOULD NOT BE BANNED, YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU'RE READING!!!

[Crispy 5,563]

Not a single yes in the poll.

 

[Doctor XFizzle 8,651]

A book's message is greatly dependent upon how the reader interprets it and not everyone interprets things the same. Banning books, in a way, is forcing people to think a certain way. So yeah, books should never be banned.

[Fluttershy4life 150]

I don't think books should be banned because it's people's personal opinions if they find them offensive, don't like it don't read it. Don't go and make it some sort of lawsuit. I've read a ton of those books in both lists and it just amazes me some of the ones that were on that list

 

I'm so sorry about this, but when I read this title, I was instantly reminded of an episode of South Park...

 

 

BOOKS SHOULD NOT BE BANNED, YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU'RE READING!!!

 

LOL YES!!! it's actually because of that episode I read Catcher in the Rye XD

[Swordfishtrombone 384]

Not even books like Mein Kampf should be banned. No book I have ever read has ever not been useful or intresting in some way. And I've read quite a few controversial books in my time. And I always gotten something out of reading them. Always. And I have read Mein Kampf and many classics using the dreaded n word. On a related note who the fuck tries to ban Brave New World, Catch-22 and George Orwell books? Catch-22 isn't even that bad anyway. And Lord of the Flies....

[Fenrir 39]

If you dont like a book, dont read it. I hate banning of books. If a parent feels that a book is not appropriate for their children, then all they have to do is prevent them from reading it. My parents would not let me read Harry Potter until they read it themselves (only one book was out at this time, so it was not overly popular) because of the witchcraft in it. But, after they read it, they realized it was harmless, and allowed me to read it. If more people would do that, then this would not even be an issue. However, I dont think that schools should force you to read books that are mature, such as brave new world(orgy porgy), that book was just discusting, and I had to read it for an assignment.

[iDarthy 6]

Why should Mein Kampf and His Dark Materials be banned?

We live in the age of computers... research the book before you go out and buy it if you're worried about it having offensive content. I'm not one to get offended at anything so I really have nothing to worry about.

 

And yes... I know Mein Kampf was written by Adolf Hitler. Why should we ban and ignore it? Are we hoping that it just... vanishes? Are we hoping that the entire European theater of World War II vanishes along with it? No... that's stupid... it happened whether you wanted it to or not.

[SailorCardKnight 84]

While I don't read books either, im not keen on the idea of banning them, especially burning them. If you don't like it, don't read it, simple as that. There are far too many things in this world people would deem "offensive" its impossible to hide from it all. The only type of books I think should be banned (if any) are books like Mein Kampf. Its books like that that can lead to all sorts of real trouble. But then again, at the same time it has historical value that we shouldn't ignore and pretend it never happened....

 

i dont reallyread books, but i did lol at the fact it said huckleberry fin was banned,

 

which leads me to doubt the authenticity of that list

 

It seriously was banned at one point in history, same goes for alot of other books on that list. Heck, even Potter was at one point, and probably still is in some places. Religious nut jobs where going around preaching that Harry Potter taught witchcraft to children and even burned copies. One of my neighbors is one such person, thankfully when I told her that I enjoyed Potter but as nothing more than a fun, fictional story she was cool about it, but she said if I was getting into witchcraft because of it, that would be another thing (and she would have shoved the bible on me).

Edited March 16, 2012 by SailorCardKnight

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,892]

It really depends whom is issuing a ban and in what manner.

The head of state should under no circumstances place bans on books. They have no right to limit the thoughts of their population.

 

As far as religious institutions go, I'm undecided.

Throughout history religious institutions have placed bans on certain pieces of literature for essentially no reason. Many of the banned books had little to no opposition to the religious institution. It's as if they were deemed inappropriate without their content actually being reviewed.

However in modern day, the process of banning books has significantly improved in many religious institutions. To the point where many books in opposition to the institutions are no longer banned, but rather simply books that are outright offensive and are given thorough reviews before being deemed ban worthy.

 

Speaking from a Catholic point of view, I do agree with the banning of certain modern day pieces of literature.

Many of which were essentially porno's in book form featuring your most revered religious figures. Those acts of literature were appropriately deemed offensive and appalling and therefore banned.

 

I can agree simply with literature that is appropriately deemed as offensive/appalling after given proper review.

I see no reason why books simply presenting opposition should be banned.

 

 

My final verdict. When implemented appropriately by religious institutions, the banning of books can take place without limiting a free way of thinking. If it can be done without corruption and with appropriate guidelines, then I can agree with the banning of literature by religious institutions.

The Catholic Church in modern day has done a good job of reviewing material before placing bans and bans are now few and far between. The illogical book bans implemented during Medieval times have been abolished and the Catholic Church has taken up a better method of addressing questionable material.

Rather than labeling all questionable material as "forbidden", the Catholic Church now simply labels appropriate material as "approved" while not restricting your right to read the questionable material.

 

Like I said, when done properly, book bans can be implemented without disrupting your freedom of what you read. If you can implement bans without corruption and brutal methods of enforcing bans, then it can very well be acceptable.

 

 

Can a poll of "it's situational" or something along that lines be added? Neither yes nor no are my answer.

[cuteycindyhoney 13,282]

Has anyone ever watched the series "The Waltons"? There was one episode that was on this subject. It was during WWII. The townspeople heard that Nazis were burning books. This angered them, so the pulled all the German books from the library and started burning them in retaliation. John-boy, who had been taking German lessons, pulled one book out right before it started to burn. He gave it to his tutor and she started to read it aloud, translating it into English.

 

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

 

The townspeople became sickened at what they were doing, and put the fire out.

 

 

No book should be banned.

 

I don't know whether to laugh or cry after seeing Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451" listed as a banned book. "Of Mice and Men" was a truly powerful novel. It should never be banned either! I've read "Slaughterhouse Five" and will defend anyone's right to read it, even though I found it to be boring as sin!

[Starshine 16,330]

Free Speech is good, but it could be a very painful double-edged sword.

 

While banning good literature or science-y journals can be disastrous for our development, offensive writings and provocative papers aren't to be treated equally as the good ones and should never be allowed to be circulated freely.

 

But then again, let say group A published a paper that totally insults group B, which claimed that said paper is offensive to their belief and stuff. When the government banned the paper, group A can easily screams that their right for free speech is being oppressed! But when the paper is running freely across the street, group B is being harassed, which is not good yada yada

 

Double standards is delicious

[Espionage 113]

Free Speech is good, but it could be a very painful double-edged sword.

 

While banning good literature or science-y journals can be disastrous for our development, offensive writings and provocative papers aren't to be treated equally as the good ones and should never be allowed to be circulated freely.

 

But then again, let say group A published a paper that totally insults group B, which claimed that said paper is offensive to their belief and stuff. When the government banned the paper, group A can easily screams that their right for free speech is being oppressed! But when the paper is running freely across the street, group B is being harassed, which is not good yada yada

 

Freedom of Speech means that it doesn't matter whether or not somebody is offended. If you say something absolutely retarded, you still have the right to say it. Just like everyone else has the right to call you out on B.S.

[Starshine 16,330]

If the book only offended one individual, everything's cool

 

But what if the said book offended a school?

Humiliating a Mosque, or a Church?

Degrading an entire ethnic group?

Blackmailing a nation leader?

 

Should the book still be allowed to circulate freely?