# data[].attributes.body
I believe students should be allowed to read books they want. Books shouldn't be banned just because a few students or their parents didn't like them. Literature is a way for children to be able to learn about the world. According to NCAC, they say that "The First Amendment safeguards the right of every American to speak and think freely. Its promise of freedom of expression and inquiry is important to educators and students." The first amendment does protect our rights to freely choose what children want to read. I personally think that parents shouldn't decide to ban books for the whole grade or class, but just their children. Laurie Anderson also believes that some parents should not ban books for everyone. "And that's when I realized — adults have to kind of suck it up, and to start being honest with kids about what is the reality of the world." She thinks that parents, instead of banning books from children, should be honest with their children and show then about the world.

# data[].attributes.body
Students should be allowed to read any written works that they desire. If a library were to prohibit a book, ideas would be barred from being spread. This is outright unconstitutional. An institution may not legally censor a book based upon biases. According to Laurie Halse Anderson, “Censorship is most often a reflection of the fears of the censors, their fears that they are not up to the task of having conversations about these hard things.” I can relate my own beliefs with Anderson's. In my opinion, censorship is taken advantage of by people to subdue specific concepts and beliefs that they refuse to support. When an idea or belief is censored, it is ignored. I believe it is not just to ignore a perception due to the fact that you oppose it. By ignoring opposing ideas, you isolate yourself from other people and reality. As stated by Laurie Halse Anderson, "One of the dirty little secrets of America is how many people who appear to be successful on the surface, in terms of income and owning your house and things like that.” Anderson then explains, “But actually underneath it, you’ve got a parent who’s got some bad addiction issues, usually with alcohol but more often these days with pills." I agree with Anderson on this idea. Adults are always concerned with displaying the up sides of life. They censor out the dark sides of life such as addiction and depression to paint the perfect picture. The truth is that life is not perfect. By censoring out the dark sides of adulthood, adults do not help students but hurt them.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion banning book for children is not the correct approach. The author of Speak, Laurie Anderson, says that adults have to be “honest with kids” and “help prepare them” for the world (Laurie Hansel Anderson pn ‘Speak’ Censorship, and ‘The Impossible Knife of Memory’ P3). Speak is a book about a young girl who was raped and how she reacts after the assault. This book has been challenged and banned multiple times. Yes, I understand that parents don't want their children reading about such sensitive content, but how else are they going to learn. They will be put in the dark until the time comes when the parent feels comfortable explaining. Parents say that exposing children to sensitive content; sex, drugs, profane language, and alcohol; will influence children to do such things, but I don't agree with that. I, as a young adult who has read about such things, have not thought about or acted upon such things. These examples in books that kids read usually end up also explaining the negative result of such acts and how they can hurt and ruin lives. Parents want to shield their children from the flaws in life, but how else are they going to know what they are and how to react once they are faced with them? Books that talk about these things is a way to help children “understand their own lives through the minds of others” (Banned Book: Learning from our past mistakes P12). Literature is a way for children to learn about the world around them. It explains to them what is happening and how others can relate. Books discuss the things that are uncomfortable for some people while sharing other people's experiences. They reassure people that they are not alone. Stories like Speak open the door to reality and give the story to others. It lets people know they are not alone.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that parents have the right to challenge books that they don’t want their children to read.

In Eric Manning’s passage about banning books, he says, “I think we're no longer talking about book-banning or censorship. I think we're talking about parenting.” It is the right for parents to choose what they want their kids to read. If the book discusses topics the parents aren’t comfortable with, they have the right to challenge it. Let's say a child selects a book that talks about drugs and a parent does not want their child informed about this in school. The parent can voice their disapproval with evidence to school administrators, and leave it to the administration and finally the school board to judge the suitability of the book. Later Manning talks about books that young kids read and says, “The fact is, there are plenty of good reasons to object to books with these content elements in them, especially when such young children are the ones who have access to these books.” Parents can challenge a book that has sexual content or smoking in it especially when there is a young child reading it. People on the other side would argue to watch what your child reads. That isn’t always possible because a child could read at school while the parent isn’t around. I have a little brother; my parents and I don’t want him to learn inappropriate topics that, at his age, he would not be able to understand. If a book has graphic or inappropriate content, parents can challenge its placement in the school, and then let the school board make a final decision.

# data[].attributes.body
I personally believe that a couple of parents belief of a book should not decide if it's on the shelves or not. I understand parents not wanting their own kids not reading certain books but you can't take the book away from everyone else too. Certain kids parents let them read whatever they want. Neil Gaiman certainly relates to that because he states,"my parents didn't have any kind of rules about what I couldn't read". If you don't want your child to read something then don't let them, but don't ruin it for all the other kids.An article states,"However, as someone who thrived on reading banned books in high school, I can proudly say I have no desire to become an assassin, psychopath, revolutionary or Satanist after reading books like Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451" or John Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath." The quote is basically saying that reading these books doesn't mean you will be a problem to society. Books being banned should not be decided by people who fear the unnecessary.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion, banning books is a concept that should only limit the family or friends of people who find certain books inappropriate. It just doesn’t make sense as to why something that may offend you but not others should be completely unavailable. It’s understandable that everyone has their own opinion on different topics, but just because you may find something offensive doesn’t mean that someone else will. I also believe that controversial topics are how people learn about the world and if one person decides that it’s inappropriate for the whole world to read, then that causes issues. Laurie Halse Anderson has a similar opinion when she says, "And that's when I realized — adults have to kind of suck it up, and to start being honest with kids about what is the reality of the world. We have to be honest with them about what we've been through, because we have to help prepare them." I completely agree with her and think it’s better for people to be aware of the real world. At the same time, I realize that there are mature books that young children shouldn't be exposed to. As a solution, I think parents or guardians should only restrict content for their children rather than for everyone.

# data[].attributes.body
Students and children alike should have the right to select books of their taste. While I understand parents’ concerns for their children’s safety, I can hardly fathom as to why educators and adults would ever consider that novels can corrupt juveniles. During an interview, Neil Gaiman, a respected author who explores controversial subjects through his writing, admits that when he writes violent scenes, he wants people to realize that it is an inexcusable misconduct. More likely than not, authors will not brand violence as necessary or pleasant. Simply, conflict is used for the literary development of a book’s plot or theme, and I expect parents to perceive it not as mindless slaughter, but as an imitation of life. Adolescents are not inspired to merrily commit homicide by reading violence in books; ironically, it typically teaches the youth life morals that emphasizes how the world is full of flaws. Later in the discussion, Gaiman truthfully answers, “…people… are rather better at censoring themselves when they read books.” Similar to Gaiman’s opinion, I believe that children can distinguish if a novel’s contents are too dull or disturbing for their preference. Blinding children from the cruelty of the world will do nothing except retain powerful knowledge that they will continue to seek and discover. Stories broaden the reader’s imagination and awareness regarding ideas, thoughts, and people, and that’s why I think kids should be entitled to read works that satisfy and connect with their interests. According to "It's not censorship, it's parenting!" by Eric Manning, people will always analyze issues in drastically numerous ways, whether it’s about political correctness, sexual explicitness, offensive language, violence, or age appropriateness.  In retrospect, it may not be the best decision to thrust a kid into reality by supplying the child with unrealistic tales – for example, there will never be a Prince Charming or a “happily ever after” in life. However, that’s the remarkable thing about allowing kids to read whatever they want because as soon as they finish reading a blissful-ending story, they can dive into a book that’s all about the imperfections of life. In the end, we must all respect each other’s standards when it comes to a sensitive topic such as censoring books. Nevertheless, that does not change the fact that since everyone has their own view on matters, one’s belief does not dominate over others.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe books should not be banned from all people only that there will be an appropriate age restriction. With the exception that parents should approve of the books that their children read since the parents should have complete control of what their children learn in the environment that they are in. I also believe that if the parents of another child didn’t mind them reading the book, I believe those kids may communicate with the other that were incapable of reading the book.  The parents would not be happy which is why there should be an age restriction for what they read and or is able to see. For every age there is some book that should not be seen. Also religious beliefs can contemplate with the religion itself. As the family may be offended by the certain book it shouldn’t be shown to the child nor the family. Age restriction comes as “smaller authorities generally ban books for specific content issues such as sexual explicitness, the use of offensive language, political incorrectness, and violence. In many cases, these bans are the result of concerns over the appropriateness of certain books for young readers” which should be respected. As respected “this means that most modern book bans are the result of efforts by concerned parents or school officials looking to protect children from exposure to certain themes or ideas contained within targeted books that they view as objectionable” for their kids which can be seen as interest in what the child can learn from the inappropriate/ age level books .Books should not be banned since the freedom of reading does apply to everyone however I think that it is the parents decision of what the child may read. Of course as the child becomes older, the inappropriate levels in books will change.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it is a must to have books available for children so they can learn and grow up. If a parent or sibling doesn’t enjoy a child reading a book they can speak out and say they don’t like that book, or keep it away from their young ones. Just because a book may have certain things that you feel violated by doesn’t mean you have to take it away from all children, because certain ones may need it.  In Laurie Halse Anderson's book Speak The Protagonist is raped when they were young, and so was a little girls sister, she began to explain what happened "and as a result of the trauma, was suffering from depression and drug use." Which is to show how one of the most challenged books Speak is important to some people. As well as kids need to grow up and learn the world isn't perfect and banning books is against the first amendment in the USA, which is the freedom of speech. As well people who are transgender or feel uncomfortable about their gender may need a book to read to become more comfortable and realize that they are not alone. It is important we don't ban books for certain things they say but It will harm many people when it can be easily avoided.

# data[].attributes.body
Personally, I believe that banning books is not the right way to censor what children do or do not read. Students and any children should be able to chose what they read. If they are allowed to chose what they read then they will lose interest in reading books. Tara Soneshine wrote that "Lawmakers in Virginia want to become the first state in the country to allow parents to block their children from reading certain books in school." I agree with Tara when I say that book banning is ridiculous. Books are how we learn about the world and by censoring what we read, we are blocking are brains from learning about the topics discussed in the books. Just because a few parents don't like certain books doesn't mean that the other kids shouldn't be able to read them. I understand if a parent doesn't want their child to read a certain book because of religious reasons, but the child should have a choice. It is important that we can read what we want because it may also help in real life situations. If they wish not to read the book, then they will stop.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion, if the book is appropriate for the student then they should be able to read any book of their interest. Students of all ages should be able to find a book that gains their attention then they are going to want to read more and more. If many of the books that some students may like have been or is getting banned then they will eventually lose the interest of reading. Though I also believe that parents should have the right to control what their child reads but shouldn’t put it where other students can’t read and enjoy the book anymore too. Some books like Speak by Laurie Anderson though have been challenged and sometimes banned from places gives children a lesson to speak up about what may happen to them in everyday life. Anderson believes that adults need to start being honest with their children and to stop hiding things from them that may be contain in books because they should start preparing children for the real world. Laurie Anderson says that "The difference between the mindset of a censor and the mindset of someone like me is I believe in preparing kids for the real world, and the censors think they’re trying to protect them," ( Laurie Anderson on  'Speak,' Censorship, and 'The Impossible Knife of Memory' P5 ). Anderson’s writing not only gives students all over the world overall support to do things and find motivation but gave the readers of her books the courage to help others everywhere. I believe that children of all ages should have the freedom to read a variety of books of their choice and that books should not be banned in libraries.

# data[].attributes.body
Personally, the freedom of reading anything makes the United States special. In a foreign country, the government often silences, say, rallies and protests, and with no one opposing their rule, no one has a say. The article “Censorship in three metaphors” makes a great point, saying that challenging and banning books is a direct violation of the First Amendment, which declares everyone has the freedom of speech, press, opinions, et cetera. Although parents have the right to say that books have to be taken off the shelves, the school counts as a federal branch, which is higher than selfish acts of censorship by parents. The article “‘Goodnight Moon’ and Book Banning in America” claims that Virginia passed a bill to let parents block certain books from their children. In my opinion, I think this is extremely narrow-minded, because some parents think that books with “sexually-explicit” content would have negative messages that would lead to delinquency, but most interviews with authors and book banning would say otherwise. I believe book banning is almost identical to the argument that violent games make children violent. Sure, there are situations that may seem bad, but the ratio of good to bad is simply too drastic of a difference.

# data[].attributes.body
Banning books isn't the right way to teach kids about life. Parents are the main source of censoring their kids. Parental censorship shuts down their ability for their children to read books that they are interested in. However, some parents take bigger matters into their own hands and attempt to ban books that they believe students should not read. I think that the challengers' motivations in banning a certain novel or comic, they don't want their kids exposed to what happens in this world. In the Bustle article, "Laurie Halse Anderson on 'Speak,' Censorship, and 'The Impossible Knife of Memory,'" Anderson expresses that there is a difference between protecting and preparing. Preparing for the world includes being exposed to the crazy things that happen in it, to be aware of what people are like and history that comes with it. According to "Censorship in Three Metaphors," another aspect that parents don't see is that when they over look crucial information because of gays or sexual assault, they miss out on the history that comes with homosexuality and/or assault. In the end, once these kids are older they will witness some type of people that they never new were apart of this world. Therefore, books should not become banned nor challenged in schools nor libraries just because there are dangers that you do not want your daughter/son to know about. Knowing about these dangers make them mentally stronger and prepared.

# data[].attributes.body
I do not believe that books should be banned from the library. One reason that books should not be banned is it is a kids right to read what she or he wants to read. Just because a single parent does not want their kid reading a certain book, does not mean every kid can not read that book. That would be unfair for the kids that have the right to read what hey want to read. Another reason a kid should be able to read what they what is because they will be exposed to the content in the book eventually. When kids are not allowed to do something, like read a book, it tempts the even more to read the book. They kids whether parents like it or not will be exposed to the content that you try to hide from them.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that there shouldn’t be book banning. In the article on ncac it says that “The First Amendment safeguards the right of every American to speak and think freely.” This is important because it says that every American has the right to speak and think freely which means that they can read what they want to. In the Bustle article Laurie Halse Anderson says “adults have to kind of suck it up, and start being honest with kids” I think this is true because if parents keep limiting everything their child reads their kid will not understand a lot of things in the real world. I think that if you don’t like the things in a book then just don’t read it and if you're a parent and you don’t want your kid to read something then make them not read it but don’t make everyone quit reading a book.

# data[].attributes.body
All over the world people have different opinions about books. Some people may think school and libraries should censor certain books due to specific content. Other people think that adults and kids should be able to read whatever they want. I believe that kids should be able to self censor themselves on what they may or may not feel comfortable to read. “Although parents and guardians have the right to demand that their child will not read a particular book or view a specific film, no one parent or guardian has the right to demand that an entire classroom, school, or district should not read a particular book or view a film.” This quote was from an article supporting people and kids right to freedom to read. It’s explaining how some parents can limit what their kids read due to age or religious beliefs but should not be able to take certain reading rights away from certain schools or libraries. “ Banning books or screening out "dangerous" issues or "controversial" ideas from classroom discussion typifies a school dedicated to indoctrination. And when the rights to inquire and question and even doubt are denied young people, education inevitably degenerates into indoctrination.” This quote is saying that by limiting kids on what to read based off only a few people’s opinion it could limit their knowledge of the real world. The reasons people have for challenging these book can happen in the real world and kids and teens need to be prepared for the world.

# data[].attributes.body
Students should be able to read any piece of literature that they feel is appropriate for themselves. It is a form of entertainment, and therefore should be free for anybody to read. Laurie Halse Anderson confessed that her pediatrician friend had many "sexually assaulted teenage patients use Speak [Anderson's book] as courage to confess." If Anderson's book was banned completely for all teens to read, their confessions would never have happened. Parents believe that the the topic of rape included in young adult books are unsuitable for their children to read. However, this "inappropriate" topic inspired many to become brave and speak out on their experiences. This otherwise banned book helped many, which is why children should be able to have the freedom of choosing any book to read. Additionally, books do not traumatize teens. If they deem the book to violent or graphic, they will stop reading the books. Neil Gaiman shares that he "definitely [wasn't] traumatized for life." Gaiman's parents allowed him to read anything he wanted. He read some books that would be considered unfitting for his age. This however, did not affect him in the long run, and he is now a successful writer. This outcome disproves many parents' theories that books should be banned. Teens should have free access to any book that they want to read. It is their Constitutional right to be able to read anything they desire.

# data[].attributes.body
The freedom to read is and will always be, important to kids all around the world. The purpose of “some books are to “challenge us, make us think, make us wonder, make us doubt” from Donelson in an article Censorship in three metaphors. Reasons why these books are banned, are for the following reasons: dangerous issues or controversial ideas. One reason why these books are being challenge, is sexual content. However, this is, and will be, part of the real world. Asking my own guardian about this question, my guardian would answer “I can’t protect my child forever; so, I’ll let my child read the book”. Another reason why kids should have the ability to read these books, are so they can expand their knowledge on the reality of the world we all live in. The people(mainly parents) that goes against the freedom to read, are “try[ing] to keep people from seeing life as anything other than self”. The real world is a cruel place, it’s not a perfect place where everyone cares about each other as if the other was them self. So teaching children about the reality of the world with gays, drugs, sexual assault, etc… prepares them for the real world that will face them in the future.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that parents should not try to interfere with other peoples kids and only worry about their own. All parents have different paces that they want their kids to learn about life, but they should not try  to interfere with other peoples kids because their view does not match yous. I also believe that parents should be aware that, kids talk, and what Lauire Anderson said in the Bustle.com article,  Laurie Halse Anderson on 'Speak,' Censorship, and 'The Impossible Knife of Memory, " adults have to kind of suck it up, and to start being honest with kids about what is the reality of the world. We have to be honest with them about what we've been through, because we have to help prepare them". Parents can't always have the world go their pace for their kids, there might be accidents that force you to tell something that you were saving for later, and parents have to accept this possibility, and prepare for it. Parents should not try to push their ideals and beliefs on other people, and should just except the way the world is, and go with it, not against it.

# data[].attributes.body
Restrictions on what children are allowed to read have caused conflict for years. Parents restrict what their kids can read out of fear. They fear that they will ask questions about uncomfortable topics or be influenced by something negative inside of a book. In Neil Gaiman’s article he explains that banning books violates the first amendment. Which gives the right to freedom of speech as well as other things. Books are banned because of content that offends someone or a group of people. This leads to kids not understanding the world fully. For example, kids may not learn about racism or how bad the world really is because parents will not allow them to read books containing that information. They will find out eventually, so why not tell them now. The more they know now, the easier it will be for them later when they enter the real world. Books that are banned may contain knowledge that could  help someone. Laurie Halse Anderson, the author of Speak tells a story in her article about a girl she met at one of her presentations who admitted her sister was raped and started using drugs. In this case Anderson’s presentation on her book helped someone come forward and admit what happened. She also says, “ adults have to kind of suck it up, and to start being honest with kids about what is the reality of the world. We have to be honest with them about what we've been through, because we have to help prepare them.”

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that parents should take care of their own children, and not interfere with other people's children. Parents should be able to take their kids at the pace that they want them to go, but as said in

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that all children and teens are entitled to choose whether or not they want to read a particular book. Middle and high school students should not be restricted to certain literature and exposed to another. If a parent or guardian of a child does not want them to read a specific book then they themselves should inhibit their children from reading it. Parents should not force their beliefs on other children, and prohibit them from reading too. In the article Laurie Halse Anderson on ‘Speak’ Censorship and ‘The Memory of the Impossible Knife’ the author, Rachel Simon, uses several of Anderson's interviews and stories to show how censorship is not protecting children from reality, it's making them unaware of it.  In the article, one of Anderson's quotation states "She [the girl] was crying because she didn't know that anybody could be okay after being raped," Anderson tells me via phone. "And that's when I realized — adults have to kind of suck it up, and to start being honest with kids about what is the reality of the world. We have to be honest with them about what we've been through because we have to help prepare them." I believe that this quotation supports my claims for the freedom to read because had this girl not have read this book, she would have no hope, and no way to know that this can get better. While the book Speak is banned in some schools because of its rape story, it gives hope to victims. In the ALA Freedom to Read statement, they say “It is in the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those that are unorthodox, unpopular, or considered dangerous by the majority.” This statement means that all libraries should have a wide range of books, no matter what the material is about, and let the reader decide whether or not they would want to read it. However, when libraries do not carry certain books because they are challenged then nobody can read it and decide for themselves. Everyone should be able to decide if they want to read a certain book, and to have a simple right like that to be taken away because someone does not agree with the content is terrible, and it should stop.

# data[].attributes.body
I am on the Freedom to Read side. I think that people should be able to read whatever they want. I think that most parents want their child to turn out like them, and they have their child view the world like they [the parent] want them [the child] to. By banning these books, they are hiding how to world can really be. The authors who write these books can ease these topics into the child's life, and could probably explain things better than the parent can. If the child goes into the world without knowing any of the hardships, then new things will seem unnatural, and uncomfortable to them. Books like the banned ones can also get people to say something that has been holding them back. Rape stories have been confessed since Laurie Halse Anderson's Speak came out.This shows that books can teach people to be brave. If they don't want their child to read books containing war, LGBT+Q, or rape, that doesn't mean they should ban the book and take away the privilege from someone else who would like to read. Everyone should be able to read what they want, no matter the topic.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that people should be able to read anything they want and have the freedom to do that. Laurie Halse Anderson published Speak and one girl went up to her saying,"[s]he [the girl] was crying because she didn't know that anybody could be okay after being raped".The girl was crying because her sister was raped and didn't know how to recover, so her sister took drugs and is now depressed. If the book was banned other people would not know how to recover from rape like the girl's sister. Another thing is that a doctor states,"[b]ooks need to be selected by professionally trained teachers based on their academic and intellectual merit". If some books are not appropriate for some ages they do not have to be banned just some teachers must not show that book to their current class. Books don't need to be banned just parents and teachers just have to not bring the book to children ,but banning it is outrageous to many people.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that everyone has the right and the freedom to read whatever they desire to read. Just because one parent doesn’t want their child reading the content or an older brother or sister doesn’t want their little brother or sister to read what they’ve read, it doesn’t mean that the rest of the world shouldn’t be able to read it. If the parent isn’t comfortable with the topic, then they should just not let their child read that particular book. Don’t hinder other kids’ learning and growth because you feel that your child isn’t ready to hear about certain subject matters. For parents with teenage kids who they don’t want to read certain books because they don’t want them to be exposed to the content, you are just making it more tempting to read the book because it is “forbidden” to read. Tara Sonenshine even said that “a teenager will simply borrow the book from a friend who is allowed to read it! Or hide in the closet and read it.” This comes to show that even though you ban a book, people will find a way to read it anyway. I feel that this definitely takes our rights away. The People for the American Way organization stated that they “call for continued vigilance against efforts to censor our words, thoughts, and opinions, in other words restrict our freedom” in response to the organizations that are for banning books. Peter Montgomery even said, “defending freedom of expression for artists, writers, and activists-and the freedom of students to read and learn.” This is a very good point and I would just add that people don’t go around banning songs that are about LGBTQ relationships, sex, or drugs-so why ban books? So just think about it. Is it more fair to ban books for everyone or just ban the book in your household?

# data[].attributes.body
Everyone has a right to read with their heart desires. Everyone has a right to read any book that an author may have written. Think about it like this; any author has a purpose for writing that book. That is why I believe that no book should me banned. Parents want books banned because it states something that they think is unfitting for their child or for a certain grade level to read. Some authors right non-fiction, other right about things that are real and have a possibly of happening. Just like Laurie Halse Anderson, the author of Speak, stated they are preparing students "for the real world". I have noticed that some of the main things that are being targeted are books that have gay people, transgender people, along with what some call "witchcraft". All of those things are real in the world. Parents want books banned that contain that content because they are scared that their child will follow that example; however, if they would tell their child about those things and explain to them what that particular family might believe in as right or wrong, their wouldn't be a need for books to banned. Normally, books are "banned into four categories" which would include: political, sexual, social, or religious. I speak on regard of myself when I say I have many different friends. I have friends that have different political judgments, religious beliefs, that have a different social standing, and that have different sexual thoughts. Above all of that I am able to see their personality, see who they really are. My question is this: why can't people look beyond what the authors use, whether it be a different sexual thoughts, political thoughts, religious thoughts, or social thoughts in that story, and look at the main message in the book? People want books banned because they look at what's on the surface, when the author really has a good and truthful main idea. If those books are banned, then we will never get to uncover that true meaning that the books are portraying, just another reason that shows how unfair banning a book really is.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that all books could be teached, and everyone could read every book. My logic for this opinion is this: kids read books because they may be interested in those books.If parents don’t want their kids to read that book, that’s fine. If said parents say that they do not want anybody to read said books then that is where the problem comes in. There is strange criticism for books as well. The National Council of Teachers of English have quoted critics that have said things such as “[t]his book is un-Christian…[v]ery unfavorable to Mormons… [c]ontains homosexuality.” These claims have been made for Plato’s Republic, Around the World in Eighty Days, and Moby Dick respectively. These claims may be true, but that does not mean that parents should not let children read these books. These are American classics. They have been read for years with criticism. Only recently have they been challenged with these claims. There is another problem with this claim. When parents say that they do not want anybody to read these books, that’s almost the same as limiting their creative views. People cannot shut out the real world forever. These books mainly focus on “the real world of young people--drugs, premarital sex, alcoholism, divorce, high school gangs, school dropouts, racism, violence, and sensuality.” The real world is out there. Parents prepare kids for the real world; not forbid adolescents to read about it. There could be some reasoning behind this, such as the fact that a particular book has underage smoking. Does that mean that these kids that read that book will smoke? Not necessarily so. These children will read the book for what it is and will either like it, or not. Perhaps if they have common sense, they could stop reading a book if it goes over a topic that they do not particularly enjoy. The books that are criticized should be allowed to be read and taught anywhere no matter what some parents or people say. These books depict the real world. Children need to prepare for that.

# data[].attributes.body
In my eyes I think kids should be able to read anything that is available in the school library. As Anderson, the author of Speak, said parents need to "prepare" their kids for the world. Anderson is right because if books about drugs or gays are not on the shelves , then the kids would have to find out what those things are the hard way. Some people challenge books because they "misunderstand a book's message" (General OneFile page 1). People have banned books for this reason. That is unfair to the people that might want to learn more about the topics in those books. Some people just need to be more open minded about the books meaning. If not then books will continue do be removed from shelves. Many people may agree with me and other maybe not , but what is important is what the kids think because it is their education not the adults.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that all Americans, have the Constitutional right to read any piece of literature they choose. If a parent does not want their child reading something that they find offensive, then the parent must do the civilized thing and say "I don't want you to read this because I find it offensive and inappropriate." Allowing parents or organizations to determine what is and isn't appropriate for all students takes away the right of Free Speech. As the "Students' Right to Read" Organization says, " Some books have been attacked merely for being "controversial," suggesting that for some people the purpose of education is not the investigation of ideas but rather the indoctrination of certain set beliefs and standards. " So some people think that just because their opinion is being questioned, they have to stop all kids from being exposed to another point of view besides their own. What insecure parents need to understand is that just because their child reads something, it does not mean that they are going to forget and abandon the morals and values they have raised them by. Don't stop your kids from trying to read a certain book, because it just makes the book or topic more interesting to them. Regarding the banning of books, The American Library Association says that "We do not believe they are prepared to sacrifice their heritage of a free press in order to be "protected" against what others think may be bad for them. We believe they still favor free enterprise in ideas and expression."  and I couldn't agree more.

# data[].attributes.body
I support that everyone has the freedom to read whatever they want.  I also believe that everyone should have a warning before picking up the book and reading it. An article called “It’s not censorship, It’s parenting!” was published on Mercatornet. The author of the article talks about why books are banned or challenged. The article also includes the certain contents the book might include that causes people to be so opposed of that certain book. In the comments of this article a father shows his concern about mature books that don’t have warnings. He claims that his 11 year old daughter got a book from her middle school library that has a “cute cover “and was unassuming as to what is inside the book.  He goes on and says that “if the book were a movie it would be rated R.” The father has the same concern as me, “[w]hy are books in school not rated the same as movies?”

Reading is also known to educate people on facts that they are not aware of. They can learn and realize things they haven’t ever realized before. On Bustle they posted an article titled “Laurie Halse Anderson on 'Speak,' Censorship, and 'The Impossible Knife of Memory'” Bustle interviews Laurie Halse Anderson and questions her perspective on censorship. She tells Bustle that “[she] realized — adults have to kind of suck it up, and to start being honest with kids about what is the reality of the world. We have to be honest with them about what we've been through, because we have to help prepare them.” This statement shows that parents shy away from things that are bad. So to protect their children, parents usually keep important real life situations hidden from them. This includes taking away their freedom to read books, even if they have that bad content in it. What Laurie Halse Anderson states is true, parents need to understand that they can’t hide everything. They should be more understanding towards books that depict the real life problems that go on in the world. If parents do this, their child can be more aware and understanding.

Books should have ratings on them like movies. The rating should also include the contents of the books, so whoever picks up the books know what they will read and decide for themselves if it is appropriate enough for them. If libraries do this then there may not be as many books being challenged or banned. Parents would know what their child is reading, and decided if it is age appropriate. If not, then they can explain why and make the child understand. This solution could solve many disagreements.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe kids should have the freedom to read. If parents have a problem with the types of book there children  are reading that is okay, but doesn’t have to ruin it for everyone. Like Laurie Anderson, author of Speak, told Bustle, she spoke to a young rape victim " [the girl] was crying because she didn't know that anybody could be okay after being raped". If a banned book, such as Speak never existed this girl would still be struggling and unaware of others like her. After talking with the girl "that's when I realized — adults have to kind of suck it up, and to start being honest with kids about what is the reality of the world. We have to be honest with them about what we've been through, because we have to help prepare them." because it will happen. Books in some cases are inappropriate or not followed by a religion, but this in not a reason to keep kids in the dark about what going on around them. I understand when people want to tell their children about it first, but even if you don't want them to know about they are going to find out some other way. People talk, even kids.

# data[].attributes.body
Students and other juveniles should have the right to read any book of choice, without the consent of authority. Laurie Anderson, the author who wrote the book Speak (which has been challenged and banned multiple times) says that adults have to be “honest with kids” and “help prepare them” for the world (Laurie Halse Anderson on 'Speak,' Censorship, and 'The Impossible Knife of Memory' P3). It is understandable that parents would want to prohibit their children from reading about disturbing matters such as drugs and sexual activity, but this idea stems from one common intuitive: that reading negative material would have a negative influence on a person. Parents want to protect their children from the flaws in life, but as they grow older, they would eventually stumble upon them and have no clue on how to react because they do not have intellect on what it is, its effects, or its purpose. Therefore, as Laurie Anderson stated, it is better to expose the blemishes in the world to help them adapt and accept them rather than wait until they jump out at them. Literature is a way to help children “understand their own lives through the mind of others” (Book banning: Learning from our past mistakes P12). Books help the youth understand the world and what to expect. They will learn to adjust into a world of flaws and also express their feelings to others. Through books, those who go through similar unfortunate events speak to the reader, and may have a positive influence rather than a negative one. Those who have been raped can read Speak and find the path to recover, knowing that other people have experienced the same thing. Literature opens up the door to reality, a world full with flaws, so juveniles have the right to discover the earth and prepare for it.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion, students should have the ability to read whatever sparks their interest. Restricting books that students can read in their schools and in public libraries defeats the purpose of being able to pick out your own book. Basically, if students are not interested, they are not going to read. Since most elementary students don’t have to read a specific book for a class, they go to the library to pick out a book to read it. However, if there are no books in the library that are interesting to them, maybe because they’ve been banned, the students are not going to want to read anything. By limiting the book selection in libraries to only a few topics or genres, the government is also restricting students’ willingness and curiosity to read. In addition to limiting readers’ interest in reading, banning books technically violates the First Amendment in the Constitution. The First Amendment states that citizens have the right to freedom of speech, religion, press and assembly. Freedom of press means that you are able to publish whatever you want, about whatever you want. Although, if authors are scared to write freely about sensitive topics, they aren’t going to publish books to potentially help others. Some authors may be scared that their book is going to reach the wrong audience, in the wrong way. Therefore, I believe that all students and readers in general, should be able to read whatever they feel is interesting and engaging.

# data[].attributes.body
I think students should be able to have the freedom to read. If parents don"' want their child to read the book than they don't have to, but they should still have the book open for other people to read. Laurie Anderson expresses a very great statement and says "I believe in preparing kids for the real world." This a really great reason as to why students should have the freedom to read because if kids know about the real world know they wont have to deal with learning it later. As well when the authors of "Censorship in Three Metaphors" say "Parents and guardians have the right to demand that their child will not read a particular book or view a specific film, no one parent or guardian has the right to demand that an entire classroom, school, or district should not read a particular book or view a film." This is very important because not all parents may agree with that parents decision. I think you have the freedom to read because if one person complains about a book then all the other students should still be allowed to read the book.