Against Banning Books
Neha, author of “Against Banning Books”, wrote about the contradictory topic that led the scholars to debate upon, which is the banning of specific books. Banning books can result according to racial and sexual issues. In parents’ eyes, some books are controversial and have to be banned from schools. In the article entitled “Against Banning Books” written by Neha, she states explicitly that she’s against the banning of books and against the government control over the liberty of getting access to books. Neha’s arguments throughout her article are remarkable to take into consideration. Nevertheless, the article is obviously biased to the side of the partisans not accepting the banning of books, and this is unfair for such a broad and complex topic.
In “Against Banning Books”, Neha argues for the banning books. The idea of preventing children and adolescents from getting exposed to delicate materials such as homosexuality is presented as a counterargument. However, the author disapproves trying to prove that the act of banning is oppressing the rights of the bigger population. As a matter of fact, parents should control the contents of the books that their children read, but they don’t have the right to ban books from the libraries since other people would want to read them. Neha concludes “Children can be responsible in knowing which articles to read and which to ignore. They will become educated adults and can profit the American community”.
“Against Banning Books” is by far an extraordinary high-standard written article. Neha used real-life examples and sociological cases to defend her arguments and try to reveal the sincerity of her opinion. A remarkable loophole is apparent in paragraph 1, where the author refers to “Micah Issitt” without stating his or her own title or expertise. Thus, she committed the first fallacy of appeal to authority. She gave fascinating facts about the first amendment whereby the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document