Book Banning Synthesis Essay

Book Banning

February 15th, 2014

AP English Language

We, as American citizens, should be free to choose what to read or what not to read constructed by our own principles and values, not on the principles and values of complete strangers. I am vehemently against the banning of books, period. These books are banned, not because of morals and values, but fear, the fear that people will ripen their own opinions after reading. Opinions are not illegal, so why should books be? A chief illustration of this is J.D. Salinger's novel, Catcher in the Rye. By an examination of the text, as well as data provided from credible and respected sources, will unequivocally prove books should not be banned.

The freedom of expression is really just an extension of freedom of speech. This, as one can distinguish in Source B, the United States Constitution, is an essential part of the First Amendment. This amendment ensures our freedom to express our own opinion even if that opinion might be viewed as nontraditional or disliked. Individuals who upkeep book banning are depriving the rest of America of their freedom to practice a significant portion of the First Amendment. Also, the First Amendment sustains the freedom of the individual. It seems that we are individual rights are being slowly taken away, undoubtedly against the Constitution. Catcher in the Rye has been challenged copious amounts of times, for a multitude of reasons. Kristina Jones utters, "Holden thinks, talks and worries about sex frequently in the book…" which provides that Holden, in this sense, thinks just as any other teenage boy does. Using this as an argument to ban a book is irrational and illogical. It is an irrational argument because every teenage boy in existence thinks about sex as much as Holden does, perhaps more. In my opinion, to leave out these thoughts would make Holden an aloof character, one we could not connect with. Another reason the slight sexual content seems invalid as a reason for such drastic measures is that in ninety percent of high schools require each student to take at least a year of health class. Health class covers all aspects of sexual relations and such topics, so why is it unacceptable for a book to touch upon the same topic? Plenty more arguments include, "Holden is basically having a nervous breakdown and is a frequent liar," Jones states towards the closing of her article called, "The History of Censorship." I find what she said in the previous quote absolutely appalling. Yes, Holden certainly has several problems, but that is what defines his character and nowhere in the book does Salinger make him out to be any character to emulate. People lied, cheated and killed in the bible as well, are we going to ban that too? No, because the bible has, ‘deeper