Banned books week in the US! Sept. 21-27, 2014

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by SparkleEyes, Sep 22, 2014.

  1. Have you read any of the books that have been banned?
    Should parents screen books for their children or should we let a secular organization decide what should be banned?
    Should "the church" ban secular books or suggest to parents that their children not read certain books?
    Should "the church" ban (or suggest we not read) secular books for adults?

  2. I'm not sure which books are banned but I've read Catcher and think that was censored at some stage.
    Parents should screen. Many accepted books are not appropriate for a Christian child. imo
    Yes the Pastors/Elders and the Church should protect the congregation and make recommendations if they think a book is unacceptable.
    Yes for the same reason as for children.
  3. Do you mean Banned Books Week?

    Like maybe Huckleberry Finn? Catcher in the Rye? Harry Potter? The Bible?
  4. The only book my church has highly suggested that we not read was the 50 Shades of Grey series! LOL. I appreciate that the message (sermon) giver that day confirming what my church stood for, that one is a pretty obvious series to avoid! ;)
  5. Who is doing the banning, and what group is being forced to not read certain books?

    Is the week dedicated to "banning more books" or to "remove bans on books already banned?"
  6. The Autobiography of Malcolm X
    Gone with the Wind - Margaret Mitchell
    Howl - Allen Ginsberg
    Uncle Tom's Cabin - Harriet Beecher Stowe
    Huckleberry Finn - Mark Twain
    Slaughterhouse Five - Kurt Vonnegut
    Alice in Wonderland - Lewis Carroll (yep, this was banned).
    The diary of Anne Frank
    Mein Kampf - Adolph Hitler

    Possibly others. I'm not sure. All of these have at some point been ban, but some are still technically banned.

    Yes, parents should screen books for their children -- it should be up to the parents, and one prays they will discern wisely.

    The Church can only express which goes against Christian teaching, but the Church doesn't have the authority to ban books from the public.

    There are some obvious things the Church can suggest not to get into reading, but simply ban all secular books because they are secular is extremely unwise. At some point, it could be a very good thing to get an understanding of what the secular world is doing and saying in order to combat it with truth. But I'm only talking about things that are worth reading for that purpose, like Camus or Voltaire. No point in really reading 50 Shades of Grey. Though nothing should be banned, only discouraged, even severely.
    C1oudwatch3r and SparkleEyes say Amen and like this.
  7. I have read ancient tomes that would have gotten me burned alive in centuries past.
    Not that I recommend reading such works, but I have little use for censorship.

    Having said that, we should keep close track of what our children read and disallow those books
    that will cause them harm. And for ourselves, we should avoid those books that lead us away from God
    (50 Shades of Grey being a good example, and NO, I don't read such tripe).
    C1oudwatch3r likes this.
  8. I agree with you, Lys. Sometimes I read books BECAUSE they are banned/not recommended. My motive for doing so is to find out the reason for its being banned. Most generally, the reason given becomes clear to me as I read the banned book. After reading it (or at least scanning the book), I have a better understanding and can speak to my kids/grandkids about it with more conviction other than simply stating, "The church doesn't allow this book," or something like that.

    But then, I've always chafed at attempts to control me. I used to think I was rebellious and wondered what was wrong with me, but I believe now that God probably gave me that quality knowing it would keep me from being sucked in by cults, which it definitely has done (kept me out of cults, I mean).
    LysanderShapiro likes this.
  9. If somebody tells me that some book is banned, I would be much more tempted to read it.
  10. Kinda like Eve and the forbidden fruit ?
    SparkleEyes likes this.
  11. I read a book, Mistborn, that talked about banning books. And how a Ruler didn't ban a book because then it would become more popular than it is. That by not acknowledging it, he doomed it to obscurity.

    A better way, is to point out its flaws. It's like the "glass shattering" episode of How I Met Your Mother (thats right, HIMYM). Once you point out something, everyone cannot help but notice it. So you point out how unrealistic it is, or how the writer missed the mark by making it to flat at the end. They will respond to that better than an outright ban.
  12. Yeah, I guess I have something from her nature in me.
    I think that it is important to know what non-believers read , watch or post on FB (etc.) especially when we serve to them or to people who have converted recently. That doesn´t mean that we should use it as an excuse for reading all the stupid books but read at least some of them to know what is it about. It´s very easy to say "this or that is bad" but it´s much better to say "it´s bad because there is .... and it will make you think that ... ". As Jake writes above.
  13. Is it possible that "banning a book" requires proper authority to ban it?" Is it also possible that "authority" can only be ethically obtained though delegation by a higher ethical authority.

    Thus its immoral to force any ban unless you have the delegated authority to ban it.

    You mentioned parents. I would agree that parents have the "ethical and delegated authority" from God to ban a book for their children.

    You mentioned churches. I would agree that a church could require obedience regarding reading material as a prerequisite to join, which is in essence a "contract" and not a ban. For one could simply reject the contract and not join.

    I believe it is inherently immoral for government to ban any book unless it is a child and the parent has granted the state the specific authority to ban it.
  14. Yes I can understand that. I also think it's a good practice to be able to say in a discussion " I haven't read the book because I've read/been told that it contains material I don't like". That can also lead to discussion with non believers and allow them to challenge your position. As example the books and films " Game of Thrones " is very popular but after seeing several episodes I decided it had no redeeming qualities and wouldn't watch any more. I'm comfortable saying why I don't like it, and I don't judge anyone who does like it, but I wouldn't recommend it to a Christian.

    Oh btw we all have some Adam and Eve inside us that liking for the forbidden. imo
  15. I agree with you.
    I didn´t reject Game of Thrones totally. The books are much better, incomparable with the serial.
  16. 2Co 2:11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.
  17. I'm not sure banning/censoring any book is a good idea. The moment you censor something, it acquires a mystique. And that makes the forbidden fruit all the more desirable to some people, if for the curiosity factor alone.
  18. Does this principle also apply to forbidding actions ?
  19. I'm usually a reasonable guy. I don't think kids should be reading anything overly graphic or sexually explicit. But honestly some of the books I see on the banned list are just absurd to me. Someone I read complained about "The Hunger Games" because of its "religious views". For the life of me I don't know what religious view Collin's was purporting.

    I also hate that people still object to Huckleberry Finn. It is an American classic that uses derogatory language to shed light on the evils that were being done at the time. It's language is also no worse than what I heard in the halls of my high school.

    Honestly, if you go to a public high school, I think there is very little in the way of literature that would be worse than how teenagers talk on a daily basis.

Share This Page