"To Kill a Mockingbird" and "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" were banned from Virginia's Accomack County Public Schools due to racial slurs in the books. Although I understand the school's intent, this is the wrong decision to make. This is a prim example of censorship, and censorship is immoral.

Censorship is defined as the act of examining books, plays, news reports, motion pictures, radio and television programs, letters, etc, for the purpose of suppressing parts deemed objectionable on moral or political grounds.

The first argument I have against censorship comes from an artistic point of view. When an artist’s work is censored (especially after that person is dead) it disrespects the original work. It is fine to create interpretations of the work fifty years after that person is dead, this falls under the fair use laws. It becomes censorship when the artist’s original work is altered and presented as if nothing had been changed.

An example is “The Diary of Anne Frank.” This book is iconic amongst young people around the world, because it showed the world what it was like to be a young teen during the holocaust, fearing every day for her life. The book showed many people that she was (for all intents and purposes) a normal teenage girl. Unfortunately the book company that published Anne Frank’s diary cut out several passages that involved her exploring her own body, and questioning certain things, like how a baby could fit outside of her vagina. It may seem ludicrous, but everyone has been a teenager, and those moments happen quite often. For the company to censor her writing, this disrespected her life, and her experiences as a teenager.

A second argument I have against censorship is that it limits important rights such as free speech. People should be free to express their opinions without threat of harm. Even if people say deplorable things, they should not be censored.

For example, The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is a nonpartisan, non-profit organization whose stated mission is “to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States." They in the past supported the Klu Klux Klan’s decision to march through a predominantly African American neighborhood because they believed it was their right to do so. The KKK members were non-violent, so the ACLU supported them. For perspective, the ACLU does not support white supremacy as a concept. This is shown by the fact that they are fighting against voter suppression acts that target poor black people.

The third argument I have against censorship is that it stifles progress and learning. More specifically, it stifles social progress. Censorship stifles social progress because it shuts down opposing opinions, or opinions in the interest of changing a certain way of life. When women were advocating for the right to vote, many feminist writers were threatened for what they wrote. Similarly with Abolitionists who were working to abolish slavery, many of those people were censored. Censorship is the enemy of progress, plain and simple.

Censorship limits learning because it attempts to erase certain parts of the past that should be remembered. For example, before January 1^st 2016, German citizens did not have access to “Mein Kampf” by Adolf Hitler in bookstores. In the beginning of this year it entered into the public domain, and immediately sold out within a week. Many people were upset with this because they thought that the German people suddenly wanted to become the next generation of Nazis. But the reason it sold out was because German citizens had not been given access to a book that (like it or not) is a part of their heritage. It is important to learn about the country one comes from.

An argument commonly used in support of censorship is that it protects the innocence of children, and censoring certain things uphold the morality of a country, therefore protecting the citizens, except that it is not true. The idea of protecting children from immoral things is a good concept, but not an effective one. If children wish to seek out something that their parents have banned they will find it. It is illogical to think that children will not go out of their way to find another form of contraband. In some cases, they may go to dangerous lengths. It doesn’t apply only to children, even adults will sneak around to get what they want, whether it’s banned or not.

Thanks to the internet, a web browser is all that is needed to find anything illegal. There are parts of the deep web that are not available to the general public where hitmen can be purchased. Should the entire internet be shut down because of this? No, because the needs of the many are more important than the needs of the few. The internet is used to find new places, new people, and new experiences. There is more information available now than ever before, and that has opened up many doors for innovation and creativity.

All in all, censorship is harmful to society in general. The Accomack County Public Schools in Virginia should not have banned "To Kill a Mockingbird" and "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn." They are products of their time, and come with an unfortunate lesson about the past (and in some cases present) state of the US.