The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." But what rights do minors have when they walk into a school? Do these rights disappear completely, or do they still exist in full? Is the answer somewhere in between? This debate has many, many facets. But one significant piece involves censorship of literature in America's public schools. The list of books that have been banned completely in many schools across the nation is expansive, and so are the justifications that parents and school boards give for taking this kind of action. Proponents of literary censorship say that it's best for the students. Opponents say that it's severely detrimental to the educational system. The students themselves have mixed emotions. Books that provide insight into life whether it is good or bad should not be banned from schools.

Literary censorship at the secondary school level is indeed very widespread. According to the library association, there were nearly 600 requests in 1997 to remove or restrict books from school libraries, classrooms and bookstores. If you were to show a list of banned books in the 90s to a group of high school students, they would be shocked to see some of the books that may appear on that list. In most cases there is sufficient reasoning as to why a person may get offended and want a book banned. The problems are that there should be no one person or group who should be aloud to dictate what other people can read in a public school library.

A common issue that is brought up by members of a community is that they do not want there tax dollars going to pay for books which they consider to be trash. Isn't a free country worth paying for? The teachers that teach from these "trashy books" are paying taxes too. Other people who may want to read these books are also paying there tax dollars. The issue of tax dollars should play no rule in deciding whether or not to ban a book.

Concern for children, parents and citizens groups say they push to remove what they consider unsound educational materials. That might be anything from books with pervasively vulgar language to comprehensive sex education programs that deal with homosexuality. Educators and First Amendment defenders have a word for these attempts to protect youth censorship. They say it shackles academic freedom, the cornerstone of education. Parents have a right to control what their children read, but not anyone else's.

Authors have the right to say whatever they want in their books, so long as it isn't libelous. High schools censor and ban books because they feel that some material is inappropriate for high school kids to read. However, it seems that some parents and administrators wish to carry their ability to censor what their kids read too far. The main argument that proponents of the censorship of such books have is ludicrous. They tell their opponents that letting high schoolers read the material in question would dirty their mind at a time when they are trying to develop their own morals. But the action of not letting high schoolers read such material is itself detrimental to their moral development. To be against something, it is first necessary to have knowledge of it.