Answer:
Ultimate guide to Descriptive research. ... However, we will be restricting ourselves to only 3 distinct examples in ... Why Use Descriptive Research Design?
Answer:
Topic: The decision to censor particular books is often tied to current political or social debates.
1. People are social media addicts. The internet is usually either plainly seen as republican or democratic views and they are expressed to you in a manner that you could actually believe what they are writing about. They attempt to reach into your own morals and values and convince you that you need to read a certain book - or that a book has things in it that would not be appropriate for you and your beliefs.
Hopefully, the students have a teacher, as myself, that will encourage them to read all the banned books that they can get their hands on. Even though most of all literature is somewhere on the web, I encourage you to purchase the banned books. Politically motivated censorship is usually someone trying to please the people. Give them what they want; in reality we do not want books to be banned. It is simple really, if you do not want to read it, then do not read it. Whatever is going on in the news, is usually somewhere in history and written about already. History repeats itself and it is evident that there are people that want to control what you think and what you say. They want to control people. There is no government for the people by the people any longer, if they continue to ban books. If we allow them to continue to ban books, this will trickle slowly into other areas of our lives. They start slow, and then they get into the media to try to sway people to believe a certain way.
Explanation:
Books - the ones you still can hold in your hand and read - will continue to disappear. People will try to control what you think, eat, believe and attempt to change your value system and your morals.
Fake news? possibly, but in reality, no on should ban books.
If you have not READ (not watched) Fahrenheit 451, I encourage you to do so. Read the book. If you choose to watch the movie, wait until you have read the book.
I don't get it, are we supposed to get an answer from the phrase?
In the poem "Guilt," Jed Chambers works to draw sympathy from the reader and give them the message that hurting other animals is wrong. Although the poet used negative language in the beginning of the poem, the first line where he intimates that the narrator was having doubts about the death of the mackerel is line 31: "'Just a fish,' you claimed." <span>Unlike his friend, the speaker believes that the fish is more than "just a fish." </span>He puts a value to the creature, viewing it as a life that should not be wasted. The final two lines (34-35), "I tasted / guilt" further prove this theme. The narrator is regretting killing the fish. Unlike most people, he views the mackerel as more than just dinner; he has problem with the fact that the animal's life was taken so thoughtlessly. In "Guilt," Chambers does an excellent job of provoking thought regarding the value of animal life through effective language and a compelling first-person perspective.
Hope this helps!
