Nerdfighters! Help me edit my speech against banning books?

[David Nicholas Organ]

   Guys so I wrote this in a day with out an outline, I would really appreciate feedback so i can make this better, its for my 10th grade english class.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks and DFTBA.

     Books are a form of art don’t you think?  The author being the artist putting words in an order that literally tells a story.  Capturing the readers attention and emotion.  But for some reason schools across the country feel that some books need to be banned.  Would you ban a piece of artwork from a museum?  Just like a painting books are works of art, just in a different medium.
    Schools want to ban certain books based on the content and ideas they are thought to portray.  Fundamentally this is a bit, pardon my words here, stupid.  I think it is, and again sorry, stupid because often books are written with the message being up to the reader, the reader takes away what they will from a book.  Thats why schools teach critical thinking.  Critical thinking allows for a reader to understand and comprehend a book, and find out what they think it means.  So when schools ban books based on the ideas and ideals that THEY think the books portray, things get a little, bare with me, stupid.  Sometimes the schools however are fine with any and all literature being taught to their students, but the parents aren’t.
    A good example of parents attempting to ban certain books takes place in January 2008.  John Green, author of many books including Looking for Alaska, and more recently A Fault in Our Stars, received word that his book Looking for Alaska was going to be taught to 11th grade students at Depeau High School in Albany, just outside of New York.  He was excited, who wouldn’t be?  However this excitement was soon met with sorrow, as he found out that the parents of the students who were to be taught this book, were as ok with it as the school was.  The school then came to a compromise, giving students a permission slip for their parents to sign, if the parents were ok with them reading Johns book, then they would sign it, if they were not, then they would not sign it.  Which looked like idea until parents who didn’t have students in the 11th grade began to voice their opinions.  They believe the book shouldn’t be taught at all, even to the kids whose parents are ok with it.  Because they believe the book is pornographic.  Let me stop right here for just a second.  To quote author John Green “Pornography is designed to titillate, I don’t think there is a single halfway normal person in the world who would find a single thing in my book in anyway arousing”.  He goes on to describe a part of his book in which there is a very brief sex scene.  It is awkward, confusing, and emotionally empty.  He says it is there not to provide a spotlight vapid physical interaction, but rather to show that physical interaction is never a way to express your emotions and feelings for someone else.  The scene is immediately followed by a emotionally rich connection between the two characters.  The sex scene is there only to provide contrast for what follows.   This is a great example for my argument on books not being banned on their content because books and their content can be interpreted in many different ways!!!!!
    The adults saw Johns book as pornography based on one sex scene, they didn’t realize the meaning behind it and they didn’t think critically about what it could really mean.  My point i guess is that banning books is just about as silly as banning art from a museum.  Much like art books are made to be open peoples minds to new thoughts and ideas, and often the meaning they contain is ultimately up to those who read it.  I don’t think books should be banned based on what a group of people think about them because thats just it, thats how they portray it.  They can’t possibly know how the potential readers of the book in question will comprehend and think about the content of the book.  They don’t know what the readers will take away from it.  They don’t know because they cant know.  Books are something that are open to interpretation.  So how do you ban something thats meaning is something that is personal to the reader.

[Alene Oboe]

  Books are a form of art, don’t you think?  The author is an artist, putting words in an order that tells a story capturing the readers attention and emotion.  But, schools across the country feel that some books need to be banned.  Would you ban a piece of artwork from a museum?  Just like paintings, books are works of art, just of a different medium.
    Schools want to ban certain books based on the content and ideas they portray.  Fundamentally this is a bit ignorant on their part. It is wrong to ban certain books, because often books are written with the message being up to the reader's interpretation; each reader takes away something different.  That's why schools teach critical thinking, because each person sees the world differently. So, when schools ban books based on the ideas and ideals that THEY think the books portray, it's wrong because the books are banned based on ONE person's interpretation.  Sometimes, however, the schools are fine with different forms of literature being taught to their students, but parents aren’t.

    A good example of parents attempting to ban certain books takes place in January 2008.  John Green, author of many books including Looking for Alaska and more recently A Fault in Our Stars, received word that his book Looking for Alaska was going to be taught to 11th grade students at Depeau High School in Albany, just outside of New York.  He was excited, however this excitement was soon met with disappointment, as he found out that the parents of students at the school weren't as accepting of the subject.  The school then came to a compromise, giving a permission slip for parents to sign if they were ok with their children reading John's book.  This seemed a reasonable idea until parents who didn’t have students in the 11th grade began to voice their opinions.  They believed the book shouldn’t be taught at all, even to the kids whose parents were accepting of it because they saw the book as pornographic.  To quote author John Green, “Pornography is designed to titillate, I don’t think there is a single halfway normal person in the world who would find a single thing in my book in anyway arousing”.  He goes on to describe the part of his book in which there is a very brief sex scene.  It is awkward, confusing, and emotionally empty.  He says it is there not to provide a spotlight vapid physical interaction, but rather to show that physical interaction is never a way to express your emotions and feelings for someone else.  The scene is immediately followed by a emotionally rich connection between the two characters.  The sex scene is there only to provide contrast for what follows.   This is an example for the argument that books should not be banned because of their content because it can be interpreted in many different ways!
    Adults saw Johns book as pornography based on one sex scene, but they didn’t realize the meaning behind it and didn’t think critically about what it could really mean.  My point is that banning books is just about as silly as banning art in a museum.  Much like art, books are made to be open peoples minds to new thoughts and ideas, and often the meaning they contain is ultimately up to those who read it.  I don’t think books should be banned based on what a group of people think about them because that's only how the one group portrays it.  They can’t possibly know how the potential readers of the book in question will comprehend and think about the content of the book.  They don’t know what the readers will take away from it.  They don’t know because they can't know.  Books are things that are open to interpretation. You can't ban something if the core meaning of it is up to the reader.

[Alene Oboe]

*my edits*

I'd try to keep the "I thinks" out of there because this is persuasive? I'm guessing? hope this helps.

[David Nicholas Organ]

You don't know how much you just helped me, now I just need to yeah know, speak it, in front of my class.  But seriously thank you so much Alene!

[Michael Green]

I think you should get rid of the "pardon my words" stuff. If you think its stupid just say its stupid. It's stronger that way, and if you don't want to out right call it stupid try a different word rather than saying "pardon my words." Some of it is kind of cliche, sorry for being overly critical, but overall its pretty good.