Has your belief system or way of thinking ever been challenged by reading? If not, censorship may be to blame. Censorship is a massive issue growing within the writing, school, publication, and learning systems. Whenever viewing a news station, newspaper, or article, it is easy to find a report on a book being scrutinized. This scrutiny come from a variety of people, and directions, for many reasons, some personal and some political. The argument for whether or not the material that people read should be censored can be fought from many angles. Censorship leaves the mind bland, unindividualized, and synced with whatever idea the writer or publisher believes the reader should believe. If books are not controversial nor display ideas from every direction the learning system becomes flawed; readers are unable to create their own understanding, platform, or decision based on knowledge they have attained through reading, or listening to material. This material when censored is stripped of any conflict or troubling ideas that may make a reader question how they feel or what they believe. People and groups who support censorship, believe that without censorship the public will become familiar with obscene acts, and it “can or will brutalize and debase our citizenry” (Kristol 489). There is fear that without censorship the general acceptance for obscene or untraditional acts could become the norm. Censorship is possible when material is challenged, usually based on content. These challenges usually occur in the classroom setting, and more frequently in the libraries. These challenges often result in limited access to material and information for students (Jamieson 1) This reading material is typically censored because it is believed to be violent, harmful, or contains troubling ideas. Libraries are generally able to avoid challenges of censorship with protection from the first amendment. The first amendment guarantees the right to free speech along with the right to receive information (Monks 7). This statement supports the ideas that the rights to speech is not limited to what the public is allowed to say or write but includes what they wish to listen to or read about. Libraries have the protection of the first amendment. Even with this protection they are still targeted and challenged on material. Some libraries fear the hassle of having material challenged from the public and choose to self-censor the material available. The act of self censoring is choosing not to put a book into circulation due to the fact that it may cause controversy (Monks 11). Libraries may self-censor to appease specific groups in a town or area. If self-censoring occurs in a library it, “diminishes the credibility of the library and restricts access for all library users” (Monks 11). Libraries are public facilities in which the public should be able to attain information regarding any specific topic or issue. When a library decides that it is going to self-censor its material, the library is no longer a solid ground for unbiased information. The information attained in these facilities is biased and aims to please on ly specific groups and beliefs. In a newsletter for Intellectual Freedom the writer quotes a librarian dealing with a censorship issue in her own library. According to the author “She noted only five percent of all the 1,500 titles in the teen section dealt with occult, vampires, and the supernatural, and the spoke of the mission of the public library, saying material should not be chosen or removed because of partisans or doctoral disapproval” (Schools 160). This allows for people to access information that they wish to access. If someone chooses not to access specific information they are also awarded this right. A method used to ensure that material is accessed only with the correct permission is the