Personally, I don't think Dracula should be banned. It is a classic book that fine-tunes a tale, which every child knows. Everyone but the sheltered has heard the tale of "Dracula, ruler of the undead," but is left with no true definition of what the book was originally like. To ban this book would be to leave a child with only fears, speculations, and rumors. Also a child would only be able to learn about "V`lad the Impaler," which is a more gruesome tale than the book based on him.
Also, there are no grounds to have the book banned in the first place. Although there are hints of violence, there is not much violence actually in the book. There are no notable curses in the book, which I could find, except for an old man's rabble, which doesn't really curse, but suggests that the words are curses. .
The only ground for banning this classic tale is the presence of the mythical creatures commonly known as vampires. But to ban the book on that basis alone denies us the right to choose our religion, for choosing our beliefs is part of choosing our religion. If you were to ban this book because you don't believe in vampires, you would have to ban every book that contains something that someone doesn't believe in. Where would you draw the line? .
Many people don't believe in the wrongness of slavery, so would you ban a book that says slavery is wrong? But thousands of people believe slavery is wrong, so would you ban all the books that hint that it is right? We could go on like this through every subject that they have in our books, and where would it lead us? Our children would grow up never having a chance to learn from the school library, because there wouldn't be anything left. There is no subject that doesn't have controversy over it, because not every one thinks the same way. So I say, if you ban this timeless tale, you ban them all!.
