Regularly, students face suppression of ideas through banning of books or internet monitoring and blocking of web pages. When an idea is suppressed, it is forgotten or becomes a taboo subject. In either case, adolescents no longer have the capacity to learn from this idea. Instead, teens only have access to ideas supported by the school board, which conditions them to accept the terrible idea that ideas can be suppressed. John Simmons believes that school boards “view nonconforming ideas as dangerous to impressionable young minds” in his article School Censorship: No Respite in Site. Simmons' belief is formed based on frequently suppressed materials, which are usually ideas that go against society and conformity. Apparently, when conformity is threatened, schools make short work of the material and instill in students the belief that ideas contrary to conformity are bad. Of course, there are many other reasons why books and other materials are banned, but when reading materials are banned, students lose the benefit of "thinking critically about literacy texts" and, by extension , to the ideas contained in the material (Simmons). Then there are First Amendment observers who firmly believe that free speech is under attack by schools when they punish students for commenting online. They also believe that if the issue is brought to public attention, the censorship problem will be resolved, but unfortunately, it is not yet widely known. This conditions students to accept the loss of freedom of expression, which is normal. Some courts have also sided with schools by giving them the power to “censor and punish students for their words…even if those words were written off campus, after school” (Richey). Whether or not these acts of repression are deliberate attempts to censor schools or