Who here is for banning and burning books?

Who here is for banning and burning books?

Not all books. Just offensive books. Books with dangerous words in them. Assault books.

I'll bet no one is. Because who is against free expression, amirite?

Free expression, free speech takes all sorts of forms. From words in print, to words online, to art, music, dance, statues, sculptures.

It is a RIGHT. It is inalienable.


Yet we find ourselves in a global debate on removing, restricting an inalienable right. So many are offended by this RIGHT. They are so upset that they want to punish people who have never done anything wrong or illegal. Many people treasure their RIGHTS. Others think that RIGHTS are given to us by government.

And what can be given, can be taken away.

We are losing our Rights because we are being convinced that we should give them up.

Our RIGHTS cannot be taken, they must be given away. And we are giving them away.

We are giving them away to the book-burners in our society. We are gladly handing over our copies of "Huck Finn" because people find it offensive.

We are being convinced that everything will be better once all the copies of "Huck Finn" are burned.

They want you to give away your freedom to choose.

So who here is a book-burner?

a reply to: DBCowboy
I can def think of a book to burn lol But that would make me no better than Hitler.

a reply to: DBCowboy

How many folks think we should be able to have soldiers move in and take over our homes?

Maybe we should be tortured and forced to bear witness against ourselves.

Why do we need rights?

originally posted by: DBCowboy

Who here is for banning and burning books?

Not this Commie. I love our right to free speech and will gladly fight alongside anyone seeking to defend it. The same goes for guns. I know... crazy right?

The only people who claim to want to burn books are probably the politicians paid to say such things in order to get people outraged over it. Take the bait if you want.

Books actually don't burn very well.

Newspapers, on the other hand, make excellent kindling when used a sheet at a time.

My personal favorite newspaper to burn is the New York Times. The flames give off this eerie glow like you're burning true evil, like when Vader threw the Emperor down the hole or whatever.

After that, the Arizona Republic.

What are your favorite newspapers to burn, OP?

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
The only people who claim to want to burn books are probably the politicians paid to say such things in order to get people outraged over it. Take the bait if you want.

Some just had a march this past weekend over wanting people to give up a RIGHT.

Burning books, banning guns. . . . a rose by any other name. . . . .

originally posted by: NthOther

What are your favorite newspapers to burn, OP?

None.

Never needed to. I have a smoker that has an electric coil.

a reply to: DBCowboy


If it's Fifty Shades of S*** and its sequels I'm in.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

As long as you treasure my book, "Fifty Shades Of Gravy".

a reply to: DBCowboy

So who here is a book-burner?

This guy, right here.

There is a qualifier however, and that is only the ones I don't like. Think of the children! Don't you want living, healthy children?


Why do you hate children DB?

Also, don't even think about asking me to justify my stance.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
The only people who claim to want to burn books are probably the politicians paid to say such things in order to get people outraged over it. Take the bait if you want.

Some just had a march this past weekend over wanting people to give up a RIGHT.

Burning books, banning guns. . . . a rose by any other name. . . . .

Giving up A right? Or demanding some measures of control are implemented.?

a reply to: JinMI

I like my children.

Does that count?

a reply to: DBCowboy

If someone wants to burn a book. So be it.

I wouldn't burn any book.

There is no right to a book. And I don't believe that is in the Constitution. Freedom of expression and freedom of speech, freedom of the press.

If some schools don't want Huck Finn in their classes, those kids can simply get the book at the library and read it. I wanted to read the Amittyville Horror when I was in school, but i got "To Kill a Mocking Bird, An American Tragedy, The Lord of the Flies, etc. I read Stephen King and other such novels on my own.

No one is banning books, and if you buy it, you can burn it, I suppose. As a political statement, I'd never do it. Just like I wouldn't burn a flag and probably not sit during the National Anthem, but frankly, I don't care if anyone else does. I guess I believe in real freedom. My choice. If I want to burn a book, the flag, or sit during the National Anthem, I will. Period. This is the USA. That's what it's about folks. I will also live with the repercussions of that decision at the time. It's called being responsible.

The path that burning of books leads down is a road I won't be taking in this life. But if someone else want to, how does that hurt me? As long as I still have access to those books, burn away if you must.

a reply to: DBCowboy

"You can choose from phantom fears.... and kindness that can kill.... I will choose the path that's clear.... I will choose free will."

Yes, there are actually people marching to have their human rights regulated by those who are supposed to ensure the very same rights.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
The only people who claim to want to burn books are probably the politicians paid to say such things in order to get people outraged over it. Take the bait if you want.

Some just had a march this past weekend over wanting people to give up a RIGHT.

Burning books, banning guns. . . . a rose by any other name. . . . .

Giving up A right? Or demanding some measures of control are implemented.?

Demanding that we limit our rights. So you don't want to burn all of Huck Finn, just a few of the pages.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I went to Mark Twain middle school back in the early 80's. During that time we had an administrator who tried to remove "Huckleberry Finn" from the county curriculum. It didn't work.

Sure there are parts of the book that are offensive. Heck there are parts of almost every book that could be considered offensive. That's part of the growing up process. It is part of history. I grew up with my grandfather calling people "colored" or "Injun" or "Mexican." He didn't apologize, I wasn't offended. It's the way things were.

People need to learn the mistakes of the past so that they don't make those same mistakes again. Being offended is actually a good thing, as it teaches us to reach inside ourselves and discover why we feel something is offensive to us. As someone wiser than me said "The truth hurts." But purposely blinding oneself to the truth of the past is much more dangerous in the long run. Whitewashing history is not a good thing, nor is whitewashing literature.

Should Hester Prynne's crime be minimized, because the idea of adultery is a foreign concept in a free loving society? Should we turn Shylock into a generous man? Should Gatsby come back to life? Perhaps instead of killing Ceasar they could have just shaved his head and shamed him?

No, literature has it's place and it reflects the ideals and culture of the time in which it was written. I leave you with a quote from "The Man of La Mancha."

“The truth may be stretched thin, but it never breaks, and it always surfaces above lies, as oil floats on water.”

originally posted by: DBCowboy
As long as you treasure my book, "Fifty Shades Of Gravy".

That's a book? I thought it was your bib.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I like my children.

Does that count?

__Insert deflecting comment here__