It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who here is for banning and burning books?

page: 10
29
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Not since the early 60's, I think, has the federal govt. outright banned a book. Various localities have, and school districts also have done.



Libraries, churches and various interest groups aim to ban books or advocate banning books as well.


Why should we care since words have no meaning and can do no harm?




posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: burdman30ott6

The Cruz shooter had every right to his gun. So did Adam Lanza, Jared Loughner, James Holmes, etc., etc.

If we let them have books, we gotta let them have guns.


Considering murder is already illegal and that law did nothing to stop them, why do you think laws to keep guns out of their hands will work? Sounds like a scenario in which we should ban guns from whoever believes it will make a difference, considering one definition of insanity is doing the same thing multiple times and expecting a different result.



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Not since the early 60's, I think, has the federal govt. outright banned a book. Various localities have, and school districts also have done.



Libraries, churches and various interest groups aim to ban books or advocate banning books as well.


Why should we care since words have no meaning and can do no harm?


Words have no meaning? Take a look in the dictionary.



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Not since the early 60's, I think, has the federal govt. outright banned a book. Various localities have, and school districts also have done.



Libraries, churches and various interest groups aim to ban books or advocate banning books as well.


Why should we care since words have no meaning and can do no harm?


Words have no meaning? Take a look in the dictionary.


I meant to say words don't hurt us. That's what you would say and have said. So okay to ban something that doesn't hurt us because the lack of said thing can't hurt us either?



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Right. When some guy walks into a gun store and tells the owner “I want a gun right now so I can walk out and start shooting random people on the street” - the owner should give it to him - it’s his right to have it.



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Oh, yes. Those are some of my favorite meetings to go to. Harry Potter is a popular one in this neck of the woods, along with The Good Earth.

Go Ask Alice was a popular one when I was still in school. The local Catholic church hated that one.



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing




I meant to say words don't hurt us. That's what you would say and have said. So okay to ban something that doesn't hurt us because the lack of said thing can't hurt us either?


What? Why would you ban something that couldn't hurt you?



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: amazing




I meant to say words don't hurt us. That's what you would say and have said. So okay to ban something that doesn't hurt us because the lack of said thing can't hurt us either?


What? Why would you ban something that couldn't hurt you?


Or why would you care if something was banned if it couldn't hurt you? For the record I only want to ban three books. Bible, Quaran and Torah.
edit on 27-3-2018 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Right. When some guy walks into a gun store and tells the owner “I want a gun right now so I can walk out and start shooting random people on the street” - the owner should give it to him - it’s his right to have it.


Your counter argument is juvenile.


Voting is also a RIGHT, but there is a reason why we don't let 2 year olds into a voting booth.

Because they are physically incapable of handling the responsibilities that come with that RIGHT.



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Right. When some guy walks into a gun store and tells the owner “I want a gun right now so I can walk out and start shooting random people on the street” - the owner should give it to him - it’s his right to have it.


SHocker of shockers, you're changing the rules on the fly now. "Crazy" doesn't automatically mean homicidal, Kayla. Further, you are not discussing "crazy" now, you're discussing premeditated threats of murder, which, again, is another set of laws entirely. If a dude walked into a car dealership with cash in hand and said "I want to buy that Jeep so I can drive across the street and plow into that crowd of protesters, the dealer would be federally required to not only deny the sale, but report the attempted buyer immediately or face charges. So your logic spectacularly fails here.



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: amazing




I meant to say words don't hurt us. That's what you would say and have said. So okay to ban something that doesn't hurt us because the lack of said thing can't hurt us either?


What? Why would you ban something that couldn't hurt you?


Or why would you care if something was banned if it couldn't hurt you? For the record I only want to ban three books. Bible, Quaran and Torah.


So you would infringe on the rights of others.

Well, at least you're honest!



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Should we let that same guy buy whatever book he wanted?



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing




Or why would you care if something was banned if it couldn't hurt you? For the record I only want to ban three books. Bible, Quaran and Torah.


No one in the history of the universe has said "I don't care if that is banned because it cannot hurt me". You're the first to suggest it.

Why would you want to ban books?



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

So you'd infringe upon peoples right to worship freely as they choose, so long as it's peaceful?

After all, if they're peaceful they aren't hurting you any.



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: DBCowboy

Should we let that same guy buy whatever book he wanted?


What books do you want to ban?



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: amazing




I meant to say words don't hurt us. That's what you would say and have said. So okay to ban something that doesn't hurt us because the lack of said thing can't hurt us either?


What? Why would you ban something that couldn't hurt you?


Or why would you care if something was banned if it couldn't hurt you? For the record I only want to ban three books. Bible, Quaran and Torah.


So you would infringe on the rights of others.

Well, at least you're honest!


Of course. I'm being a little facetious and controversial. I wouldn't actually ban or burn any books. Seriously. but those are the 3 books on earth that have actuall caused millions/Billions of people to die. That's the point I'm making.

Those are the books that caused the Crusades, that caused the Twin towers to go down that caused the inquisition, etc etc etc.

those books cause deaths almost daily.
edit on 27-3-2018 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 06:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: DBCowboy

Should we let that same guy buy whatever book he wanted?


What books do you want to ban?


You didn’t answer my question. Should we let the homicidal maniac buy whatever book he wanted?



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

No one ever said that freedom was clean and nice and always peaceful.


Freedom is dangerous.

It actually forces people to be responsible for themselves and their actions. That's why a growing number want to eliminate freedoms of all sorts.



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 06:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: DBCowboy

Should we let that same guy buy whatever book he wanted?


What books do you want to ban?


You didn’t answer my question. Should we let the homicidal maniac buy whatever book he wanted?


Only if the individual is physically and mentally capable of handing the responsibility that comes with freedoms.



posted on Mar, 27 2018 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: DBCowboy

Should we let that same guy buy whatever book he wanted?


What books do you want to ban?


You didn’t answer my question. Should we let the homicidal maniac buy whatever book he wanted?


Only if the individual is physically and mentally capable of handing the responsibility that comes with freedoms.


So, we should do background checks for people who want to buy books?




top topics



 
29
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join