Dear People Offended By Books; Requesting Permission To Burn Them Will Drive More Attention To Them
from the that's-not-what-you-want dept
A reader named Frosty840 points out that, if you thought the idea of a good old fashioned "book burning" had gone out of style in the US, a group of offended individuals in Wisconsin are petitioning the local library for permission to burn its only copy of a book called Baby Be-Bop. A book burning? Apparently it hasn't occurred to these offended folks that (beyond the disgrace of wanting to burn books they dislike), this entire action has only served to call a lot more attention to that book. The folks asking for the right to burn the book, are also demanding $120,000 for "being exposed to the book in a library display," which seems likely to (again) only drive much more interest in the book. A book that can cause that much damage? Where can I get my copy?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: baby be-bop, book burning, censorship, streisand effect, wisconsin
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_3RUwAJ_MI
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAzMuHyg8Eg
Someone should suggest to these people that they burn a book the "offended group" likes, but offends OTHER people. Hell I'd tell them a book they like offends me and demand they burn it just to see how retarded it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Always brings me to this ruling...
— U.S. Supreme Court in Board of Education, Island Trees School District v. Pico (1982)
I think the same should be applied to ignorant groups of people and libraries. Hey, if Pope Paul can ban books, why can't I? (not trying to bash Christianity.. but it's just too easy.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do the world a favor!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what is this?
1940's Nazi Germany????
haven't we gone beyond such intolerance and be able to accept any and everything in this age of free flowing information and internet?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's for the Children!
Let's make a deal, we'll accept you for believing in miracles and demons, and you accept that gays can't just choose to like the opposite sex, and if that's too hard, just accept that they actually exist in society.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's for the Children!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's for the Children!
Anyone who claims to have changed their innate sexual orientation is probably lying and liars are not good ones to ask questions of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's for the Children!
No liars there, and you can find more information about them just by googling "ex-gay". I've met some before, so yes they do exist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: It's for the Children!
Another one, and wikipedia even has an entry on the term. So you can't deny their existence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Way to cast the first stone there, retard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
So the usage of idiot, which originally meant someone who didn't go to the polls and vote in Athens, is ok? And then follow that up with BS about how he was using the term "go to hell"?
C'mon, you can do better than that. Admittedly, using the word retard as an insult is/was wrong. Fortunately I don't believe in fairy land heavens or hells, so I'll just allow the admission of wrongdoing to suffice and not worry about the invisible man in the sky being upset with me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You should realize that accepting Jesus involves accepting his teachings as well. (Matthew 5:22) - "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell."
Repent while you still can.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Santa tough on books
http://trueslant.com/jeffhoard/tag/christian-civil-liberties-union/
Video @ bottom
[ link to this | view in chronology ]