Silly Christofacsists on CNN burning Harry Potter books - Page 15 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-19-2005, 07:54 AM   #211
Refugee
 
dazzlingamy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The city of blinding lights and amazing coffee - Melbourne.
Posts: 2,468
Local Time: 06:16 PM
Why burn the books though? Thats sound an outdated frankly, completely laughable thing to do.

'Ooooh look at us, burning these evil harry potter books, we're so powerful! We live in the dark ages'

I can't believe people still burn books. Thats such a pathetic thing to do. Ban the books, write letters to JK Rowling, get one of your psycho ministers babble on on one of your god damn boring tv shows, but burn a book? What are you 11 yrs old and playing with matches?!

Its the most hilarious thing!! All these men and women standing around a bonfire, slowly watching the harry potter logo melt away feeling some smug satisfation that they 'stuck it to them heathens'

omg i just pissed myself laughing. i can't breathe.

what next? flaming bags of dog poo on the steps of kids houses who you've spied reading the book on the bus home from school?!
__________________

__________________
dazzlingamy is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 10:24 AM   #212
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 03:16 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
Hi Cheryl
Gello darlin

80's: yes, that's a good example. I don't believe the Virgin birth is metaphorical either.

But your example further proves my overall point: you made in that post an *argument* about why isn' t not a metaphor, rather than the 'self explanatory' line. For the record, I have seen arguements elsewhere that the Virgin Birth is metaphorical (ie, a metaphor of Jesus's purity).

Again, my basic point is that ANY reading of ANY text involves an interpretation. You don't seem to disagree with that general point, at least that you've stated here.

When someone tells me he's not interpreting, I wonder what he doesn't want anyone else to consider.....

And I'm repeating myself now, so I'll bow out unless there is confusion about what I've written.
__________________

__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 10:39 AM   #213
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:16 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sherry Darling


Gello darlin

80's: yes, that's a good example. I don't believe the Virgin birth is metaphorical either.

But your example further proves my overall point: you made in that post an *argument* about why isn' t not a metaphor, rather than the 'self explanatory' line. For the record, I have seen arguements elsewhere that the Virgin Birth is metaphorical (ie, a metaphor of Jesus's purity).

Again, my basic point is that ANY reading of ANY text involves an interpretation. You don't seem to disagree with that general point, at least that you've stated here.

When someone tells me he's not interpreting, I wonder what he doesn't want anyone else to consider.....

And I'm repeating myself now, so I'll bow out unless there is confusion about what I've written.
No confusion here. Very well worded.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 11:55 AM   #214
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 09:16 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by cardosino


I'll defend both. Consistency is a great thing. Burn a flag, flush a Koran, burn Harry Potter.......
by the way, as an outsider to this discussion:

flag burning is a more acceptable form of protest than book burning.

because burning a flag is critisizing a nation and its policies, so it is a form of political protest against something established (not against a minority)

book burning is not critisizing a nation, not critisizing policies, but critisizing facts or fictional stories or a certain view expressed in that book - nazis burned books that were critisizing their wish for absolute power in form of a dictatorship - the burning of harry potter books (as ridiculous as it is) points into the same direction, which is against free expression of ART - a book is a PIECE of ART, NOT a SYMBOL of a NATION and its political power - flushing the koran wasnt a form of protest at all -

that means flag burning and book burning are two entirely differerent concepts of criticism. not that i would burn a flag, but as a form of protest it clearly makes more sense than burning a book.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 01:51 PM   #215
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:16 PM
"more acceptable" speech???

Isn't that what we are trying to avoid?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 02:12 PM   #216
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 09:16 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
"more acceptable" speech???

Isn't that what we are trying to avoid?
why speech? i said form of protest and referred to the sense of burning a flag in compare to a book as you can clearly see in above post.

do you think burning a book makes as much sense as burning a flag, as a form of political protest? (i mean theoretically, its clear we both wouldn´t resort to that form of protest). remember, a flag is a symbol of a nation/ state and its policies, whereas a book isn´t.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 02:18 PM   #217
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:16 PM
Protest is speech.

The protest was not against an author or fictional character, it was against the perceived acceptance of something that goes against their religious beliefs.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 02:28 PM   #218
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 02:16 AM
and they're still idiots.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 02:44 PM   #219
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:16 PM
And peope call Christians judgmental.....
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 02:59 PM   #220
New Yorker
 
sallycinnamon78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,977
Local Time: 08:16 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest

Or is that you are allowed to make facetious comments and I am not?
You DEFINITELY win when it comes to facetious comments. I did wonder if you were serious, as it goes, but wasn't 100% after labouring through 14 long pages of the same, neverending little argument. Back off. Alternatively, try talking sense.

Quote:
At least this shows me you read the book. Did you like it, by the way?
Although it has nothing to do with the discussion whatsoever, I love A Little Princess; it's been a favourite of mine since i was 8 years old.

Quote:
Just as there are no easy answers to interpreting scripture.

Remember, deciding that there is only one way to read a certain passage IS itself an interpertation, and must be defended just as any other.
That's a good point...
__________________
sallycinnamon78 is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 03:00 PM   #221
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 09:16 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
The protest was not against an author or fictional character, it was against the perceived acceptance of something that goes against their religious beliefs.
if I wrote a book and it was burned, i would take it personal. it also goes against the author who created the text.

imo burning books for something that goes against a religious belief is not acceptable. also flushing religious symbols is not acceptable.

imo burning flags for something that goes against a political opinion is acceptable, even if i wouldn´t practise that form of protest and would also advise others not to because it is too extreme. also flushing political symbols is acceptable.

if you fail to see the difference between expressing political opinions and trying to suppress other religions beliefs, i can´t help you.

i think the reason for that may be that you think religious causes should be treated just like political causes. but religious beliefs are connected with a completely different set of freedom values. a religious belief doesn´t depend on a majority or a democracy. everyone is entitled to hold his very own religious "representation", whereas political representation is reached through compromises and majorities.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 03:05 PM   #222
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:16 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by sallycinnamon78


You DEFINITELY win when it comes to facetious comments. I did wonder if you were serious, as it goes, but wasn't 100% after labouring through 14 long pages of the same, neverending little argument. Back off.
Hostility does not become you.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 03:07 PM   #223
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 09:16 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Protest is speech.
violent protest is speech?
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 03:17 PM   #224
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:16 PM
What violence?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 03:23 PM   #225
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 09:16 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
What violence?
well you made that general statement that protest is speech. i don´t think so. protest can take many forms. i´m just asking if you also include violent protests in your definition of (free) "speech".

you will agree that the Christians didn´t (only) speak out against harry potter books, but also burned them. that form of protest is not what i call speech.

ps. i´m also expecting your reply to the point about differences between politics and religion.
__________________

__________________
hiphop is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com