Silly Christofacsists on CNN burning Harry Potter books

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

financeguy

ONE love, blood, life
Joined
Dec 4, 2004
Messages
10,122
Location
Ireland
Cripes, they're at it again.

Can someone explain to me why they don't arrange burnings of the Tolkien Lord of the Rings series? I mean weren't their wizards in Lord of the Rings too?
 
Very silly and sad...more sad than silly. I live in a province with a very high illiteracy rate. From what I've seen, Harry Potter seems pretty harmless...plus it gets kids reading, which is vital for their future. Who knows, they may even be inclined to pick up the bible to read one day.

Book-burning, it seems, would have the opposite effect, and instill a sense of fear....which we already have too much of....:|
 
These people really boggle my mind. They are probably the same people who complain that kids don't read too much, and here's Harry Potter getting kids to read, and somehow they have a problem with that.
 
Crazy folk. I admit it I'm not a fan of harry potter *prepares for flaming* but it has nothing to do with witchcraft or anything like that. It just doesn't entertain me the way it does others :shrug: But these people freakin out over Harry potter need to find a more productive hobby.
 
:lol:

I still can't believe people get so riled up over HARRY POTTER. Damn. I don't recall reading about controversy like this over The Da Vinci Code or any books like that.

Heh...Harry Potter...
 
The Christian Taliban isn't too bright, considering they had to buy all those books they burned. I'm sure J.K. Rowling appreciates the royalties, while the rest of us will continue to ignore them. My younger sister started reading the first book, after a priest had a hissy fit on the pulpit and called the books "evil." This, of course, was before the Vatican made an official statement calling the books "harmless." He's too influenced by minions of the Catholic League anyway. :wink:

Anyway, you can see why I have such a distaste for religion these days. They get one little sick and illogical idea in their head and they refuse to shake it. Basically, if it is popular and secular, they'll hate it.

Melon
 
Last edited:
My cousin refused to read them for years because her church kept on that they were evil.

Finally, her stepmother wisely pointed out that she should read them before she judged them.

Now she's an enormous Harry Potter fan. :|
 
haha, yeah didn't the Pope say Harry Potter "corrupts the soul" or something?

losers *points and laughs*

I hope some poor little kid doesn't have their parade rained on though by some nutters telling them they'll go to hell if they read Harry Potter. that would actually make me mad.
 
Actually, I think the Vatican said that it was a good illustration of the struggle between good verses evil.
 
from an interview with JK Rowling in the Vancouver Sun, 26 Oct. 2000:

So far, despite all the odds, Potter and the forces of virtue and decency have triumphed. The moral significance seems clear.

''It does to you,'' says Rowling. ''And to me it's so blindingly obvious. But when this first became an issue I would take an enormous amount of time to explain what I thought was so obvious.

''Now I am starting to get impatient because I feel that you can lead a fool to a book but you can't make them think. And you can quote me, actually, because I'm just getting impatient about it.''

[...]

Harry, of course, is able to battle supernatural evil with supernatural forces of his own, and Rowling is quite clear that she doesn't personally believe in that kind of magic -- ''not at all.'' Is she a Christian?

''Yes, I am,'' she says. ''Which seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books.''
 
Dreadsox said:
Actually, I think the Vatican said that it was a good illustration of the struggle between good verses evil.

Yes. For all the Vatican's hysterical, irrational tendencies, it, for once, erred on the side of reason on this subject.

Not before, of course, watching groups like the Catholic League make a fool out of itself and condemn it.

Melon
 
yolland said:
from an interview with JK Rowling in the Vancouver Sun, 26 Oct. 2000:

''Now I am starting to get impatient because I feel that you can lead a fool to a book but you can't make them think. And you can quote me, actually, because I'm just getting impatient about it.''


I like that "lead a fool to a book, but you can't make them think" line.

Pretty much sums it up. :yes:
 
They've got to be on the publisher's payroll.

Nothing generates a "I've got to read this book" like a good old fashioned book burning on CNN.
 
melon said:


Yes. For all the Vatican's hysterical, irrational tendencies, it, for once, erred on the side of reason on this subject.

Not before, of course, watching groups like the Catholic League make a fool out of itself and condemn it.

Melon

Actually, from what I heard anyway, the Vatican has switched back to the "Harry Potter is the tool of the devil" mode. Makes sense since the tolerant and rational Joey Ratz has assumed the role of pope.
 
Halifax said:
Actually, from what I heard anyway, the Vatican has switched back to the "Harry Potter is the tool of the devil" mode. Makes sense since the tolerant and rational Joey Ratz has assumed the role of pope.

I know that during Benedict XVI's past life as JPII's rottweiler, he hated the series. But he shut up after JPII said good things about it. I'd be surprised if he'd make such a reverse position now.

It doesn't matter anyway. People stopped listening years ago.

Melon
 
financeguy said:
Cripes, they're at it again.

Can someone explain to me why they don't arrange burnings of the Tolkien Lord of the Rings series? I mean weren't their wizards in Lord of the Rings too?

Tolkein was a Christian, and his books were largely allegorically Christian in nature.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Because they are mentally deranged and mentally deranged people don't do well with logic.

The Bible says to stay away from sorcery and witchcraft. These people are taking a stand for their beliefs. You call them mentally deranged for that?

Where's the tolerance, BVS?
 
melon said:
The Christian Taliban

The Christian Taliban?

Burning books merits a comparison to people who don't let their women have jobs, make women cover from head to toe, and can legally beat women to bloody pulps simply for being alone in the streets?

Come on melon, that's completely ludicrous.
 
The more venomous of the replies in this thread floor me; they really do. Some of you scream nonstop about having tolerance for other viewpoints. These book burners obviously have a different view than yourselves, so here is your perfect opportunity to put that tolerance into action. But what do you do? You let a perfect opportunity pass you by; instead you level accusations of "taliban" and "mental derangement". Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Because they are mentally deranged and mentally deranged people don't do well with logic.


I'm not about to burn books just because I don't personally believe in them. So yes, I agree with above...I can tolerate differeing opinions, I'm not out burning thier books for one....
 
starsgoblue said:



I'm not about to burn books just because I don't personally believe in them. So yes, I agree with above...I can tolerate differeing opinions, I'm not out burning thier books for one....

You agree with BVS that these people are mentally deranged because they burned Harry Potter books? do you really?
 
Look....there is alot of people that have opinions that I don't agree with. Do you really think burning those books is going to get anyone to agree with my opinions? Think about it.....if I go and stand on the street and set flame to a book that says something I don't agree on what is that going to accomplish?

Besides, do you really think that witchcraft is really what these books are about? No, not really.
 
Is burning books tolerance?

I don't think so.

Why should we tolerate those who cannot respect a piece of fiction? No, they don't have to like it--and I can disagree with them, but outright destruction of something (be it a book, a statue, a painting, etc.) smacks of something else.

I don't think we REALLY need to remind ourselves who else was burning books in the 20th century, now do we??
 
starsgoblue said:
Look....there is alot of people that have opinions that I don't agree with. Do you really think burning those books is going to get anyone to agree with my opinions? Think about it.....if I go and stand on the street and set flame to a book that says something I don't agree on what is that going to accomplish?

I don't know what it will accomplish, maybe nothing. But that;s not what I asked you. Answer me - do you think that these people are mentally deranged?

starsgoblue said:
Besides, do you really think that witchcraft is really what these books are about? No, not really.

I don't know much about these books, not enough to make an informed decision, but that's not my point either. Do you consider these people to be "mentally deranged" and would you compare them to the "Taliban"?

I consider calling them "mentally deranged" or comparing them to be the Taliban to be every bit as irrational as burning some books.
 
Well, I guess that begs the question: Why are they so scared as to be burning these books?


I am sure there are alot of things that you don't agree with...are you going to stand in the street and cause a commotion as you publicly burn them? I am sure that you are comfortable enough in your own faith to not act out as that way. They had to have bought these books ( a true Christian wouldn't steal) which only served to help the sales count of this book that they burned....wouldn't a larger statement of disagreement just to be to ignore the whole thing and have nothing to do with it?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom