Oh Please. "Book burning"? The book is not being removed from school libraries or classrooms. The books are not being removed from classrooms or libraries.
They're not being taught as part of the core curriculum of _English Language Arts_ to Eighth graders.
> Last night, Mt. Juliet pastor and pro-Trump conspiracy theorist Greg Locke decided to turn it up a notch by organizing an old-fashioned book burning.
> In a sermon preceding the bonfire, Locke described beefing with "Free Mason devils" and said "I ain't gonna be 'suiciding myself' no time soon." Locke also said people aren't mad that they were burning books, but mad because of the books they were burning — implying that his critics, even other pastors, were devil and witchcraft supporters.
> You can see the footage in Locke's Facebook video of the event — the burning starts about an hour in.
From the OP. This was actually an old-fashioned book burning...
This misses the crucial question: Whose books were burnt?
If this guy bought a copy of Harry Potter and then burned it, that's just a somewhat over-the-top way of saying he doesn't like the book. Which is an opinion he's completely free to have.
The problem with book burning comes when people (or the state) burns books owned by people who don't want them burned.
I read the entire thing, but by all means, flag me if it make you feel better.
It's a sensationalist news piece designed to conflate the actions of the whacko religious right that has been doing this kind of stuff for decades with the recent decision concerning not using the book "Maus" in ELA curricula.
I don't think that Spiegelman's work is so critical that the a school board deciding to keep it in or out of the official curriculum is even noteworthy, let alone something to get worked up about.
As for setting fire to Harry Potter books, if it were transwomen burning them to protest Rowling's TERFery, would that be talked about differently?
> As for setting fire to Harry Potter books, if it were transwomen burning them to protest Rowling's TERFery, would that be talked about differently?
Yes, as it should be. There's quite a large difference between taking an action in protest of discrimination, and taking that same action in support of silly religious fairy tales.
Even if you are a religious person and a believer, burning books that disagree with your doctrine is just reactionary nonsense. Have a little more faith in your, er, faith. I would hope it could stand strong even in the presence of a book you disagree with. If not, maybe you should reconsider your beliefs.
The religious person burning books they disagree with is reactionary nonsense but the trans (supporter) burning books they disagree with is a protest of discrimination...
It's rare to see someone so overtly hold two to different groups to such different standards on the same action.
I was with you up until that point. Burning books in this fashion is never good. Especially not as a publicity stunt. If liberals were getting press for holding a book burning of conservative authors, I'd be against that too. It's more the symbology behind the act, than the actual burning itself.
Here's a less sensationalist report:
https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/williamson/2022/...