The best way to burn your Quran (and your Bible)

What with all this sacred book burning going on, I got to wondering: What burns better? The Bible or the Quran? So with the help of Google I did a little web sleuthing.

And found out nothing. No one seems to know which of these books will burn the fastest, the longest, the hottest or the brightest. For the sake of scientific purposes, I hope these religious whack-jobs will film the burnings, for later comparative purposes. Maybe keep the ashes for electron scanning, see if there is any residue of the supernatural left.

I did find this out: apparently both the Bible and the Quran can provide you with a lifetime of satisfactory rolling papers. There are dozens of stoners on the web who will attest to this. Now, if someone is compelled to burn a sacred book, that’s the right way to go about it. Might take the edge off of all that anger, dude. (But…no matter what grade of weed you use, you just can’t get high smoking the Book of Mormon)

Another thing I learned: it is a sin to read the Bible or the Quran in the bathroom. Just as I figured. (Now I’ll never get to finish Leviticus)

All kidding aside, I do not think that these book burnings, of  either the Quran or the Bible, should be taken lightly. But it is obvious that many religious people, particularly fundamentalists. place way too much importance in the physical presence of their sacred texts. Take the absurd hoopla over Senator Ellison, a Muslim, wanting to be sworn into office with his hand on a Quran instead of a Bible? Why would anyone expect a Muslim to swear an oath on a book that is not the Quran? For that matter, how ridiculous is it for anyone to swear on the Bible – does it have some sort of ju-ju that ensures honesty? If someone lies while doing so with the earth open up and swallow him?

Typically book burnings are not purely symbolic, as these current incidents are meant to be. When the early church ‘fathers’ (or the Reformers or the Nazis) burned books it was to destroy all the reading material dangerous to their causes.  Not what is happening in the Carolinas, Florida or Afghanistan. (Which is also why book burnings can never be more than symbolic, with TV, radio and especially the Internet replacing the printed media as the primary vessel of ideas)

These book burning are big deals because the people who ‘own’ those books, Christian and Muslim Fundamentalists, allow themselves to be offended, as if the offenders were somehow actually burning Jesus or Mohammed. They have become idolaters and the books are their idols. They have allowed religious fervor to replace common sense along with, at times,  common decency.


, , , ,

  1. #1 by logiopsychopath on September 9, 2010 - 8:49 am

    I checked this out, and my memory was correct.

  2. #2 by Jack on September 9, 2010 - 8:55 am

    Remember Ray Bradbury? Both books will burn at Farenheit 451.

  3. #3 by logiopsychopath on September 9, 2010 - 9:26 am

    I see your point–hate speech has become a controversy in this country–I can’t even email you my views that I would not say on this blog. Both of my employers monitor my emails, and state this in their policies.

    So, we are liable for libel, so to speak. Our free speech rights have been infringed, and we no longer have a true right to privacy. Our freedom of conscience only extends to the bounds of our skulls (or our hearts).

    So, is this Koran burning protected speech? I wouldn’t touch that with a ten foot pole on this blog or any other location in cyber space.

    My opinion is this guy is wrong and should be stopped.

  4. #4 by logiopsychopath on September 9, 2010 - 9:27 am

    Jack–“Wanted for murder, Montag, Wanted for murder, Montag.”

  5. #5 by anon on September 9, 2010 - 10:22 pm

    “is not (IMHO) in any way supernatural nor does the book itself somehow take on supernatural or literally divine properties.” —I agree—-This was also the common “Western” understanding regarding the Muslim displeasure about the cartoon issue. —that Prophet Muhammed(pbuh) was being “idolized”—-In both these issues—-“intentions” played a big part in how the ” action” was understood. (and often, politically played up in some countries whose governments wanted to divert their citizens attention from domestic issues). The intentions that have come across is of “deliberate and intentional disrespect aimed at causing hurt”. —and the fact that officials and governments seem to condone it. In both instances, it doesn’t really help that “condemnation” happens only for “self-interest” in that the U.S. condemnations (internationally) came about when safety of U.S. troops was brought out, and in the Danish cartoons, it was because the M.E. public began to boycott its goods.

    I think, it may have been better to protect the actions but condemn the intentions as being “against the values of civilized society”…….not because of “self-interest” but because of “respect for each other” .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: