This book gives an interesting early exploration of liberal media bias. Written during the Reagan administration, it explores some of the ways in which the media works to discredit and disenfranchise the Republican Party and conservatives in general. During the Reagan administration, for example, the media terrified people into thinking that the world was about to be thrown into nuclear war (an idea encouraged by the TV docudrama "The Day After"). During this time, vagrancy was redefined as "homelessness", Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative was dubbed by the media as "Star Wars" and the entire decade was labeled "the decade of greed." What actually happened, of course, is that the Soviet Union fell and the threat of nuclear war diminished. On the other hand, despite 16 years combined rhetoric of Clinton and Obama, "homelessness" is still with us. So is poverty, urban decay and all the other problems liberals claimed to be able to fix. One of the best indicators of just how liberal the media is is obtained by polling members of the media to discern their political affiliation. Invariably, they wildly disproportionately identify as Democrat. None of this has changed since this book was written. If anything, it's only gotten worse.Okay, so this is an old book, an old Christian book from the Reagan era.where the Far Right thought they were in unquestioned power. However, this book is ironically interesting, even when you understand Cal Thomas's Christian bias. Thomas is a newspaper columnist with a conservative " family values" Christian slant. One of the immediate ironies is that Thomas in the book lambasts " liberal media" while nowadays his column is put on the same "liberal media" op-ed pages. Basically the book claims that all the "book burning" ( IOW any censorship of HIS religion) comes from the liberals, while his fellow Christians are OC only interested in high moral values and not being excluded from the bookstore shelves and whatnot. Yup, that line of crap.Usual attacks on liberal biases and how his religion is supposedly being supressed. He mentions the Arkansas Creation Science law, which was rightly overturned, but does not mention the scientific invalidity of creationism. He attacks the critical of fundamentalist Christianity books of that time, particularly " Holy Terror" and even calls some of the claims of the two authors slanderous ( interestingly, if they did commit slander, they were never sued).. And there is the claim of no Christian book on the weekly besteller list. Usual accusations against the press, the library boards and civil rights groups that support causes Thomas and his ilk do not approve of.Note the title. None of what he claims about the "secular humanist liberal letf" includes BURNING books. Those of you who are old enough may remember reading about various Christian groups BURNING records, books and so forth, up to the earliy eighties. I remember a number of stories, including an Assembly of God Minister and his flock burning Elvis records in my home town. Also there are some Christians who so dislike the Harry Potter books they burn them. Caryl Matrisciana in a public rally had to satisfy herself by tearing up her copy, not burning it. The ironic title is that the actual book burners are Thomas' ilk, not the liberals.That's not to say that Thomas doesn't make some good points. One of the more relevant points he makes is that when certian Christians are guilty of crimes, their religion is mentioned immediately and prominetly. Thomas doesn't concede that those accused of abuse and so forth may have done so BECAUSE of their extreme Christian beliefs ( IOW he wants to whitewash the direct link to his religion angle)Thomas' intent is to make it look like ALL Christians are " innocent victims" of exclusion and censorship-- and that liberal " filth" is running control of the media. Even then it was bull and now its even more male bovine excrement posturing.Irony: He complains that in many secular bookstores Christian books are in the "religion and cults" sections hiding in back, sharing space with books on Buddhism. In actual fact most bookstores have a whole section, sometimes almost a third of the book space, for Christian books alone. Irony: Thomas calls the "inattention" that Christian books and writers got from the secular world as the " Black Ghettoization"., " separate but equal". Didn't the Klu Klux Klan start from Baptists ( IOW a part of Christianity)? The simple fact is that if any publication not religious-oriented covers religion at all, they reserve it for their religion section of their publication, where it rightfully should go, unless it's a shocking news du jour bit. One of the many ironies in this statement is that Thomas ( as usual for his type of Christianity) thinks "religion" means Christianity and everyone else's beliefs are cults, not religions. And yet its a suckers bet if a NON-Christian religion is shown in any section of a paper, Thomas's folks would raise a stink. Fort Hood incident, Halloween and Wicca, teen "witches".... All legitimate freedom of religion issues yet fundies rally and show their dislike.The biggest enemy of Christianity is the devout fanatical Christian. Its not the sincerity of belief, its the ignorance and prejudice and even hatred of other views that damages the Christian religion far more than any " Christ-hater" could do. This is something Cal Thomas doesn't see.So Cal Thomas, while you are standing there by the bonfire watching your fellow Christians tossing books in, tell me more about how YOU are being discriminated against and how you Christians are so disliked.Cal Thomas is a conservative syndicated columnist. In 1983, he was the communications director of Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority.I first learned of this book as a teenager, when I was reading books in the Opposing Viewpoints series. The Opposing Viewpoints series featured articles from different perspectives, right and left. One of the books, “Censorship,” had a predictable article criticizing right-wing censors, as it discussed the 1970’s textbook protests in Kanawha County. Is that not what enters many people’s minds when they hear “censorship”: the religious right? But then the book included an article alleging that the left, too, practices censorship. This article was an excerpt from Cal Thomas’s Book Burning.Book Burning undertakes four tasks.First, Thomas explains why freedom of speech is important. In fact, Thomas regards it as a Christian virtue. He summarizes John Milton’s Christian defense of it, favoring it over John Stuart Mill’s utilitarian defense. People need not fear exposure to competing ideas, Thomas argues, for only those who lack confidence in their own ideas desire to censor other ideas. Thomas prefers to ground freedom of speech in theism rather than utilitarianism because utilitarianism lacks a solid basis for morality, making free speech merely a good idea that could become dispensable; theism, by contrast, regards free speech as a God-given right. Thomas supports diverse ideas in public libraries, akin to the Fairness Doctrine that existed for radio and television.Second, Thomas defends the Moral Majority against the charge of censorship. As Thomas points out, not every right-wing troublemaker who tries to censor a book officially represents the Moral Majority! But Thomas also sifts through right-wing rhetoric and activity to distinguish what is legitimate from what is wrongheaded. As far as Thomas is concerned, a book should not be censored just because it contains illicit sex and violence, for sin is a part of life. But a book that is appropriate for a teenager or an adult may not be appropriate for children, who may lack the critical faculties to evaluate what they are reading. Thomas also distances himself from the right-wing nostalgia for the days of the Founding Fathers: Thomas does not want to go back to those days, but he would like to see religion and traditional values at least acknowledged in public libraries, public schools, and the media.Third, Thomas argues that the left engages in censorship. References to the traditional family, traditional gender roles, and Christianity are omitted from public school textbooks, even though many Americans embrace these things. Book reviewers, public libraries, bookstores, and the New York Times’s bestseller list marginalize or ignore Christian books, even though Christian books outsell some of the books that they do choose to acknowledge. The national news media is baffled by evangelicalism, as when Jimmy Carter claimed to be “born again.” And movies and TV programs fail to depict Christianity positively, choosing instead to depict Christians as hypocrites or as nutcases.Fourth, Thomas offers advice on what conservative Christians can do. This includes becoming part of the system so as to influence it from the inside, but also challenging the system from the outside.On whether Thomas’s concerns are still relevant thirty-seven years later, my answer is “yes” and “no.” On the “yes” side, children are exposed to sex and violence at an early age, through television and the Internet. The entertainment media promote acts of which Thomas and conservative Christians disapprove, such as homosexuality and premarital and extramarital sex, at a more intense level than was the case when Thomas wrote this book. Not only traditional gender roles, but also the very concept of gender, have been challenged. On the “no” side, religion has become more included in the mainstream media. TV shows and movies, even outside of Christian media, have explored the spiritual side of life in a sympathetic manner. Religious books, even conservative Christian ones, are included on the New York Times’s bestseller list.This book is a thoughtful defense of free speech from a Christian conservative perspective. I have four critiques, though.First, I could not recognize Thomas’s allegation that public libraries and bookstores marginalize or ignore Christianity. Perhaps that is because I grew up in the Bible Belt, where Christian and conservative books filled the shelves of public libraries and bookstores. I recall even seeing some of the titles that Thomas recommends (donated by the local right-to-life group).Second, Thomas seems to conflate public schools teaching children about religion with public schools promoting religion. The former is fine; the latter, legally-speaking, is a no-no. I recall a liberal social studies teacher I had who included a unit on religions. He asked if what he was doing was legal, and he replied “yes”: he is allowed to educate students about different religions, since religion is a part of life, but it is wrong for him to try to encourage his students to convert to Judaism. Thomas, at least in this book, fails to recognize that line, for he responds to the removal of religious rituals from public schools by saying that religion is a part of life and thus should be studied.Third, related to the above item, there is some ambiguity in Thomas’s book about where he wants Christianity to be in the American system. Does he support pluralism, in which Christianity is appreciated and acknowledged among a diverse array of viewpoints? Or does he want Christianity to have a more prominent and dominant role? He points out, after all, that Christianity is a part of America’s heritage.Fourth, Thomas’s discussion of the Christian basis for free speech perhaps would have been stronger had he addressed censorship in the Bible, which the Bible endorses. There is not much tolerance in the Bible for idolatry, for idolaters are to be killed. So much for freedom of speech and religion.This book is way out of date. The good thing about it is that we can read it and look back at how much things have changed since 1983 when it was published. Another good thing about it is that we can look back and see how much things stay the same. The same battles are happening today, but it does seem that, all in all, Cal's Moral Majority is more on the defensive now, whereas the so-called secular humanists seem to have gained ground in 20 years. Diximus.