What is Cross burning?
[[File:Ku Klux Klan members and a burning cross, Denver, Colorado, 1921.jpg|thumb|[[Ku Klux Klan]] members and a burning cross, [[Denver]], [[Colorado]], 1921.]][[File:Cross Lighting 2005.jpg|thumb|right|Ku Klux Klan members at a cross burning in 2005.]][[File:Hatred Racism Ku Klux Klan outfit Exhibits of The Children's Museum of Indianapolis, Indiana, US. Photo Valerie Everett 2012.jpg|thumb|Photo taken by Valerie Everett in September 2012 showing items from the [[Exhibition|exhibitions]] at the en:The Children's Museum of [[Indianapolis]], [[Indiana]], USA: Figurine in Ku Klux Klan outfit, historical photo, etc.]] '''Cross burning''' is a practice associated with [[racism]]. ==United States== In the [[United States]], the [[Ku Klux Klan]] burned [[Cross|crosses]] close to the homes of people they wanted to [[wikt:intimidate|scare]]. It is unrelated to a [[custom]] called fiery cross, which was common in Northern Europe. In that custom, a burning piece of wood was used in [[wikt:procession|processions]], or to call people together for a [[rebellion]]. At first, Klans during the [[Reconstruction era|Reconstruction]] period did not burn crosses. The idea was introduced by Thomas Dixon Jr. in his novel, ''The Clansmen''. He took it from an old Scottish custom known as the ''Crann Tara,'' used to declare war. It also called all clan members to defend a certain area. Most of the KKK's rituals were Scottish in origin; the group saw Medieval Europe as morally pure and white. Ten years after Dixon's book, D.W. Griffith directed ''[[The Birth of a Nation]]'', the movie version of Dixon's novel.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/12/why-does-the-ku-klux-klan-burn-crosses.html|title=Why does the Ku Klux Klan burn crosses?|last=Koerner|first=Brendan|date=2002-12-17|website=Slate Magazine|language=en|access-date=2019-09-05}}</ref> Cross burning in the KKK did not really start until the early 1900s. Its purpose ''was'' to intimidate, despite the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in 2003. The case was c