If I can’t burn your holy book without terrorism there’s a problem.
If I can’t walk down the streets of Tel Aviv dressed like Hitler then there is a problem.
If I can’t drive through a small town in 'Bama with a ‘I VOTED FOR HILARY’ bumper sticker then there is a problem.
If I can’t go to a Portland Cider Bar wearing a Make America Great Again hat then there is a problem.
Jessie what the fuck are you talking about
Whataboutism
All around the world there is an issue with others violating some groups value system and then being met with violence. It’s not an issue exclusive to Muslims.
I think burning a book is not comparable to dressing like hitler
Whataboutism
You keep putting yourself into the position where you GO somewhere. Sure, don’t go to Israel if you’re a Nazi.
Don’t go to Alabama at all.
Don’t go to Portland as a supporter of fascism if you don’t want to be labeled as a fascist.
Don’t go to a 1st world country if you want to cut off people’s heads for burning books. Don’t go to places if you don’t support the principles they’ve carved out there. It’s not that hard.
Don’t burn holy books if you don’t want sectarian violence.
But of course the book burners do want violence, that’s the whole point.
Burning books doesn’t cause any physical harm to anyone. Someone that would hurt other people for burning books doesn’t deserve to live in a first world society. Whether it be the Bible, Quran, Torah, whatever. It doesn’t even matter if they’re baiting people into violence. They’re just proving that these individuals have those insane violent tendencies inside of them.
Why would you want to burn their holy book?
I’m against burning books but if someone wants to, let them.
Because I support free speech. That means protecting speech I disagree with. If we only defend the speech we like, we no longer have a democracy.
There’s also a difference between burning one book and burning all examples of said book.
It’s also a question of not applying your religion to others. Your religion does not allow you to burn your own book, but you can’t impose that restriction on others, as long as it’s a book that they own and are not burning someone else’s book in the legal sense of ownership.
No, I mean what is the MOTIVE for the people doing the book burning? What do they hope to achieve in burning it?
The recent example in Sweden was of an Iraq refugee who was protesting his treatment by Muslims in Iraq. He claims his right to free speech was suppressed in Iraq because of Islam.
So it’s the same reason everyone protests: to raise awareness of an issue. A more polarising figure, Rasmus Paludan, has also burned qurans. He did so to raise awareness of the growing violence in Muslim communities in Sweden. They proved him right.
Right. Because burning a fundamentalist’s most holy book is the best way to promote a reasonable debate on the subject. It wasn’t to goad the extremists at all? Because that’s really what it looks like to me. It’s like me raising the issue of fights outside pubs by punching someone’s girlfriend outside a pub.
It’s clear you don’t believe it’s a good way to use his free speech, but that’s the beauty of free speech: he doesn’t have to ask your permission first.
I don’t think extremist-baiting is anything more than pointless self-aggrandizing. It’s been obvious to the whole world that extremism is bad, ever since extremists flew planes into buildings in 2001. There is no point to make. We know. Stop pointlessly winding them up and boosting their cause. Do you think the extremists are personally hurt by it? No. They love it when someone does something like this. It shows they are right by proving how terrible the infidels are. They gain followers and the cycle of hatred churns on. Thanks for using your free speech to make the world a little bit shittier for everyone.
I support free speech but this guy clearly is using his speech to start violence and I don’t have to pretend to be too dumb to notice that.
What do you mean “clearly… using his speech to start violence”? The only people starting violence are the people starting violence. There’s no restriction on free speech for hurt feelings. If we only allowed people to practise free speech when it could never offend anyone else, we’d all be silent all the time. The entire premise of the concept is that we can express ourselves when it offends others. That’s the whole point. Free speech arose as a central pillar of reason, science, and democracy during the Enlightenment when the Church would hang people for claiming the Earth wasn’t the centre of the universe. Can you see why it’s important that we allow people to dissent, disagree, and even antagonise one another?
A cute sentiment but not one based in reality.
I’m not allowed to visit Auschwitz dressed in Nazi uniform. I will have violence used against me.
I can’t slowly drive around a small town in 'Bama with a gay pride flag and a I VOTED FOR HILARY bumper sticker. I will have violence used against me.
I can’t enjoy a Cider at the Cider House wearing my Make America Great Again hat. I will have violence used against me.
In each instance I’m not hurting anyone, I’m just making those around me uncomfortable and anxious with my (to them) questionable views. Yet everyone can clearly see I’m looking for trouble, that the ‘speech’ has the unsaid addition of ‘I want to hurt you when I’m powerful enough’.
It’s easier to police the one person doing the antagonizing than it is to police the millions of people from the demographic they’re targeting, it’s inevitable that a few loons will take matters into their own hands.
These are false comparisons. This is an approved demonstration against Islamic violence(and such). But I guess we all forgot about Charlie H and all the rest. The man did not walk into a mosque on a Tuesday and light a book on fire.
Individuals are responsible for their own actions. Blaming an entire group for the actions of a few goes against the principles of justice and fairness. Attributing the actions of extremists to all Muslims is like blaming all Christians for the actions of a few extremists within that group. Extremism exists in all religions and ideologies.
Yeah but if you insult the mob you can’t be all surprised if they try to kill you. Free speech protects you from the government. We live in a world were everyone doesn’t recognize the same rules law and order.
I look at this the same way as a white guy singing a bunch of rap songs using the n-word as emphatically as possible then posting it on youtube. Sure you have the right to say it but that’s not going to stop you from getting your ass beat
So you’re using examples where Free Speech has failed as an argument against Free Speech? Because you SHOULD be allowed to do the things named in your examples. That’s the ideal, were not there yet but that’s not a justification to stop the journey.
There you go again with weak arguments that don’t compare to this.
Let’s try a different track: I’m asking you to to go to all of those places and do all of those actions. It’ll be more productive than either (good-faith) getting the conversation distracted responding to explain why those aren’t good points or (bad-faith) derailing things just for the fun of being contrarian.
How doesn’t it compare?
This is an individual who hates Muslims, doesn’t want them in his country. He thinks they are dangerous, so he will prove they are dangerous by antagonizing them in the hope that a few hot heads will take the bait. Then he can say ‘look see, all Muslims are violent and we must remove them from our country’.
Just like the guy in the MAGA hat can then say ‘Look at how violent the Portlanders are’, just like the guy with the Hilary bumper sticker car can then say 'Look at how violent these rural bumpkins are. It’s active provocation, not a protest.
Oh yes he is an asshole. As much as I despise religion I would never lower myself to the level of defacing a book. He is also an asshole with rights, rights being threatened by much worse assholes.
Burning books isn’t promoting free speech. It’s literally the opposite. It’s sending the message that we don’t accept your ideas. That’s why the Nazis did it.
Of course it’s free speech. Burning the American flag is free speech. Shitting on a picture of Donald Trump is free speech. Burning Bibles is free speech. All of these happen frequently.
Sure, you’re allowed to do it because you have free speech. But don’t say that you’re promoting the freedom of speech because you’re doing it. Book burning is an act that stifles the ideas of whoever wrote that book.
More on topic, the two groups in question are both extremist groups that are opposed to the existence of the other. This isn’t about speech, this is about inciting violence.
Against violence committed to those not following Islam
Moving those goal posts pretty quickly…
Book burning is an act that stifles the ideas of whoever wrote that book.
The Koran really doesn’t have any ideas that need help. Humans have historically been pretty good at turning little girls into chattle and torturing people for gold. Are you really worried that there could be a day where those ideas are stifled?
In this context, I was mainly referring to book burning in general; not specifically the Koran. In my mind, they are done only as a tool for hatred. But, fair point, I haven’t read it and if that’s what it depicts then I don’t think I’m missing out on anything.
There’s a difference between burning one instance of one book as a protest and blacklisting hundreds of books and erasing all mentions of them and forcing everyone to not read them. One is declaring your dislike for something without affecting anyone, the other is erasing history. What you just did is a false equivalence.
Books are for reading, not burning. But anyone should be allowed to burn any book they want to burn. It’s nothing but ink on paper.
Why would anyone want a book about pedophilia and war?
Lolita is quite good, as is All Quiet on the Western Front. There are so many amazing books out there about awful things. And yet every religious text is just absolutely dreadful, horribly poorly written, incoherent plot and structure, no character development, and don’t even get me started about the dialogue. And I’m really not kidding just make a point, they just straight up fucking suck. Idk how anyone can possibly read that shit. They should be burned for being horrible books, let alone the religious connotation.
Very well aware. Before I lost my faith I was planning on making Bible studies my career. There is so little well written or good about that book. Even in the original languages. The very few parts well done are only done well in context. The Sermon on the Mount isn’t one of the best speeches of all time, it is just so much better than anything else in that book that if you read it cover to cover it is jaw dropping.
Imagine living in a world where you fear for your citizens because someone could kill them as a revenge for some burnt books.
Some Americans feel the same way about those who burn a flag.
I have just noticed Americans calling for the killing of Democrats because they dare waving a LGBTQ flag. They are literally the same kind of people they hate, extremist Muslims
The same can apply to them then.
I abhor any form of physical violence which I always find unjustifiable.
Emotional and psychological violence is just as bad and can do just as much harm.
You don’t even have to imagine. That’s the sad part.
Unless a huge majority of muslim religious leaders are decrying seeking vengeance for things like this, and unless they’re all telling their congregations to be peaceful, then it’s a shit religion that I would be ashamed to be a part of.
We ARE condemning it. We’ve been consistently doing that for literally decades now. Did you even bother to check?
Where? Which respected imams and Muslim leaders are criticising this? Genuine question.
The list is literally hundreds of thousands. Honestly, go into any mosque and ask the imam. Follow any Islamic leaders; in the US it’s people like Imam Omar Suleiman who post a lot on social media. Or imam Khalid Latif on YouTube.
Thanks for those examples! I’ll take a look at their work :)
So the majority of the muslim priests (imams) are loudly condemning it during their sermons? You sure?
If so, aight, fair enough.
But if I were you I’d do what a ton of people did for the catholic church during the whole child sex scandal, and leave to join an offshoot
Yes I’m sure, my mosque even livestreams the sermon on YouTube every week if you care to check.
The fact that illiterate farmers in Pakistan are hurting people doesn’t mean I need to change my religion and has nothing to do with my prayers to God. I have as much in common with them as I do with Jack the Ripper. Should I change my citizenship because my country is full of racists? No, because they have almost nothing in common with me. Asking me to do so is because you are unable to deal with the stereotypes in your mind, not me.
You’re making good points and making me think.
Although, I will say the attacks on people are far more common than jack the ripper (one guy). I think the catholic sex scanal was a much closer analogy.
doesn’t mean I need to change my religion
I don’t think you need to do anything. It would be a wise decision for you to leave your religion, you know assuming you don’t live in a country where it is dominate and they kill you for doing that, but you don’t need to change it.
and has nothing to do with my prayers to God
There isn’t any God. You are talking to yourself.
How interesting that I haven’t tried proselytizing or converting anyone and are merely pushing back against islamophobia and hate, and you feel the need to push your beliefs on me?
How have I pushed you? Did I make you wear a hijab or torture you as an apostate? This is like that saying if you are so used to getting everything you want equality looks like oppression.
I gave you advice, you can follow it or not. There is no god, prayer and your rituals are a waste of time and effort. Do what you want with that advice.
Salmon Rushdie
Sigh. The attack on him was condemned by Muslims and Muslim leaders worldwide. Those condemnations were all over Muslim social media and TV in Arabic, Urdu, Swahili, Malay, Bangla, Turkish, Kazan, Uzbek, and the list goes on. Did you even bother to check? Or do you just assume all Muslims are terrorists?
Sigh. I don’t care about your Rittenhouse tears. Who issued the Fatwa? Sigh.
Obviously you want to give me a share of the blame even though that was long before I was born. I’m not going to continue wasting my time on someone who misplaces his anger and hate. Peace.
Removed by mod
This is a ludicrous statement. Obviously Muslim leaders shouldn’t support or endorse violent actions, but they do not have a responsibility to account for every misdeed done by members of their faith. Does every Christian church have to provide a response for every Christian nutjob?
Does every Christian church have to provide a response for every Christian nutjob?
Nope. They can remain silent and people like me will continue to point out their involvement. Please remain silent. Please please continue to let people do bad things in the name of Christ. Also Christ never existed.
How about stop letting certain groups have special treatment?
There is zero justification for going into some raging fit if someone burns a book. Yet all these left leaning European countries have tried to turn a blind eye or downplay every time one of these groups have assaulted or threatened someone.
Assimilate to a modern, 1st world culture, or go back to the stone age bullshit where you came from. You left whatever hellhole you came from because those countries are backwards-thinking conservative theocracies. Don’t you dare come to these western countries and try to impose your backwards thinking onto the native folks already there. You Assimilate to their culture, they aren’t going to walk on eggshells to appease your archaic religious nonsense. Fuck religion.
Yet all these left leaning European countries have tried to turn a blind eye or downplay every time one of these groups have assaulted or threatened someone.
Which countries do you mean? And could you explain how they ignored people assaulting other people?
I fail to see why this is a thing, or why you mention it’s somehow a “left” thing.
The reason it’s more significant now is that Turkey is using the book burning as an excuse to withhold approving NATO membership. After that it became news, before that it wasn’t news. Meaning, no need to make up stuff about you making up things about “left leaning”.
There has been a massive influx of Muslims into Europe over the last decade or so due to troubles in the Middle East. The Left has naively been welcoming them en masse not realizing that so many of these people have zero interest in assimilating into these new countries and instead want to bring with them the extremist conservative values they had back home. This has been happening all across Europe from Germany to the UK to France to Sweden. These people have been known to try pushing their ass backwards views on locals and the locals not really being able to do anything about it.
Fuck Turkey they are the worst the NATO member and fight with the rest of them
Sweden and Denmark for sure, maybe also Germany, UK & France.
Islamaphobia doesn’t exist. A phobia is an irrational fear. It is perfectly rational to be afraid of people who’s faith instructs them to kill the non-believers.
This isn’t Islamophobia.
Islamophobia definitely exists, and is the phobia / hatred of all those who practice Islam, i.e. Muslims, via a generalization that all Muslims are extreme and dangerous. This is objectively false, and systemic Islamophobia needs to stop.
However, this here is cause for concern, as there are a few extreme fundamentalist Muslims calling for the death of people over a burned book. That’s not Islamophobia, that’s a fear response to a direct, physical threat.
Someone else in the thread mentioned some Americans calling for the death of anyone who burns the American flag. This is also extremely concerning.
It IS islamophobia if you think all or most Muslims are like that. Do you think DJ Khaled or Dave Chappelle wants to kill you?
And that’s NOT what Islam says.
No that would be called muslimophobia
That’s not a real word. Islamophobia means irrational fear or hatred of Islam and/or Muslims.
Only bigots try to split hairs on definitions like this and say things like “homophobia isn’t homophobia if you’re not afraid of gay people.”
Yes because an ideology is the same as being gay lol.
And yes it might not be a existing distinction but one that can be made. Most Religions are stupid ideologies that I hate. Doesn’t mean I hate every Catholic for following an ideology that is for example homophobic as long as the person ignores that part of the ideology.
I’m not afraid of gay dudes. I’m afraid of their dicks! /s
sahih hadeeth say who ever disrespects quran/mohammad/allah kill him.
No it does not. That’s a hateful myth spread by bigots who try and take things out of context. The sahih Hadith AND the Quran actually talk in great length about how to ignore trolls and ignorant people who bash you and your religion, and to “repel evil with Good.” The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) himself signed the charter of Medina that guaranteed religious freedom.
Stay back on topic. I’m a practicing Muslim, and there’s 2 billion Muslims out there. If my religion told me to kill people why is it so rare then?
Then why are apostates and non Muslims treated so terribly in the Muslim world? And don’t tell me they aren’t.
You sound like a nice guy. But your religion has far more than its fair share of fundamentalist jackasses, the kind of people who will threaten violence because a refugee halfway around the world burned a book.
You’re trying to generalize 2 billion people and tie the actions of a few to the entire community.
Indonesia has the world’s largest Muslim population with over 300 Million Muslims. It also is home to 300 distinct religions with centuries of coexistence. The majority of the worlds Muslims live in democracies and get along just fine. Places like Senegal and Jordan just don’t have what you’re describing.
Pakistan is a poor country with a literacy rate of less than 50%. There’s a lot of violence there, but their Hindu-majority neighbor India with similar culture and poverty ALSO has massive religious violence problems with current lynch mobs and pogroms. It’s not the fault of a single religion.
And FYI, the reason this book burning got any attention at all is because these countries bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, and the far right in the country is very public about hating Muslims and immigrants, so this was an attempt at trolling people. The Muslim community largely ignored the entire thing, because its very clearly an attempt at trying to insult, and have not tried burning things in response. The media is focusing on the 0.001% of the community that did otherwise, just like how the makers of South Park got death threats from Christians even though almost no Christian’s worldwide joined in.
Never said it was, but I know multiple people who are non-Muslims in Muslim nations. The stories I hear from my friends in Egypt and Bangladesh are horrendous.
There’s monsters in every religion, but prevalence varies. In Indonesia, they still actually flog people for being gay sometimes… And if I said what I really thought about Muhammad in Riyadh and I was a Saudi citizen, I would die for it.
Oh, and no, I guarantee it’s all religious outrage, with the book burning. Stop trying to pretend it’s different. I get that you live in the West and want happy feelings about your religion, but your lived experience pales to that of my atheist and Christian friends who have to live in the Arab and Muslim world.
Prevalence varies BASED ON socioeconomic factors.
I’ve lived in poor Christian countries that still jail people for homosexuality. Jamaica and Uganda lynch suspected gays, but Argentina does not. Wealth and education are the big difference between the two, not religion. And religious fundamentalism is on the rise all over in the developing world, if you ignore that and try to blame a specific religion in general then you’re missing the massive death tolls in places like Central African Republic or the genocides in Myanmar.
Saudi Arabia is a total dictatorship and a tiny one at that (Chinas has 2x as many Muslims as Saudi) ; say what you want in a Muslim-majority Democracy like Albania or Senegal and nobody will stop you.
There were some highly publicized incidents in Bangladesh but they were loudly and widely condemned by the public and the religious leadership, then the government caught and punished those who did it and made examples of them. Violence is a human behavior, but you can’t blame a religion for it when the religion explicitly forbids such behavior AND all the major religious leaders spoke out against it.
I’ve traveled extensively throughout the Muslim world, you’re just going off of hearsay and anecdotes, and you’re being condescending to boot. If you’re going to stubbornly ignore facts then I can’t help you.
@[email protected] is a big liar and he is trying to use Taqiyaa (deception) to show that his religion is peaceful. here is the proof of list of authentic hadeeths (which btw also teach you how to pray, because quran does not completely tell you how to) that apostates are required to be killed or reconvert to islam. https://sunnah.com/search?q=Whoever+changes+religion+kill+him
here is proof that who ever disrespects allah/mohammad/quran need to be put to death.
http://sunnah.com/muslim/32/146 http://sunnah.com/bukhari/64/84 http://sunnah.com/bukhari/64/185 http://sunnah.com/abudawud/40/11
Quran 33:57-61:
Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment. And those who annoy believing men and women undeservedly, bear (on themselves) a calumny and a glaring sin. O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Truly, if the Hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who stir up sedition in the City, desist not, We shall certainly stir thee up against them: Then will they not be able to stay in it as thy neighbours for any length of time: They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain (without mercy).What exactly does it mean when it says that Allah “curses them in this world”? Some Muslim scholars have taken this to justify punishments of blasphemers.
Quran 5:33
Muslim scholars have also used verse 5:33 to justify the punishment of blasphemers:
The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; Except for those who repent before they fall into your power: in that case, know that Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful
thank you.
Removed by mod
Learn to control your emotions
deleted by creator
At some point we will just have to burn all the religious text and be done with it.
Burn every science book and eventually they’ll be exactly rewritten. Burn every religious story and they’re gone forever.
I wonder why they are so afraid of the religion of peace?
Yeah, all major religions are known for their very level-headed followers. No need to worry.
That didn’t really answer my question. Whataboutism.
it’s hardly whataboutism if your starting statement already alludes to the comparison.
Muslims allowing islam to be known as ‘the religion of peace’ is one of the biggest doublespeaky manipulations around. They’re technically correct, because they’re referring to this line from the quran: “There will be peace on earth when there is no more al-fitnah”. Al-fitnah means ‘disbelief’ so what they’re saying is, there WILL be peace on earth, once we’ve converted everyone to our religion (forcibly or otherwise).
I’m a bookworm, read voraciously, and as a sad lonely young teen who struggled to understand religious people, decided to read all the books. Hindu vedas; Christian old / new testament; Buddhist dhamapada; quran, and the hadith. Islam is an awful religion when taken literally, and the few islamic sects who are genuinely peaceful (eg ahmadi, sufi) are not even considered ‘real muslims’ by the more popular interpretations (eg sunni / shia / salafi).
Don’t rely on out-of-context quotes from dodgy rightwingers, don’t rely on out-of-context explanations from muslims seeking to proselytise and make excuses, EVERYONE should read it for themselves so you’re debating on solid ground with facts on your side. My absolute favourite line from these particular religious texts is when Mohammed says he wants another wife to his (iirc final wife) Aisha. Aisha says something like, you’ve already had the maximum number of wives; Mo falls into a trance then says, don’t worry, I just spoke to god and he says it’s fine. She replies “Oh, how your god rushes to fulfil your desires”. Even she knew it was a crock of shit.
It’s not the religion they’re worried about, it’s the adherents. And if you’re wondering why that is, there’s two towers in New York that used to be there and aren’t anymore.
Gotcha the ideas are perfect, it is the people who are wrong. Odd how often that is claimed
What? In what way did I claim that?
It’s not the religion they’re worried about, it’s the adherents.
Yes. The religion is abstract. It’s the people that are the problem. Are you worried about Mein Kampf or are you worried about Neo-Nazis?
@FlyingSquid @afraid_of_zombies
Some day soon I imagine the Christo-fascists will jail us all, then the neo-nazis will line us up against a wall.
Yeah and it’s not the gun I’m worried about, it’s the bullets
Same thing man, same thing. Control them both.
Neither guns nor bullets are abstractions. Very poor analogy.
Religious texts are just about the only books I support burning, especially if the intent is to piss off the morons that think the books are true.
How can I make a donation to buy more korans and kerosene for them?
I hope their counter-terror operations are successful and end with a deficit of bullets.
Removed by mod
They go and cry about muslim being intolerant yet they go and burn their sacred book which is considered the holiest thing for them.
Am I the only one seeing the problem here?
Genuinely unsure if satirical or not…
There’s millions of those “sacred books” being printed by machines. Just go buy another one. They’re dirt cheap too.
Its not like burning the quran is part of everyday life in society. More like they deliberate do it because they know its offensive for muslims, so its an obvious provocation disguised as freedom of expression. Im atheist btw and i despise religion in general, but sad to see reason being downvoted. Sorry i can’t back you up on the comment sections, i cant afford to be judged right now.
Thanks for your comment, glad to see some people are still reasonable.
I honestly don’t understand why you’re being downvoted. Book burning is probably one of the worst steps you can take towards being intolerant without directly harming people. There had to be so many more options that could’ve been taken that would’ve de-escalated the situation in a way that didn’t involve destruction.
I think it’s the fact that true tolerance would allow the burning of any book. Not all copies, not banning it from circulation, but the burning of an individual symbol as a means of expressing an idea is perfectly fine in most Americans’ view. I share that view, I understand the nuance of the situation at hand, I’m aware the quaran is a holy book and that it sends a strong message.
But so does burning the American flag, as a symbol, to show that America’s ideals and values are dead or do not apply for the people doing the burning. American flag burning was done with the intent to express that the symbol of freedom and equality that it was pushed as was not at all representative of the America those people were experiencing. America has a problem with nationalism, so much so they tossed “under god” in a “non-mandatory” (socially reinforced) pledge of allegiance you say every day before school starts all the way until you graduate. You can imagine burning the flag pissed those nationalists off too, but their vitriol and frustration is useless and unwarranted.
If you say the culture of Islam, or the culture of the people who see that book as their most holy symbol and use it to justify violence, is unwelcome in your nation, as an individual, that’s completely fine to me. I don’t love the blanket statement, but I do love that you can express it without fear of retaliation from your government and with the knowledge that you are as safe expressing that belief as you are expressing one more widely agreed upon.
If I disagree with you, I should debate you, i should seek to educate you, or be louder than you with my actions and words. That’s not the way of every place in the world, but it is the way of any civilized people. Any who condone violence in response, even provoked violence, are closer to animals than their fellow man.
I want to agree with you but I can’t. The world can’t run by true tolerance; at least not in this day and age. There are too many beliefs, cultures, and ideas that are being eroded away by people that spout hatred. Why? Just because they can? Just because they have the right?
If anything, the closest we can be is intolerant of the intolerant. The people that burned the books were an “anti-Islam activist group”. This sounds exactly like other hate groups like the proud boys, westboro baptist Church, the KKK, the EFF, Islamic extremists… These aren’t people that are celebrating their free speech. They are people that are practicing legal hostility as a tool to oppress others. I’d say hate speech is a good line to draw when allowing people to have public demonstrations.
You don’t believe in freedom of speech.
Is it freedom of speech to deliberately provoke an entire religion just because it is your “right”?
It is my freedom to call you all kind of horrible names and slurs, does it mean I have to do it?
Yes to the first and no to the second.
Is it freedom of speech to deliberately provoke an entire religion just because it is your “right”?
Yes. That is literally the entire premise: the right to say offensive things. The reason this is important is that everything we say is offensive to someone. If we operated under the principle that we may never offend anyone else, we would all have to be silent, all the time. Free speech is the basis for science and democracy, where saying things which offend people is a requirement. We must always be free to challenge the beliefs and values of others, or we’re no better than theocratic dictatorships.
How about we instead respect each other’s beliefs and live happy?
Respecting each other can do great stuff and it won’t prevent your from doing science.
That’s a pretty broad statement.
You can’t go into an airport and shout “bomb” or use a bullhorn in a residential area at 3 AM without someone calling the cops on you and being detained. You can verbally harass someone to the point of being abusive or lie about someone to defame them but you can face repercussions for it. There’s a lot of lines that intersect with freedom of speech. Just because I’m drawing one at hate speech doesn’t mean I’m against freedom of speech.
Just because there is nuanced on the topic doesn’t mean that you were nuanced.
Burning the American flag is a different ordeal. When you invade their country in the name of “freedom” don’t expect love and rose.
Imagine the reverse, Iraq invading the US over fake claims of “chemical weapons” and imposing their political regime and destroying your whole way of life, imposing the Shariah Law (just like the US imposed their view of freedom). Would you still hold the same views? I think not.
