• Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The burning of qurans is clearly meant to incite hate and violence though, and frankly people shouldn’t be burning anything in public anyways.

    They’re still perfectly free to invite anyone to their backyard book burnings, don’t act like this is some authoritarian limit on freedom, this is an active intervention to PRESERVE freedom from the nazis who want to take it from us.

    • frostbiker@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I do not approve of burning holy books, but I think it should be legal.

      What people shouldn’t do and what should be banned are different things. I don’t want to live in a place where what is not mandatory is banned. There has to be some room for freedom of expression, even for people expressing ideas we dislike.

      • Syndic@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        There has to be some room for freedom of expression, even for people expressing ideas we dislike.

        And there still is plenty of room of public expression of opinions without burning a book representing a religious group. Seriously there are thousands of ways to do so.

        But European countries did learn some lessons and that’s why some actions such as calling for religious or other minority groups to be killed or to intimindate such groups with displays of violence isn’t allowed in many of them. And burning a religious book in public is such an act of intimidation which serves absolutely no constructive purpose. That’s why many European countries don’t allow such behaviour.

        • taladar@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          that’s why some actions such as calling for religious or other minority groups to be killed or to intimindate such groups with displays of violence isn’t allowed in many of them

          Then why are you giving groups who threaten violence an incentive to do that more often by giving in to their demands?

          • brainrein@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well, rightwing people have proved over and over again that they’re willing to not only burn books but to burn people.

            • taladar@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              So we should make action A by right-wing people illegal because they are known to do action B?

          • Syndic@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            So we now should base our laws only on doing the opposite of what a few lunatics demand regardless on how it will affect a lot more people? I really don’t think so.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I do not approve of burning books, full stop. I couldn’t care less whose imaginary friend the book is or isn’t about.

        But I completely agree that the government should categorically not be legislating which books you can and cannot burn. Burning a book is a form of free speech. It’s often offensive to many people, but it’s still important - if for no other reason than it lets the people doing the burning show their true colors.