97
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
97 points (98.0% liked)
Europe
8324 readers
1 users here now
News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures
Rules
(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)
- Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
- No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
- No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.
Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Why would you need an anti-something for a book burning? I didn't know about this book burning event, but this had one purpose from the beginning and they fell for it. They want to show the "religion of peace" is not so peaceful so it works wonders, that's what they are trying to stir and to bring it into conversation.
If no muslim reacted aggressively or even responded to this, there wouldn't be a second book burning. And the person doing this would be labeled crazy or something like that buuuut religious people are so easy to trigger so yeah.
Many Muslims don't give a shit. Provoking poor uneducated people from war-torn countries unsuprisingly does not give you cozy wholesome responses.
It is naive to believe that a Quran burning is simply a "social experiment". People who passionately support the book burning are obviously hating Muslims passionately as well.
The burning is in Sweden, not Iraq. These poor people only know about it because they're informed and agitated by religious leaders profiting from this violence. Mobs in Iraq cannot and should not determine the law in Sweden, I think we can all agree on that.
Muslims in Sweden probably don't love this move either.
Should Swedes also support demonstrations, where Muslim Swedes burn Bibles, Torahs, LGBTIQ+ flags etc, as long as they cite "freedom of speech" and or wanting to do a "social experiment" as their primary motivation?
They do
That's crazy
It's not about supporting. Swedish officials have been condemning these acts. It's about allowing it or not and if not, on which basis? Geopolitics is not the rule of the land... and shouldn't be. People manipulating mobs against Sweden know all this and still do it, they're the ones at fault here.
I'm not saying that this demonstration should be banned, because people in Iraq got aggressive.
I'm saying that this demonstration should be banned, because this demonstration goes against modern Swedish values and laws. Being openly hostile towards certain religious minorities and ethnicities is not something Swedish authorities should protect.
Burning a Quran is a message of hate towards Muslims, that's simply it.
Sorry, but if we're going to be that strict about hate speech then we also must ban the quran itself, where racial violence, ethnic hate and slavery are promoted and justified. If we allow the quran we must allow people to hate the quran as well.
Swedish law guarantees freedom of religion. You can criticise the Quran, you can hate it, you can promote alternative humanist interpretations of the Quran, but the Quran itself will always be the symbolic representation of Muslims. This is simply reality.
Every ancient religious text has passages that did not age well, that is still not a reason to spread hate tho.
I know enough about the religious texts to know that's a huge simplification. And while the old testament does have horrible things in it, the quran goes far beyond. This is something we should be able to discuss freely.
Arguing which religious scripture is worse is a useless excercise imo.
I don't argue against criticism of the Quran. Even in Iraq, there are many people, that publicly do this.
Burning the Quran is not a critique and is not an invitation of a civil discussion. It is a declaration of extreme hate. Assuming anything different is just being overly charitable to a bunch of literal neo-Nazis.
And assuming that the sensitivies of people burning embassies should be accounted for is being overly charitable to a bunch of literal religious-nazis. These are 2 very different degrees of violence. It's not the same burning a book and burning an embassy (luckily no one died, but not that the mob cared).
These Iraqis are not Swedish citizens. The book burning is happening in Sweden. I don't agree with the violent response by these hooligans in Iraq and they should be held responsible. There is no rule of law in Iraq, so no idea how Iraqi authorities will respond.
But the book burning should not have happened in the first place, not because of the reaction in Iraq, but because it is not something a civilised society should condone.
I will not comment on this any further. These are my thoughts on this topic.
I didn't intend to reply but turns out that an important piece of information has been very discreetly mentioned by the press:
How does person A burning a book influence person B's freedom to exercise a religion exactly? Your religion binds you, not everybody else.
Every single religious person in the world needs to come to terms with the fact that the majority of other people in the world does not believe their religion to be true and does not believe their holy book to be holy. That's part of living in a connected world.
Support? No, and Sweden certainly doesn't "support" the burning. But the government should absolutely not interfere with the right to demonstrate or burn whatever the fuck the individual owns and paid for with their own money.
I should probably mention that a record breaking gathering held a muslim prayer (which requires the same permission as the quran-protest) the same day in gothenburg: https://www.gp.se/nyheter/g%C3%B6teborg/tusentals-samlades-f%C3%B6r-b%C3%B6n-i-slottsskogen-historiskt-1.103502911
Should the government block that too?
Is praying publicly the same for you as burning the Quran? I don't see the similarity.
Did you miss the point on purpose?
I said that the law view them equally because the law/government isn't supposed to interfere with free speech. That doesn't mean that the people that make up the government have to agree with what the individual does under their right to free speech.
Bro your point doesn't make sense.
Praying in public is a threat to nobody.
Burning holy books or symbols of ethnic or religious minorities is a potential attempt to cultivate hate among the masses.
Just look at this comment section, people here pretend that this burning is a proof of every Islamophobic talking point that they have ever read about in some schizo Youtube comments.
Free speech stops when it has the potential to severly restrict the freedom of other people's lifes imo. This applies more or less to pretty much every Western country.
One could argue whether or not this is the case here, but having the police escort and protect the madmen while they burn the Quran, is just beyond free speech under any definition.
Preventing someone from doing something considered fairly inoffensive in your own country, to avoid offending some idiot 5000 miles away seems a bit... Overmuch.
I’m a little conflicted on it, I feel like both are in the wrong, though the Iraqi Muslims obviously took it way too far. Books are only being burned because it’ll have a reaction, otherwise it’s just mean-spirited that they’re trying to disrespect someone else’s beliefs. Muslims on the other hand shouldn’t be so predictable that they fall right into it and burning an embassy is just a tad bit of an overreaction. Muslims themselves even have a procedure for burning Qurans, so it’s not like they don’t do it themselves. Granted, the intent is different, but whatever, can they just stop being religious zealots?
Book burning is what fascists do and "just ignore them" is not the way to go about it. If the book burning wouldnt start a response next thing they'd burn a mosque and if that fails they'll just straight up murder people to incite a reaction.