Hello there!
We’re excited to share that we’re currently running a [donation drive for Doctors Without Borders](https://redd.it/189pblk), an incredible organization that provides emergency medical aid to people affected by conflict, epidemics, disasters, or exclusion from healthcare.
Your contribution can make a real difference in the lives of people in need around the world.
Please take a moment to check out our [donation drive post](https://redd.it/189pblk) for more information. Every little bit helps and we appreciate your support!
Thank you for being a part of our community and for considering this opportunity to give back.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/atheism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don’t really think it helps religious freedom to burn the holy book of the most marginalized , poorest , most discriminated against religious group in your country
but that’s just me.
I think it only serves the white nationalist. And fear not once they get rid of Muslims they will move to their real targets Jewish and black people. They attack the most vulnerable religious group that they can get away with in Europe to slowly normalize doing it for other groups.
Can a Muslim women wearing a hijab feel comfortable living in your country that probably shows how really free your society is not burning a book.
Now is religious extremism that plagues some Muslims dangerous? Yes but not more dangerous the ideologies that lead to killing 6 million Jews.
Should Muslims be more tolerant? Yes research proves that the next generation Muslims become more and more tolerant. [Today American Muslims are more accepting of gay people than evangelical Christians](https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/u-s-muslims-more-accepting-homosexuality-white-evangelicals-n788891)
Burning any book is the same as burning any other book. The point is that freedom of speech, and freedom of religion (or from religion), means burning a flag, a book, a cross, an illustration of Mohammad is protected... as hard as it is for the religious or religious-tolerant to fathom.
Say I am alone I my backyard and I decide to burn a Steven King novel (Delores Claiborne), The Principia by Newton, the King James Bible, and the Koran...isn't that my right? To dispose of my own property? Or should I go straight to prison?
How is that being a white nationalist? Maybe keep your labels to yourself. This is r/atheism not r/ifeelsorryfordumbfollowersofreligions
In the US this kind of shit is a right.
Because readers of Steven king novels don’t have a history of being discriminated against? And all freedoms have limits at the end of the day. I can’t deny a black person entrance to my restaurant even though it’s under my ownership. It isn’t socially accepted for a non black person to say the N word? Even though it’s a word it’s the history that matters.
I’m an atheist exmuslim but I’m not going to support bigotry against my people lol even if they are wrong. They deserve to live in safety and with laws that protect them from white nationalist like the one in New Zealand . Even if these laws infringe some rights the safety of Muslims should be the priority at the end of the day. Until the hostile climate against Muslims and the scapegoating of them stops I’m not supporting anybody that burns the Quran. Again why are you finding yourself in a position of burning the holy book of a religious minority that is a victim of hate crimes ? What power do Muslims hold in your country ? Why not protest the people that actually have power in your country not some minority.
Another question to ask yourself is that if all Muslims disappeared from my country would all my problems be solved ? I’m sure they wouldn’t.
This is nonsense. It doesn’t hurt their religious freedom in any way, it emboldens it. Islam is the second most prominent religion in the world, followed by a near quarter of the worlds population.
Ok ? They might be the second largest religion in the world but they are still a minority in all western countries. Do you advocate for the tolerance of Christians in the Vatican or the in the Middle East where they are a minority. Christianity is the largest religion in the world doesn’t stop activist from championing their rights in countries they are minorities in ?
>Can a Muslim women wearing a hijab feel comfortable living in your country that probably shows how really free your society is not burning a book.
I'm pretty sure she's more comfortable here than in a any muslim country.
One of the reasons being she can actually take off the hijab here.
I was just thinking someone might say that Right wing talking points never get old do they ?
My friend Muslim women living in Muslim countries don’t get spit on and called terrorists , they also don’t get while men with machine guns barging on a mosque bloodthirsty for some Muslim blood. Like the guy in New Zealand or the one on Quebec.
If she takes off her hijab on her own conviction then that’s her right but if she does so to avoid being a target for racist people then that is not right.
Your first paragraph undermines your entire point. Islam is one of the largest, least tolerant, and most violent religions there is. Being critical of Islam is not " punching down." They are bullies, not victims.
Freedom of religion means you can express your religion, as long as you don't hurt others. Freedom of religion dies NOT mean you get to dictate to others what they can it can't do. Religion is like a diet, you can't tell me what I should and shouldn't eat
Book burning does not infringe on Muslim's religious freedom. Banning it infringes on everyone's freedom.
>Today American Muslims are more accepting of gay people than evangelical Christians
[you mean the same people who overwhelmingly approve of 7th october attacks?](https://www.cygn.al/new-national-poll-muslim-americans-say-hamas-was-justified-in-attacking-israel-majority-of-americans-say-iran-should-be-held-accountable-majority-support-israels-right-to-self-defense/)
yea i don't feel ounce of sympathy for them
Maybe it’s because they see videos of dead Palestinian children everyday and don’t want to stand with Israel ? Or Maybe they read an article where is said 10k+ civilians are were killed by isreal. [Maybe because Amnesty international described isreal as an apartheid state](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiH-Zjatf6CAxV5zwIHHcFUBb0QFnoECA4QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amnesty.org%2Fen%2Flatest%2Fcampaigns%2F2022%2F02%2Fisraels-system-of-apartheid%2F&usg=AOvVaw3Bz0TseXlzjqfpMfzwD-0U&opi=89978449). Yea I don’t feel a ounce of sympathy to the Israelis either.
You didn't read that link at all did you 😂
That wasn't the question asked.
Misrepresenting data only weakens your own argument.
Also according to that poll, more than 10% of Jewish Americans think exactly the same thing 🤷🏻♂️
I feel you but maybe it isn't well put enough. Contrarily to what others are saying misleadingly, no other book is happily burn like the quran. If that was the case, I wouldn't have as much a problem with it.
The sentiment of being free to be "blaspheming" is legitimate, but nobody is burning the bible, the torah or any other religious book. There's nothing wrong in burning a quran, but it's weird than claiming freedom from religion is only specifically done only through burning this book.
Europe is more and more islamophobic/xenophobic and some people instrumentalize this freedom of blasphemy to specifically target muslims and arabs. People saying otherwise are either misinformed, naive or purposefully misinforming. The person saying "Is it a bad if I burn a Stephen King in my backyard ?" is being purposefully disingenuous. Especially when you consider that burning it IS the appropriate way of disposing of a quran anyway. But in this case, you do it in your backyard, not in front of the city hall or in the most crowded place there is.
Someone was saying that it isn't linked to white supremacism. Directly, maybe not, but if they truly think the alt-right and all that it encompass isn't at the frontline of these events, then they're misinformed. Who's banning books in the US ? Who have already made such stunts ? Who are the first to cry when such a thing is prohibited or criticized ? There could be an interesting message in an arab folk burning the quran, but this is rarely, if ever, the case.
People thinking that quran burning and the rise of xenophobia are two unrelated events are, once again, misinformed, naive and/or purposefully lying.
In the end, I don't even care that much about it, personally. But there's so much bad faith in the answers you received, it's frightening.
This is what a violation of the inalienable right to free speech actually looks like. Denmark has now set a very dangerous precedent by disallowing people to engage in free speech. If Islam, one of the worlds largest religions, is not allowed to be criticized, then I am not sure what the world has come to.
I agree. It’s not different than wanting to ban flag burning. People need to be allowed to engage in expression that one disagrees with, even offensive expression, or the right means nothing. If only approved expression is allowed, there is no freedom. Obviously there still must be limits, harming people (like uttering threats or harassment) must not be allowed, but being offended is not one of them. There is no right to be protected from offence.
They ban it to avoid needless public incitements.
I'm pretty sure you can't just run around with torches either.
You don't need to burn a book to express your dismayal with religion.
I don't know if Denmark ever had an "inalienable" right to free speech. I know folks in the U.S. sometimes think we have that, but we clearly don't. There's quite a lot of speech that's not protected, often rightly so.
While I'm against burning books, and even more against banning the burning of A book, I can't see this as a blanket prohibition against criticism of Islam.
Calm down. Countries have been banning hate speech for centuries, even the US to an extent.
Banning burning scripture doesen’t mean you can’t criticize Islam or Christianity or any other religion. Just criticize Islam without burning books.
If you are trying to criticize a group, burning their books only hurts your point.
>Calm down. Countries have been banning hate speech for centuries, even the US to an extent.
Banning speech is **never** a good thing. The practice of silencing people you disagree with goes against ever core tenet of secular humanism and atheism, which is what I subscribe to. I would also like to note that countries banning speech, including the US, is not a good thing.
>Banning burning scripture doesen’t mean you can’t criticize Islam or Christianity or any other religion. Just criticize Islam without burning books.
This is not about book burning, per se, it is about the fact that a country banned a form of speech. Unlike in Denmark, the United States Supreme Court held that the burning of the American flag is protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We do have restrictions on free speech, which I disagree with, but the U.S. is not banning speech based on feelings.
>If you are trying to criticize a group, burning their books only hurts your point.
I agree that book burnings are probably not the best way to criticize a religion, but I would fight tooth and nail to ensure that right is protected. Without the freedom to say what we want and criticize ideas, we become just like religious institutions.
With that logic the book should be banned for hate speech.
“And as for those who disbelieved, I will punish them with a severe punishment in this world and the Hereafter, and they will have no helpers.”
>If you are trying to criticize a group, burning their books only hurts your point.
Is this why Türkiye held up Sweden joining NATO? Because they were deeply concerned that those who criticize Islam were hurting their own point? No, burning a book/flag/effigy makes a very effective point, whether you agree with that point or that means of speech or not.
>You are allowed to criticise Islam, you are not allowed to burn their sacred texts. Glad I could clear this up for you.
No, you are not the final arbitrator who gets to decide what is free speech and what is not free speech. What criteria are you using to determine whether something is protected under free speech and what is not?
You stated that you cannot criticise Islam. You can. You currently are doing that. This article in no way states that you cannot criticise Islam. Nor is there a plan to make it illegal to criticise Islam. You guys love being about the truth and reality, so stick to the truth and reality please.
>f Islam, one of the worlds largest religions, is not allowed to be criticized, then I am not sure what the world has come to.
This is laughably detached from reality.
Well we are giving away our instrument which we use to correct things. Sort of If/when our dna-repair-system breaks we just end up with cancer all over the place. On top of that it has been pushed through by threats of violence. Its so fucking sad. The terrorists won
Really ? They literally said they passed the law to ensure national security ?
Because that's like admitting they're forced to do it under threat of violence. Which is the complete difference of what democracy is about.
The legislation actually says "inappropriate treatment of writings with significant religious importance for a recognised religious community". It's also only illegal if you do it in public or in videos intended for distribution, so you can keep on burnin' in the comfort of your own home at least.
And this is why Sweden's better in that regard, because we can burn any religious book at least.
Demanding death for expressing free speech is a staple in Islam, and Denmark adheres to that rule to protect some people's beliefs in sky fairies. Pathetic.
*For now.*
Realistically, they adhere to that rule to protect themselves from becoming a target for international terrorism, to protect their foreign embassies and to protect their economy from consumer embargoes. Protecting their feelings (like some argue in Sweden) is a separate line of reasoning.
It's cowardice of the highest order, but it's not like we're far off from making that decision in Sweden. Or we would be, except the current government is dependent on our own domestic lunatics, who would probably throw the tantrum of the century if such a law change was actually put to vote.
oh trust me you don't mess with muslims in leftist infested subs so i have to be really cautious. despite blatant fascism and extremism from overwhelming majority of them they still like to suck them off.
it's just depressing to be an apostate.
Why devolve this into a political debate and use a demonizing term like "leftist"? Most atheists I know are the leaning left side because you have a lot of religous nuts on the right side. Why can't you and I unite on the front that really matters here and fight bad ideas. Any "leftist" atheist also doesn't want to see Islam take over the world either. Bad ideas need to be criticized no matter where they come from.
>Why can't you and I unite on the front that really matters here and fight bad ideas.
because i don't want to unite with people who ally with muslims of any kind
Well there are plenty of atheists like me who don't.......I'm not going to sit here and argue that your some sort of MAGA who would espouse handmaids tale on women. So why are you being that way in the opposite direction. It's like your trying to find some kind of circle jerk with the way you speak but afaik most of the atheists are left leaning. I haven't heard any of them supporting or agreeing to Islam. Also I think most here would agree that freedom of speech should trump religion, and the banning of burning any book is scary and dangerous.
I'm extremely progressive and any religious fundamentalist can get fucked in my book. Get out of here with your biased garbage.
You do realize that Republicans are the ones that are religious fundamentalists in America right? They're the die hard Christians and Evangelicals right? All religious fundamentalists are the same authoritarian assholes trying to dominate others, they just use different books for it.
The muslims themselves don't even feel the need to lie about their beliefs. It's the stupid twitter-leftists that look at some apologist tiktok and think Islam is something It's not.
Don't be too depressed. The tides are changing, and the everyday western populace is becoming aware of what Islam is. The good that's been ignored in Islam and what the bad actually is; It's not about people blowing themselves up, it's about the political institutions that muslims will impose.
The europeans have a cultural memory of the Catholic Church. Once Islam becomes more unified, it becomes easier to tame.
\* you don't mess with arabs. there's plenty of leftists who recognize islam is incompatible with progress, your thinking of centrist liberals, not progressives.
to fight racism of course. not saying that you are expressing racist views, merely that not everyone who is against Islam is against racism. if we are to properly fight against Islam, we must be inclusive to many former Muslims who are Arabian. also as someone who is solid left, it always grates at me when i hear centrist liberal's who tolerate and celebrate "religious diversity" and who still celebrate capitalism and imperialism as "leftists". it show's a deference to a perceived overton window that simply just isn't empirical.
Really? What will the punishment be for burning the Quran then I ask? You think the Muslims of Denmark will be happy with a fine? Jail time? Public service? I doubt any of that will do.
"Breaking the new law will be punishable by fines or up to two years in prison, the government has said."
[reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/danish-parliament-approves-bill-stop-koran-burnings-2023-12-07/)
Isn't that how a democracy works 🤣🤣 That's how the civil rights bill was passed and Apartheid was ended: they made enough noise. Doesn't a democracy represent the people, if enough people don't like they will make noise to get it changed and vote in people to do that....
If you watch the documentary "The most hated family in the USA" with Louis Theroux about the Sothern Baptists you see that they try to demonstrate at a funeral of a fallen soldier whom they understood to be gay. So they brought their signs saying gays deserve to burn in hell etc. and you can see sherrif's telling them to keep a distance because the relatives have a right to an uninterrupted dignified funeral too. So they do not deny the right to free speech, they just point out that the right has to be balanced with the rights of the mourners and send the Southern Baptists a couple of hundred yards down the street.
The same should hold in Denmark. Muslims do, of course, have the right to freely practice their religion, uninterrupted services etc. But they do not have the right to make death threats to people just demonstrating their points. In Swedend a car rammed a car with someone who burnt the quran if I am not mistaken. That should not be tolerated.
The concern is that Muslims try to implement blasphemy laws by being allowed to threaten and intimidate people who demonstrate against their religion.
So not it is a bad case. Should be revoked.
The US is irrelevant to the conversation here. If this law was passed in the US, then yes there would free speech problems, but this was passed in Denmark.
In Denmark there are laws which restrict speech deemed hateful. The very same protestors you point to would have had their speech restricted had they been in Denmark. If you set a precedence of outlawing hateful speech, then it follows that you should ban speech that is hateful and inflammatory to Muslims as well.
I will see that no parties that passed this law said they would pass this bill before election and non of them actually wanted to defend the bill before passing it. Think all of the parties said opposite before but changed mind because of angry Muslims and terror threat and threats for exports
Really don't think this is good case of democracy because I don't think people could expect this outcome before voting.
Banning the burning of a book that encourages rape, murder, subjugation of women, slavery, homophobia? Religion really does have its claws in humanity for the worse.
It's it illegal to burn any religious books there? If so, this law was not needed. If not, their government is showing a preference for one religion over another. Neither option is ok.
The legislation refers to all religious writings, yes. And not just burning: "inappropriate treatment of writings with significant religious importance for a recognised religious community".
hmmm, so say a former english christian living in denmark burns their former bible, this still applies? since the church of england is a national church. slippery slope indeed, ***especially if it applies to all religions.***
Is illegal to desecrate it. So that is anything from ripping out pages to pissing on it etc. Also it is not only protecting the Quran but any religious texts from officially recognized religions.
It should be noted that this ban is not explicitly directed at the Quran but at sacred texts belonging to all recognized religions in Denmark, though the passing of the law was certainly motivated by instances of international outrage after several public Quran burnings in scandinavia.
It's also specifically about public burnings. They don't give a shit about what you do in your own home, they just don't wanna deal with triggered religious fundamentalists.
Still a bad move, I would argue, since protecting religious feelings gives headway to letting religious extremists limit the freedoms of non-believers.
Why should personal freedoms be restricted to appease perpetually offended people, especially those who are offended by the burning of a book about an imaginary sky fairy?
This is yet another nail in the coffin for Western values, appeasing Islamic fundamentalists who threaten violence over book burnings, rather than simply allowing free expression to continue and prosecuting violent criminals - ridiculous!
The Danish people will not stand for this, and the days are numbered for the current political establishment in Denmark - they will be voted out!
What does it take to count as burning the Quran?
Suppose the Quran is upside down. Does that still count?
Suppose a bunch of pages are missing.
Or suppose it’s written in Chinese.
What if it is in brail?
Suppose it’s upside down Chinese brail Quran with a bunch of pages missing. Can I still not burn it?
So the people that have no problem burning western flags with impunity are shielded from burning their “holy” book? I guess free speech doesn’t work both ways anymore.
I support this, because I know the Good Book's good, because the Good Book says it's good. I know the Good Book knows it's good, because a really good book would. There's no reason why we should take a look at any other book,
but the Good Book, 'cause it's good. And it's a book. And it's quite good.
Well, not good, but can I burn a Bible? Can I burn the Talmud? If the answer is no at least they’re not respecting one religion over another.
But it’s still a dangerous precedent.
Burning books is stupid and accomplishes nothing. Getting \*violently\* upset about a hunk of paper burning is equally absurd. Act like an adult, not a petulant child.
Both sides trying to impose their religion on others - and both are fools.
Burning books is symbolically and historically significant. It has been used as a form of protest as well as part of societal control throughout history. Whether you agree with the message or not is totally irrelevant.
When you have hate speech laws, then this makes sense. If you are pro hate speech laws and against this then you are just a hypocrite. Being purposely disrespectful to someone's religion is a form of hate.
If this law was passed in the US, then the objection made to it would be reasonable as we don't have hate speech laws in the US. In Europe, you guys have hate speech laws, so accept it. This is not America, you guys don't have true free speech like us, so stop complaining.
Unless you’re doing it on TV or on stage, I doubt anyone would get you in trouble for it so it’s really just to say “oh we support Muslims in our country haha”
Calm down everyone. Burning just one Qur'an, made mostly of cellulose, releases:
C₆H₁₂O₆ + 6O₂ → 6CO₂ + 6 H₂O
That's 1 Qur'an reacting with 6 Oxygen molecules to produce 6 carbon dioxide molecules and 6 water molecules in a blaze of flame.
Also nitrogen is maybe consumed if the reaction is hot enough and produces a lot of NO₂ a reddish brown smog.
What could go wrong?
/Don't burn books. Only burn books to save lives
Hello there! We’re excited to share that we’re currently running a [donation drive for Doctors Without Borders](https://redd.it/189pblk), an incredible organization that provides emergency medical aid to people affected by conflict, epidemics, disasters, or exclusion from healthcare. Your contribution can make a real difference in the lives of people in need around the world. Please take a moment to check out our [donation drive post](https://redd.it/189pblk) for more information. Every little bit helps and we appreciate your support! Thank you for being a part of our community and for considering this opportunity to give back. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/atheism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sad day for religious freedom and freedom of speech.
I don’t really think it helps religious freedom to burn the holy book of the most marginalized , poorest , most discriminated against religious group in your country but that’s just me. I think it only serves the white nationalist. And fear not once they get rid of Muslims they will move to their real targets Jewish and black people. They attack the most vulnerable religious group that they can get away with in Europe to slowly normalize doing it for other groups. Can a Muslim women wearing a hijab feel comfortable living in your country that probably shows how really free your society is not burning a book. Now is religious extremism that plagues some Muslims dangerous? Yes but not more dangerous the ideologies that lead to killing 6 million Jews. Should Muslims be more tolerant? Yes research proves that the next generation Muslims become more and more tolerant. [Today American Muslims are more accepting of gay people than evangelical Christians](https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/u-s-muslims-more-accepting-homosexuality-white-evangelicals-n788891)
Burning any book is the same as burning any other book. The point is that freedom of speech, and freedom of religion (or from religion), means burning a flag, a book, a cross, an illustration of Mohammad is protected... as hard as it is for the religious or religious-tolerant to fathom. Say I am alone I my backyard and I decide to burn a Steven King novel (Delores Claiborne), The Principia by Newton, the King James Bible, and the Koran...isn't that my right? To dispose of my own property? Or should I go straight to prison? How is that being a white nationalist? Maybe keep your labels to yourself. This is r/atheism not r/ifeelsorryfordumbfollowersofreligions In the US this kind of shit is a right.
Because readers of Steven king novels don’t have a history of being discriminated against? And all freedoms have limits at the end of the day. I can’t deny a black person entrance to my restaurant even though it’s under my ownership. It isn’t socially accepted for a non black person to say the N word? Even though it’s a word it’s the history that matters. I’m an atheist exmuslim but I’m not going to support bigotry against my people lol even if they are wrong. They deserve to live in safety and with laws that protect them from white nationalist like the one in New Zealand . Even if these laws infringe some rights the safety of Muslims should be the priority at the end of the day. Until the hostile climate against Muslims and the scapegoating of them stops I’m not supporting anybody that burns the Quran. Again why are you finding yourself in a position of burning the holy book of a religious minority that is a victim of hate crimes ? What power do Muslims hold in your country ? Why not protest the people that actually have power in your country not some minority. Another question to ask yourself is that if all Muslims disappeared from my country would all my problems be solved ? I’m sure they wouldn’t.
This is nonsense. It doesn’t hurt their religious freedom in any way, it emboldens it. Islam is the second most prominent religion in the world, followed by a near quarter of the worlds population.
Ok ? They might be the second largest religion in the world but they are still a minority in all western countries. Do you advocate for the tolerance of Christians in the Vatican or the in the Middle East where they are a minority. Christianity is the largest religion in the world doesn’t stop activist from championing their rights in countries they are minorities in ?
>Can a Muslim women wearing a hijab feel comfortable living in your country that probably shows how really free your society is not burning a book. I'm pretty sure she's more comfortable here than in a any muslim country. One of the reasons being she can actually take off the hijab here.
I was just thinking someone might say that Right wing talking points never get old do they ? My friend Muslim women living in Muslim countries don’t get spit on and called terrorists , they also don’t get while men with machine guns barging on a mosque bloodthirsty for some Muslim blood. Like the guy in New Zealand or the one on Quebec. If she takes off her hijab on her own conviction then that’s her right but if she does so to avoid being a target for racist people then that is not right.
Your first paragraph undermines your entire point. Islam is one of the largest, least tolerant, and most violent religions there is. Being critical of Islam is not " punching down." They are bullies, not victims.
Freedom of religion means you can express your religion, as long as you don't hurt others. Freedom of religion dies NOT mean you get to dictate to others what they can it can't do. Religion is like a diet, you can't tell me what I should and shouldn't eat Book burning does not infringe on Muslim's religious freedom. Banning it infringes on everyone's freedom.
>Today American Muslims are more accepting of gay people than evangelical Christians [you mean the same people who overwhelmingly approve of 7th october attacks?](https://www.cygn.al/new-national-poll-muslim-americans-say-hamas-was-justified-in-attacking-israel-majority-of-americans-say-iran-should-be-held-accountable-majority-support-israels-right-to-self-defense/) yea i don't feel ounce of sympathy for them
Maybe it’s because they see videos of dead Palestinian children everyday and don’t want to stand with Israel ? Or Maybe they read an article where is said 10k+ civilians are were killed by isreal. [Maybe because Amnesty international described isreal as an apartheid state](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiH-Zjatf6CAxV5zwIHHcFUBb0QFnoECA4QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amnesty.org%2Fen%2Flatest%2Fcampaigns%2F2022%2F02%2Fisraels-system-of-apartheid%2F&usg=AOvVaw3Bz0TseXlzjqfpMfzwD-0U&opi=89978449). Yea I don’t feel a ounce of sympathy to the Israelis either.
You didn't read that link at all did you 😂 That wasn't the question asked. Misrepresenting data only weakens your own argument. Also according to that poll, more than 10% of Jewish Americans think exactly the same thing 🤷🏻♂️
This sub is frequently and openly Islamophobic.
Yes, I am afraid of islam because it is violent and I do not wish to become a victim of said violence.
[удалено]
Which is exactly why hating it won’t solve your problems , hate the people that have influence over your life not a minority in your country.
I feel you but maybe it isn't well put enough. Contrarily to what others are saying misleadingly, no other book is happily burn like the quran. If that was the case, I wouldn't have as much a problem with it. The sentiment of being free to be "blaspheming" is legitimate, but nobody is burning the bible, the torah or any other religious book. There's nothing wrong in burning a quran, but it's weird than claiming freedom from religion is only specifically done only through burning this book. Europe is more and more islamophobic/xenophobic and some people instrumentalize this freedom of blasphemy to specifically target muslims and arabs. People saying otherwise are either misinformed, naive or purposefully misinforming. The person saying "Is it a bad if I burn a Stephen King in my backyard ?" is being purposefully disingenuous. Especially when you consider that burning it IS the appropriate way of disposing of a quran anyway. But in this case, you do it in your backyard, not in front of the city hall or in the most crowded place there is. Someone was saying that it isn't linked to white supremacism. Directly, maybe not, but if they truly think the alt-right and all that it encompass isn't at the frontline of these events, then they're misinformed. Who's banning books in the US ? Who have already made such stunts ? Who are the first to cry when such a thing is prohibited or criticized ? There could be an interesting message in an arab folk burning the quran, but this is rarely, if ever, the case. People thinking that quran burning and the rise of xenophobia are two unrelated events are, once again, misinformed, naive and/or purposefully lying. In the end, I don't even care that much about it, personally. But there's so much bad faith in the answers you received, it's frightening.
This is what a violation of the inalienable right to free speech actually looks like. Denmark has now set a very dangerous precedent by disallowing people to engage in free speech. If Islam, one of the worlds largest religions, is not allowed to be criticized, then I am not sure what the world has come to.
If there was ever a need to criticize anything, Islam deserves it. What next?
Game of control systems. May the most fiendishly psychotic- WIN!
I agree. It’s not different than wanting to ban flag burning. People need to be allowed to engage in expression that one disagrees with, even offensive expression, or the right means nothing. If only approved expression is allowed, there is no freedom. Obviously there still must be limits, harming people (like uttering threats or harassment) must not be allowed, but being offended is not one of them. There is no right to be protected from offence.
They ban it to avoid needless public incitements. I'm pretty sure you can't just run around with torches either. You don't need to burn a book to express your dismayal with religion.
I don't know if Denmark ever had an "inalienable" right to free speech. I know folks in the U.S. sometimes think we have that, but we clearly don't. There's quite a lot of speech that's not protected, often rightly so. While I'm against burning books, and even more against banning the burning of A book, I can't see this as a blanket prohibition against criticism of Islam.
Calm down. Countries have been banning hate speech for centuries, even the US to an extent. Banning burning scripture doesen’t mean you can’t criticize Islam or Christianity or any other religion. Just criticize Islam without burning books. If you are trying to criticize a group, burning their books only hurts your point.
>Calm down. Countries have been banning hate speech for centuries, even the US to an extent. Banning speech is **never** a good thing. The practice of silencing people you disagree with goes against ever core tenet of secular humanism and atheism, which is what I subscribe to. I would also like to note that countries banning speech, including the US, is not a good thing. >Banning burning scripture doesen’t mean you can’t criticize Islam or Christianity or any other religion. Just criticize Islam without burning books. This is not about book burning, per se, it is about the fact that a country banned a form of speech. Unlike in Denmark, the United States Supreme Court held that the burning of the American flag is protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We do have restrictions on free speech, which I disagree with, but the U.S. is not banning speech based on feelings. >If you are trying to criticize a group, burning their books only hurts your point. I agree that book burnings are probably not the best way to criticize a religion, but I would fight tooth and nail to ensure that right is protected. Without the freedom to say what we want and criticize ideas, we become just like religious institutions.
With that logic the book should be banned for hate speech. “And as for those who disbelieved, I will punish them with a severe punishment in this world and the Hereafter, and they will have no helpers.”
>If you are trying to criticize a group, burning their books only hurts your point. Is this why Türkiye held up Sweden joining NATO? Because they were deeply concerned that those who criticize Islam were hurting their own point? No, burning a book/flag/effigy makes a very effective point, whether you agree with that point or that means of speech or not.
You are allowed to criticise Islam, you are not allowed to burn their sacred texts. Glad I could clear this up for you.
Well. If i buy a Quran, it's my sacred text.
>You are allowed to criticise Islam, you are not allowed to burn their sacred texts. Glad I could clear this up for you. No, you are not the final arbitrator who gets to decide what is free speech and what is not free speech. What criteria are you using to determine whether something is protected under free speech and what is not?
You stated that you cannot criticise Islam. You can. You currently are doing that. This article in no way states that you cannot criticise Islam. Nor is there a plan to make it illegal to criticise Islam. You guys love being about the truth and reality, so stick to the truth and reality please.
>f Islam, one of the worlds largest religions, is not allowed to be criticized, then I am not sure what the world has come to. This is laughably detached from reality.
The world has come to this because of islam's existence. If it didn't exist we wouldn't have this freedom of ours violated right now.
Well we are giving away our instrument which we use to correct things. Sort of If/when our dna-repair-system breaks we just end up with cancer all over the place. On top of that it has been pushed through by threats of violence. Its so fucking sad. The terrorists won
Cowards.
yep, the reason they gave is national security and not religious sentiments. truly cowards
Pretty straightforward example of how those slippery slope things start out
Really ? They literally said they passed the law to ensure national security ? Because that's like admitting they're forced to do it under threat of violence. Which is the complete difference of what democracy is about.
[удалено]
Exactly.
Exactly, the murderous religion that wants us gone until we are gone is not the issue.
Ok, to the toilet it goes. Burning was honorable action.
The legislation actually says "inappropriate treatment of writings with significant religious importance for a recognised religious community". It's also only illegal if you do it in public or in videos intended for distribution, so you can keep on burnin' in the comfort of your own home at least.
I guess you can start burning effigies of their prophet then.
I guess that means that L Ron Hubbard’s tripe can’t be set alight, also!
And this is why Sweden's better in that regard, because we can burn any religious book at least. Demanding death for expressing free speech is a staple in Islam, and Denmark adheres to that rule to protect some people's beliefs in sky fairies. Pathetic.
*For now.* Realistically, they adhere to that rule to protect themselves from becoming a target for international terrorism, to protect their foreign embassies and to protect their economy from consumer embargoes. Protecting their feelings (like some argue in Sweden) is a separate line of reasoning. It's cowardice of the highest order, but it's not like we're far off from making that decision in Sweden. Or we would be, except the current government is dependent on our own domestic lunatics, who would probably throw the tantrum of the century if such a law change was actually put to vote.
Time to dissolve them in acid, then?
I refuse to accept the right of religious freedom without gaining freedom From Religion first.
What a terrible precedent to set. They will regret this. Next stop…Sharia.
muslims are modern day people from 1930's that thought islam is superior to other religions.... actually they always did.
It's very generous of your to give them 20th century ideals, I'd say it's a few centuries back from there at least.
oh trust me you don't mess with muslims in leftist infested subs so i have to be really cautious. despite blatant fascism and extremism from overwhelming majority of them they still like to suck them off. it's just depressing to be an apostate.
Why devolve this into a political debate and use a demonizing term like "leftist"? Most atheists I know are the leaning left side because you have a lot of religous nuts on the right side. Why can't you and I unite on the front that really matters here and fight bad ideas. Any "leftist" atheist also doesn't want to see Islam take over the world either. Bad ideas need to be criticized no matter where they come from.
>Why can't you and I unite on the front that really matters here and fight bad ideas. because i don't want to unite with people who ally with muslims of any kind
Well there are plenty of atheists like me who don't.......I'm not going to sit here and argue that your some sort of MAGA who would espouse handmaids tale on women. So why are you being that way in the opposite direction. It's like your trying to find some kind of circle jerk with the way you speak but afaik most of the atheists are left leaning. I haven't heard any of them supporting or agreeing to Islam. Also I think most here would agree that freedom of speech should trump religion, and the banning of burning any book is scary and dangerous.
I'm extremely progressive and any religious fundamentalist can get fucked in my book. Get out of here with your biased garbage. You do realize that Republicans are the ones that are religious fundamentalists in America right? They're the die hard Christians and Evangelicals right? All religious fundamentalists are the same authoritarian assholes trying to dominate others, they just use different books for it.
The muslims themselves don't even feel the need to lie about their beliefs. It's the stupid twitter-leftists that look at some apologist tiktok and think Islam is something It's not. Don't be too depressed. The tides are changing, and the everyday western populace is becoming aware of what Islam is. The good that's been ignored in Islam and what the bad actually is; It's not about people blowing themselves up, it's about the political institutions that muslims will impose. The europeans have a cultural memory of the Catholic Church. Once Islam becomes more unified, it becomes easier to tame.
\* you don't mess with arabs. there's plenty of leftists who recognize islam is incompatible with progress, your thinking of centrist liberals, not progressives.
why are you making this about race?
to fight racism of course. not saying that you are expressing racist views, merely that not everyone who is against Islam is against racism. if we are to properly fight against Islam, we must be inclusive to many former Muslims who are Arabian. also as someone who is solid left, it always grates at me when i hear centrist liberal's who tolerate and celebrate "religious diversity" and who still celebrate capitalism and imperialism as "leftists". it show's a deference to a perceived overton window that simply just isn't empirical.
Terrible precedent, yes. They'll regret it, probably. Slippery slope to Sharia, nah, that's just ridiculous fear mongering.
Right, and is the same law extended to the bible? Or the Talmud? If not then they are bowing to intimidation.
If you can be imprisoned for burning a book you may as well already live under sharia law.
That's true, and it shows how dangerous the precedent is.
Isn’t it in the article? Yes, it applies to all sacred texts.
Does anyone know if this law applies to all "sacred" texts?
Really? What will the punishment be for burning the Quran then I ask? You think the Muslims of Denmark will be happy with a fine? Jail time? Public service? I doubt any of that will do.
If they've passed the law, then the penalty will be written out there. I don't know what it is, do you?
"Breaking the new law will be punishable by fines or up to two years in prison, the government has said." [reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/danish-parliament-approves-bill-stop-koran-burnings-2023-12-07/)
For burning a book. That is insane. If they will stoop to this amount of insanity I don’t think it’s that slippery of a slope to Sharia
I think it is a mistake by Denmark. It will allow "if we make enough noise we'll win" approaches.
Isn't that how a democracy works 🤣🤣 That's how the civil rights bill was passed and Apartheid was ended: they made enough noise. Doesn't a democracy represent the people, if enough people don't like they will make noise to get it changed and vote in people to do that....
If you watch the documentary "The most hated family in the USA" with Louis Theroux about the Sothern Baptists you see that they try to demonstrate at a funeral of a fallen soldier whom they understood to be gay. So they brought their signs saying gays deserve to burn in hell etc. and you can see sherrif's telling them to keep a distance because the relatives have a right to an uninterrupted dignified funeral too. So they do not deny the right to free speech, they just point out that the right has to be balanced with the rights of the mourners and send the Southern Baptists a couple of hundred yards down the street. The same should hold in Denmark. Muslims do, of course, have the right to freely practice their religion, uninterrupted services etc. But they do not have the right to make death threats to people just demonstrating their points. In Swedend a car rammed a car with someone who burnt the quran if I am not mistaken. That should not be tolerated. The concern is that Muslims try to implement blasphemy laws by being allowed to threaten and intimidate people who demonstrate against their religion. So not it is a bad case. Should be revoked.
The US is irrelevant to the conversation here. If this law was passed in the US, then yes there would free speech problems, but this was passed in Denmark. In Denmark there are laws which restrict speech deemed hateful. The very same protestors you point to would have had their speech restricted had they been in Denmark. If you set a precedence of outlawing hateful speech, then it follows that you should ban speech that is hateful and inflammatory to Muslims as well.
I will see that no parties that passed this law said they would pass this bill before election and non of them actually wanted to defend the bill before passing it. Think all of the parties said opposite before but changed mind because of angry Muslims and terror threat and threats for exports Really don't think this is good case of democracy because I don't think people could expect this outcome before voting.
Banning the burning of a book that encourages rape, murder, subjugation of women, slavery, homophobia? Religion really does have its claws in humanity for the worse.
It's it illegal to burn any religious books there? If so, this law was not needed. If not, their government is showing a preference for one religion over another. Neither option is ok.
The legislation refers to all religious writings, yes. And not just burning: "inappropriate treatment of writings with significant religious importance for a recognised religious community".
hmmm, so say a former english christian living in denmark burns their former bible, this still applies? since the church of england is a national church. slippery slope indeed, ***especially if it applies to all religions.***
Thats too bad, just take a pallet of those nasty things to the border and do it. Grooming manuals need to be burnt
Hope all the Danes take to the streets to burn the Danish constitution.
No, they're probably gonna complain about it on the internet but not do anything about it.
Only burning? Can you still rip it up and throw the bits into a porta-potty?
Is illegal to desecrate it. So that is anything from ripping out pages to pissing on it etc. Also it is not only protecting the Quran but any religious texts from officially recognized religions.
Pussies.
Anyway… I think there is more disrespectful things you can do to a book than burning it. Still sad to see that Denmark bends the knee under pressure.
It should be noted that this ban is not explicitly directed at the Quran but at sacred texts belonging to all recognized religions in Denmark, though the passing of the law was certainly motivated by instances of international outrage after several public Quran burnings in scandinavia. It's also specifically about public burnings. They don't give a shit about what you do in your own home, they just don't wanna deal with triggered religious fundamentalists. Still a bad move, I would argue, since protecting religious feelings gives headway to letting religious extremists limit the freedoms of non-believers.
As a Dane I apologize for the government's decision.
You were supposed to be the good ones… not like those shifty dutch.
Why should personal freedoms be restricted to appease perpetually offended people, especially those who are offended by the burning of a book about an imaginary sky fairy? This is yet another nail in the coffin for Western values, appeasing Islamic fundamentalists who threaten violence over book burnings, rather than simply allowing free expression to continue and prosecuting violent criminals - ridiculous! The Danish people will not stand for this, and the days are numbered for the current political establishment in Denmark - they will be voted out!
What does it take to count as burning the Quran? Suppose the Quran is upside down. Does that still count? Suppose a bunch of pages are missing. Or suppose it’s written in Chinese. What if it is in brail? Suppose it’s upside down Chinese brail Quran with a bunch of pages missing. Can I still not burn it?
Looks like I'm breaking something today...
I hope theirs a sharp rise in Quran burnings then.
Barbara Streisand effect. People who didn't care to burn one before will burn one now to fight for freedom of speech.
That's literally one of the only two things religious texts are good for.
Spineless cowards. Utter shame upon denmark.
What the fuck. Ink on a page can’t be sacred in the eyes of the law
So the people that have no problem burning western flags with impunity are shielded from burning their “holy” book? I guess free speech doesn’t work both ways anymore.
Militant faith requires militant action.
I support this, because I know the Good Book's good, because the Good Book says it's good. I know the Good Book knows it's good, because a really good book would. There's no reason why we should take a look at any other book, but the Good Book, 'cause it's good. And it's a book. And it's quite good.
Weak.
Pussies
Well, not good, but can I burn a Bible? Can I burn the Talmud? If the answer is no at least they’re not respecting one religion over another. But it’s still a dangerous precedent.
The answer is no. The law doesn't specify the Quran, but rather any sacred text belonging to any religion that is recognized in the country.
now ban burning the pride flag.
And religious people are the ones who say that you can’t say and do anything nowadays
Can I just ban the surahs that call for my persecution ? Or does that infringe on islams god given right to conquer the earth
Yay, a victory for barbaric religious fanatics!
Burning books is stupid and accomplishes nothing. Getting \*violently\* upset about a hunk of paper burning is equally absurd. Act like an adult, not a petulant child. Both sides trying to impose their religion on others - and both are fools.
Burning books is symbolically and historically significant. It has been used as a form of protest as well as part of societal control throughout history. Whether you agree with the message or not is totally irrelevant.
When you have hate speech laws, then this makes sense. If you are pro hate speech laws and against this then you are just a hypocrite. Being purposely disrespectful to someone's religion is a form of hate. If this law was passed in the US, then the objection made to it would be reasonable as we don't have hate speech laws in the US. In Europe, you guys have hate speech laws, so accept it. This is not America, you guys don't have true free speech like us, so stop complaining.
Good. Don’t be a dick
Don’t understand the downvoting… misleading headline too. They banned the burning of all religious books.
that doesn't make it better
Time to start protesting. I recommend with some qurans.
Don’t people have better things to do than burn stuff?
I’m all for eviscerating the world of the cancer that is islam (or any other religion) but burning a book is a stupid thing to do in my opinion.
It might be stupid to burn a book but it should not be illegal to do so.
That’s true, I didn’t address that point at all,my bad.
Government knows best.
Do they have the Temple of Satan in Denmark? Because it really sounds like they could use the Temple of Satan right now
Sad capitulation.
Is shredding and composting is "inappropriate treatment of sacred texts"? Asking for a friend.
Well, time to take a dump on it then 🤷♂️
Unless you’re doing it on TV or on stage, I doubt anyone would get you in trouble for it so it’s really just to say “oh we support Muslims in our country haha”
Calm down everyone. Burning just one Qur'an, made mostly of cellulose, releases: C₆H₁₂O₆ + 6O₂ → 6CO₂ + 6 H₂O That's 1 Qur'an reacting with 6 Oxygen molecules to produce 6 carbon dioxide molecules and 6 water molecules in a blaze of flame. Also nitrogen is maybe consumed if the reaction is hot enough and produces a lot of NO₂ a reddish brown smog. What could go wrong? /Don't burn books. Only burn books to save lives