Poll: International Burn a Koran Day

[rabidmidget]

Did we have our own holocaust just because the Nazis had one?

I think not.

(not saying book burning is on par with the holocaust, but that you can't use "well they're also doing it" as an excuse)

 

[Marmooset]

Im fine with muslims christians buddhists whatever yeah
But in the Quran it says, dont feel bad about killing or hating the infadel (or something like that) now if muslims dont accept that part fine yeah, but the fact that their holy book says that ... hmmm

Believe whatever you want to believe, just as long as it doesn't harm others

You ever read the Old Testament, buddy? Basis for the Christian and Judaic (and, to a lesser extent, Moslem) religions? Take it at face value, and infidels are to be put to the sword, apostates are subject to death, and women are property. Oh, and if she's helping her husband fight another man, and she touches the other man's privates, off with her hand.

"If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

Ever back talk to your parents? Or sneak a drink? Or eat too much? God forbid you be part of that fanatically violent and extremist Christian religion...

It's all about context. And perspective.

 

[Warped_Ghost]

Americans are some times just as fundamental as the middle east.

 

[the December King]

If they want to burn bibles & American flags, and then riot every time someone draws a picture or names a bear Muhammad, they can 'suck it'.


This is not a theocracy, religion does not rule here...at least on paper.

While I can understand 'being the bigger man', when you're at war sometimes you have to be the
bigger bully.



Also, it's just a book.
Paper, maybe some leather, and ink.
Get-over-it.

That begs the question of why burn the Quaran in the first place?

There are over a billion muslims in the world. They are not all on the same 'team'. Burning the Quaran is an ignorant act, and would degrade our own morals- western society is based on the freedom to choose your own path, not the shunning and persecution that dominates in other places. Better to burn the terrorists responsible for enforcing those kinds of intolerance and hate.

If someone in the west wants to burn a Quaran (or a bible for that matter) I WILL defend his absolute right to do so, even if other people find it rude. Thats kind of the charm of "our" side...we can actually do stuff we want, and say stuff we want without having to hang for it.

Is it nice? No. Is it necessary? No. But if he wants to get warm in the winter by burning Quarans I for one will not deny him that. Freedom to choose your own path includes stupid paths.

Absolutely! But isn't it cool when we can avoid choosing stupid paths, AND still scream freedom at the top of our lungs in everyone's faces?

Again, a minority want to abuse- not only by enacting their freedom, but by clearly doing something meant only to antagonise and conflict. They should be 'free' to do so, but warming onesself with materials at hand is a little different than 'Burn a Quaran Day', which, let's face it, can be percieved as an attack on the right to practice religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Religion_in_the_United_States

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

So yeah, the backlash was deserved and thank god it happened. Last thing the world needs is escalation based on idiotic religious prejudice.

The backlash involved the deaths of several people. The backlash on the Muslim side of things was completely insane. Complete overreaction to the actions of a random racist.

Why on earth are you glad it happened? If there was no backlash at all, it would have just been some dude in Florida burning a book in front of a couple dozen people, and everybody else could have gone about their day, completely unaffected by it.

If you haven't been living under the rock in a forest on a desert, there is no such thing as 'nobody notices'. You think if no one reacted, the whole world would just ignore it? I'm pretty sure it would one way or another get out and then things would be much much worse. We don't live in 17th century, the information flow is fast and widespread enough to not allow such things to be just local incidents.

Going about your way, unaffected equals giving consent to such actions. All extremism starts small, today it can be 50 people burning Koran, tomorrow it could 5 million burning anyone who disagrees. If not for the backlash who knows, maybe more idiots would support the idea, maybe it would spread. Ignorance is best thwarted when it starts, not when it's too late to react.

Ignoring stupidity=agreeing with stupidity. And the slippery slope fallacy. Great arguments, both of them.

By not reacting, you ARE ignoring it. If nobody reacted, that would be the exact definition of the world ignoring it.

As they should have. It's legal, it should be legal, I don't like it, but he has the right. It's a book, not a person. This whole controversy didn't reduce ignorance. The deaths that resulted are the only concrete result of the "backlash."

It was a massive overreaction, and nothing should have been said or done about it in the first place. I'm much more okay with apparently giving my consent to book burning by ignoring the dumbass than I am with ignoring the deaths like you are.

The first rule of consequentialist ethics: Take any and ALL possible consequences of the action into account. THere is no "One person burning books in from of a dozen people and shit moves on" What if it spread? What if people began to burn the Koran everywhere?

What if you were catholic and burning bibles became widespread? Maybe the mass burning of books would have led to some form of violent reaction? Maybe one person would have taken much more violent action.

Consider all the consequences before saying that anything is an over reaction.

 

[jowo96]

Firstly burning the American flag and Burning the Koran is not the same thing, the Koran is the basis of a belief that is shared by people all over the world, not just in the middle east, secondly the book burning is not the end of the issue, the issue is that by burning the Koran on September the 11th he was saying that it was muslims as a whole that were responsible for the Trade Centre attack, which is simply not true, the people who destroyed the Twin Towers were Al Quaeda who are a Muslim Cult of extremists, saying that Muslims are responsible for 9/11 is like saying that Christians are violent racists because of the Klu Klux Klan or Mas Murderers because of the IRA or Violent Murderers because of the Centennial Park Bombings... I could go on. Stiring up hate for a social group because of the actions of a few is not fair and it can never be justified.

Onto your argument that Muslims burn American flags, well... Muslims as a group don't, some members of middle eastern countries burn American Flags in protest because America has pissed off quite a few people in the middle east because of their invovlement, this is partly due to invading Iraq and Afghanistan but it is more due to the support of Israels blatant disregard for human rights where Palistine is concerned any action the UN tries to take against Israel is blocked by America and that pisses people off, so I guess the moral equivalent response to flag burning would be flag burning but that isn't going to help relations at all as you can see yourself some guy burning your flag doesn't exactly evoke sympathy for that person.

 

[jowo96]

There is nothing to be gained from burning the Koran and the fact that the guy wanted to burn the Korans on 9/11 makes him a bit of a dick.

Firstly burning the American flag and Burning the Koran is not the same thing, the Koran is the basis of a belief that is shared by people all over the world, not just in the middle east, secondly the book burning is not the end of the issue, the issue is that by burning the Koran on September the 11th he was saying that it was muslims as a whole that were responsible for the Trade Centre attack, which is simply not true, the people who destroyed the Twin Towers were Al Quaeda who are a Muslim Cult of extremists, saying that Muslims are responsible for 9/11 is like saying that Christians are violent racists because of the Klu Klux Klan or Mas Murderers because of the IRA or Violent Murderers because of the Centennial Park Bombings... I could go on. Stiring up hate for a social group because of the actions of a few is not fair and it can never be justified.

Onto your argument that Muslims burn American flags, well... Muslims as a group don't, some members of middle eastern countries burn American Flags in protest because America has pissed off quite a few people in the middle east because of their invovlement, this is partly due to invading Iraq and Afghanistan but it is more due to the support of Israels blatant disregard for human rights where Palistine is concerned any action the UN tries to take against Israel is blocked by America and that pisses people off, so I guess the moral equivalent response to flag burning would be flag burning but that isn't going to help relations at all as you can see yourself some guy burning your flag doesn't exactly evoke sympathy for that person.

So burning the Koran won't annoy all of these moderate Muslims you suggest exist and will only anger/'dispel the magic of the book' to these extremists? Well I don't much care about what these extremists think.

That isn't even remotely close to what I said, Burning the Koran may not cause violence but it is likely to alienate people, reinforce racist ideals and stir up the idiots from every religion.

Ultimately I doubt much would have happened if he did burn the books, atleast not as a direct result, but it doesn't mean that the proposed action should just be accepted as freedom of expression.

Also its not environmentally friendly so green peace would probably bomb him.

 

[Deleted]

I think both sides are being irrationally stupid. Or stupidly irrational, or irrationally irrational.

 

[Mr Montmorency]

Well, Extra Credits mentioned that burning a book is worse than burning a man...
So how about you go ahead and burn your korans, and we'll burn some people.

I could swear that killing people is actually in that book itself. Oh, the irony!

 

[Trivun]

At the end of the day, the guy was never going to go through with it. He basically trolled the entire Muslim community in a bid to get his points across, and with the media backlash that followed I'd say he succeeded. There were no real winners either way, and giving it any more attention is just letting the guy get his (frankly absurd and intolerant) views across even more.

As a student caught in another, campus-wide, controversy last year I understand a bit more about this sort of situation. Basically, proper debate is healthy. Giving a platform to idiots and bigots is not.

 

[Calatar]

The first rule of consequentialist ethics: Take any and ALL possible consequences of the action into account. THere is no "One person burning books in from of a dozen people and shit moves on" What if it spread? What if people began to burn the Koran everywhere?

What if you were catholic and burning bibles became widespread? Maybe the mass burning of books would have led to some form of violent reaction? Maybe one person would have taken much more violent action.

Consider all the consequences before saying that anything is an over reaction.

Yes, when considering courses of action, we should think of the most extreme possible hypothetical situation we can come up with, and assume it's true. Then we should act based on this prophecy we've created. IT JUST MAKES SENSE.

But the overreaction I'm primarily talking about is the overreaction from the Muslim community. If THEY just dismissed it as "some racist American" this would have never caused any problems. The reaction of some politicians (telling him not to do it) was rational, but only in the knowledge that many Muslims were being completely irrational. Its their irrationality that I'm decrying here, THEIR backlash.

It seems to me that tempering your actions to cater to the most extreme groups that exist is a fools errand which ultimately supports the extremist agenda. It sort of validates extremists using violence as a tool when other people refuse to do anything because it might spark violence from extremists.

I disagree with his initial decision to do it, and his reasons for doing it, but I defend his right to do it.

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

Yes, when considering courses of action, we should think of the most extreme possible hypothetical situation we can come up with, and assume it's true. Then we should act based on this prophecy we've created. IT JUST MAKES SENSE.

This alone tells me that you did not read my first line. ANY AND ALL possible outcomes arising from the original action. Not simply the most extreme. You must consider that some people might do nothing, that a few books might get burnt, and that FAR worse will happen.

I disagree with his initial decision to do it, and his reasons for doing it, but I defend his right to do it. So should you.

I do not agree that anyone should have right to burn a book based soley upon the gorund of "I felt like it" or "I disagree with this" or "I think this is bullshit"

Books are the thoughts, words, and written ideals of all the societies and civilizations that have existed, even fiction is the work of an author's mind. Books should not be burnt unless it causes great stress and harm to a large group of people. Before anyone asks, I have no idea where I stand on Mein Kompff(sp?) at this moment.

You can argue that it was ONE book and there and thousands of copies more, but books, ideas, thoughts, ways of life should. not. ever. be. destroyed.

He wants to do it in provate where no one watches, well I can't say anything because I wouldn't know. But making it a public demonstration is a disgrace

 

[monkey_man]

i say, religion causes stress. maybe unintended by the religion, but religion must accept that people = idiots
and I = idiot
you = idiot
until we come to accept that, religion won't work the way it's intended to work

i dont mean to be offending people. but i think this is true

 

[Arawn.Chernobog]

The Quran is only valuable to a few and thus only a few will be insulted/feel pride in it's burning.

Freedom of expression allows you to do whatever you wish with products that are your own, effectively, regardless of meaning a book (be it whichever book) is yours if you buy it, it doesn't belong to X community (same goes for flags, clothes, etc. - I can wear a burkah for the simple fact that I think I'd look damn sexy in one and not give 2 shits about the religion it refers to) - this means a person is allowed to do whatever they want to something that belongs to them by law and express whatever opinion... no matter how hypocritical, stupid or downright illogical (Half of the creationist community would be revoked of this right, otherwise).

So go ahead burn a book, burn a flag, whatever, I don't care, you have the right to do it (as long as you BOUGHT the book/flag/etc.)... even if it's damn stupid

PS: If we start making laws to protect X group from being offended, we begin revoking our right of expression and individual freedom, I'd rather have a few hypocrites and morons running around (like said southern preacher) then have the police fine me because I say something like "God damn it" in a public area because "Christians are offended by this".

 

[Reliq]

to start with, no flaming. this a thread which screams "FLAME WAR!!", and im just not interested in that.

so lets keep it simple; a probably slightly slow american priest in the deep south declared september 11th "International Burn a Koran Day" for a reason he changed as media attention grew and grew. chances are you heard about it, as it made the front page on nearly every news outlet of import, exploding a minor issue that noone would have ever cared about it into a international incident that subsequently caused deaths in afghanistan, and riots over the muslim world.

since then the event has been cancelled and the priest has recieved death threats and western politicians every where have condemned it. muslim priests have declared "such a action must not even be considered".

however, muslims frequently burn american flags, american effigies (it was almost ironic to see arabs burning effigies of Obama to protest the burning of a symbol of import) and all sorts of things, is it that much of a outrage for a christian to want to do the same?

now its a simple question, is it wrong to ostracise a christian for burning a important symbol of a religion who routinely burn important symbols of his?

even simpler: did this priest deserve such a backlash? he was doing what muslims have been doing to his flag for the past 20 years.

I basically think burning the American flag is retarded, same goes for burning the Qu´ran(this is apparently how its spelled). This also applies to any other book. I´ll admit I can still agree with the below quote tho, so I guess Im schitzo...

"A building is a symbol, as is the act of destroying it. Symbols are given power by people. A symbol, in and of itself is powerless, but with enough people behind it, blowing up a building can change the world."

I guess what Im saying is: If the act has a purpose that is needed badly enough and agree with my own way of thinking (changes the world for the better) I can find it agreeable. I just dont see what good can come from doing either of the two above acts.



/end rambling

 

[Calatar]

Yes, when considering courses of action, we should think of the most extreme possible hypothetical situation we can come up with, and assume it's true. Then we should act based on this prophecy we've created. IT JUST MAKES SENSE.

This alone tells me that you did not read my first line. ANY AND ALL possible outcomes arising from the original action. Not simply the most extreme. You must consider that some people might do nothing, that a few books might get burnt, and that FAR worse will happen.

I disagree with his initial decision to do it, and his reasons for doing it, but I defend his right to do it. So should you.

I do not agree that anyone should have right to burn a book based soley upon the gorund of "I felt like it" or "I disagree with this" or "I think this is bullshit"

Books are the thoughts, words, and written ideals of all the societies and civilizations that have existed, even fiction is the work of an author's mind. Books should not be burnt unless it causes great stress and harm to a large group of people. Before anyone asks, I have no idea where I stand on Mein Kompff(sp?) at this moment.

You can argue that it was ONE book and there and thousands of copies more, but books, ideas, thoughts, ways of life should. not. ever. be. destroyed.

He wants to do it in provate where no one watches, well I can't say anything because I wouldn't know. But making it a public demonstration is a disgrace

But you only mentioned the extreme examples. And fact is: there are always extreme hypothetical consequences, for EVERY action. It's pointless to live your life in fear of the absolute worst possible thing happening. Don't consider any and all possible consequences, consider the most likely. To do otherwise is a waste of time, unless it truly is an important decision you've got plenty of time to think about. Any and all possible consequences is an infinite list. Be practical.

As to the other part: I do believe they have that right. If an act is not an act of violence, or incentive towards violence, they have that right. A book is just a book. How do you feel about deleting ebooks? Same content, irrevocably removed.

Your argument is one of passion, not one of logic. I like books. I enjoy the content of many of them. I don't have the same idealistic fervor that all books are holy fountains of knowledge which should be preserved and cared for always as the symbol of enlightenment bequeathed upon humans. It's not your book. It's somebody else's. They bought it. They can do what they want with it provided it doesn't break the law. They want to make a stupid symbolic gesture of ignorance by destroying their own property? Fine.

You're overly concerned with the symbolism of some hick in Florida. I say why should we restrict freedom of expression because some people do things we disagree with? You disagree, and you move on.

EDIT: Speaking of disagreeing and moving on, I think I've argued with you enough to get my point across, just as you've made yours. I think I'll let this one thread lie for now.

 

[Woodsey]

It's a little disrespectful towards Muslims or whoever but it's a lesson for them to be a little tolerant of other beliefs.

Most Muslims don't go around burning Bibles or other holy books, so I don't see why they need to be taught a lesson from this idiot exactly.