Protesters angered by the planned burning of a copy of the Quran stormed the Swedish Embassy in Baghdad early Thursday, breaking into the compound and lighting a small fire.
Protesters angered by the planned burning of a copy of the Quran stormed the Swedish Embassy in Baghdad early Thursday, breaking into the compound and lighting a small fire.
Doesn’t Sweden have anti-discrimination/anti-Nazi laws or something like that? Why is a demonstration like that legal?
It’s just a book. It’s legal due to freedom of speach etc. Is it stupid and in bad taste and only done to provoke? Sure, but it’s within their rights.
I would say it is worse than simply in bad taste. It is reminiscent of Nazis burning books of Jewish authors in the Third Reich.
Burning the Quran is an act of hate towards certain ethnic groups, not a contribution towards political discourse or an expression of a constructive opinion.
lol the religious burn way more books than the non-religous, but if someone burns their favorite book then it’s an act of hate
Religious book burners are also hate spreaders.
Harry Potter fans don’t storm an embassy if you light up the chamber of secrets.
The world is not a school yard, so why argue at that level?
I’m not going out and burning any books because I think it’s unnecessary and I have no desire to, but I also feel like there are only 2 fair and even somewhat reasonable positions to take on this:
A - No one is allowed to burn any books for any reason.
B- Anyone is allowed to burn any books for any reason.
Anything else is preferential treatment for religion legally, and there are secular books that hold just as much meaning to people on a personal level as religous texts. I think A would be a violation of people’s rights, so I support B.
What about
C - Sane people -no matter if it´s legal or not- don´t burn books that are holy symbols of a world religion because that’s a sacrilege
Who cares if it’s a sacrilege? Excommunicate them from the religion then, that’s your recourse. Sleep soundly knowing they’re going to your version of Hell or whatever. Religious ideaology should not affect law or public policy.
Please stop talking to me in a way that implies I would be religious, or even sympathizing with religious fanatics. I have been an atheist my whole life, just as the rest of my family. The way you talk makes it sound like if I would be religious and that is offensive to me. I´m not in any way siding with the idiots who attacked the embassy, this is much more complex than choosing sides. I naturally condemn all aggressive and all violent actions on both sides. However -I was trying to make a point about sacrilege- so back on topic:
Think about it. Every civilized country has laws against offending people, so obviously there is a global consensus that the law should aim to protect people from being offended. You probably agree that what is considered offensive depends on the cultural background of an individual and is different from country to country. Now consider that to followers of a religion a desecration of the symbols of their religion** is the worst possible offense that is thinkable**. Why do you argue that certain (religious) people should be excluded from the protection by law against being offended - just because they were born into a different culture than you were and thus believe other things than you?
Burning sacred books of a foreign religion is a sign of intolerance and a poster-like act of aggression, offense and provocation that aims to cause an outrage in the targeted religious community. This fact can not be ignored when assessing events of this kind. It also does not excuse violent behavior by the offended community in my opinion but that is another topic.
It is just a book. If the book burning triggers a group maybe the problem is not the book burning maybe the problem is the group
Sweden doesn’t have free speech. Thats pretty much an America only thing at this point.
Where do you have that from, Breitbart?
Same reason it’s legal in most western democracies. Freedom of speech, it’s not against the law to burn a book. Similar demonstrations (Quran burnings) happen just as often in e.g. Denmark and Norway, seriously loon it up, the reason I suspect Sweden suddenly gets a lot of attention for it is mainly political, with them trying to join NATO.
Having said that, there are laws against incitement against ethical groups. The reason this is not treated as such is that its considered religious critique which is always legal.
I’d personally argue that this has very little to do with religious critique. These people haven’t read a single page of the Quran in their lives. This is clearly to provoke an ethnical minority. So I could definitely argue that it shouldn’t really be allowed. Not because you shouldn’t critique Islam or any other religion, but simply because this is nothing but a provocation actively trying to hurt/offend an ethnic group and get a reaction of out of it, but that’s not how the courts interpret the law.
That’s how I see it as well.
Two reasons:
The law regulating what the police are allowed to forbid is very limited. They can deny permission for a demonstration due to traffic disruption, but not threats of terrorism or international relations. It’s currently being debated in the Riksdag (the supreme legislative body).
Secondly, the police are in their rights to deny permission for protests/demonstrations that are clearly illegal for some reason. The legislation regulating incitement against ethnic groups (which Muslims are covered under) is fuzzy however, and this is mostly uncharted territory. Context matters for the letter of that law, in legalese the law forbids certain “verbal statements or messages” with a purpose to incite ethnic groups. But is burning the Quran a “message”? Arguably yes (imo) in this context, but it hasn’t been tried.
There was a dismissed case tried in court with a Quran burning, but the context there was different. There have also been some police reports regarding other Quran burnings that were never prosecuted, because the prosecutors only put forth cases to trial that they are convinced that they can win (this is how the system is designed).
What we are waiting for is a case that fulfills, or seems to fulfill, the letter of the incitement law with regards to context, that will be prosecuted and tried in courts all the way up to the supreme court.
The previous Quran burning might fulfill those criteria (burned Quran outside a mosque during Eid). It has been reported to the police and we are waiting to see if the case will be brought to trial.