Danish man who burned Quran charged with blasphemy

[Zecora]

No no no. You guys are taking away from this the wrong thing!

Keep in mind that the same people who uphold these so-called blasphemy laws also claim that science is a religion. Ergo, anyone who burns a scientific paper, denies the reality of climate change, or anything else along those lines are ALSO blasphemous and deserve to be condemned to the full extent of their beloved blasphemy laws.

Good point, however, the people likely to take offense at the burning of a scientific paper, denial of climate change and so on, usually deny that belief (blind or not) in science has anything to do with religion, and so we arrive at an impasse

[Deleted]

No, the man showed that he is either A) a moron incapable of using actual arguments to voice his "rejection", or B) an asshole that was out to either be "funny" by mocking and destroying an object of religious worship, or cause trouble by doing it.

I certainly agree. I just think he should be legally allowed to do so. If being an impolite idiot would be a crime, half of us would be behind bars.

[Noradin]

What if I am a Hinduist and I worship cows, but on the nearby farm cows are being slaughtered daily? Should I sue the farm and expect the farm owner to be punished for blasphemy?

No, unless they slaughter cows in public with the intent of insulting you.

- - - Updated - - -

No, it's not.

It really is, your ignorance does not change that.

[Zecora]

What would be the difference between burning a Koran and the autobiography of Helen Hunt?

One is recognized as a religious text in Denmark, the other is not.

Really, are you even trying? Have you nothing better to come up with?

[zorkuus]

One is recognized as a religious text in Denmark, the other is not.

Are you arguing that the law is a good one because it's the law? Maybe we should jail people for criticizing laws next.

You should note that laws like this weren't passed in modern times and were originally written to protect christianity specifically.

[Zecora]

I certainly agree. I just think he should be legally allowed to do so. If being impolite idiot would be a crime, half of us would be behind bars.

Oh I'd agree normally, if it was the odd idiot here and there. But when you have a great number of people who act like this (being incapable of not acting like assholes, or uninterested in doing so) there might be a need for laws like this. I don't like it any more than you do, I assure you.

[Deleted]

One is recognized as a religious text in Denmark, the other is not.

Really, are you even trying? Have you nothing better to come up with?

But people are arguing that there should be no difference and there should be no special protection for religion. Sure, people should be free to gather to worship the Odin in peace, just the same as they should be free to gather to play Warhammer in peace (the latter is better use of your time, the former is way cheaper though.) People should be free to publicly display the symbols of their religion, just as they should be free to wear the band shirt of their favourite band. The religion should have no special protection under the law, nor is such protection needed.

[Nasuem]

Burning books is not really about free speech.

Or you want to tell me the Nazis just did "free speech" when they burned complete libraries in 1933?

That doesn't include burning books still in print that you purchased yourself... Jesus.

[Deleted]

Great, that's your right; and it's my right to not respect religion.

That is as if you would not respect philosophy. No matter how much you try, it still is existent.

[Zecora]

Are you arguing that the law is a good one because it's the law? Maybe we should jail people for criticizing laws next.

You should note that laws like this weren't passed in modern times and were originally written to protect christianity specifically.

No, I am arguing that it IS the law at current. Whether a law is "good" or "bad" doesn't enter into it, and if you dislike the law, by all means, try to get it changed. What I am arguing is that as sad as it is, if people go out of their way to destroy symbols of faiths they take a dislike to (rather than using arguments like actual thinking beings), then perhaps we still need blasphemy laws.

And I am very aware that blasphemy laws were enacted to "protect" (or rather silence the criticism of) Christianity. Does that make any difference to you? It certainly does not to me. I don't care whether it's a Muslim burning a Bible, a Christian burning the Quran or an Atheist burning both. If you do so, you are an asshole regardless.

[Theodarzna]

One is recognized as a religious text in Denmark, the other is not.

Really, are you even trying? Have you nothing better to come up with?

Does the person doing the burning recognize it?

[Noradin]

Kinda surprising there is a religious law in Denmark in modern times.

I have no idea how secular the laws in Denmark are as I am from the US. But when I visited Denmark it did not seem like people or customs were overly religious.

It is not a "religious law"; it is a hatespeech law with a title that can be translated into English to mean blasphemy.

[Zecora]

But people are arguing that there should be no difference and there should be no special protection for religion. Sure, people should be free to gather to worship the Odin in peace, just the same as they should be free to gather to play Warhammer in peace (the latter is better use of your time, the former is way cheaper though.) People should be free to publicly display the symbols of their religion, just as they should be free to wear the band shirt of their favourite band. The religion should have no special protection under the law, nor is such protection needed.

And I disagree, religion does have a special meaning to billions of people. You may be of the opinion that they are wrong, and you are welcome to tell them so. But society has nothing to gain by allowing people to act like assholes with the intent to hurt others, by willfully destroying religious objects that are sacred to some. What exactly can you communicate by burning the Quran, the Bible, the Tripitaka, the Torah or the Guru Granth Sahib that you couldn't possibly communicate by word or text? The only real reason to do so is to offend others and be an asshole.

- - - Updated - - -

Does the person doing the burning recognize it?

Doesn't matter, as the law does.

[zorkuus]

No, I am arguing that it IS the law at current.

Yet it is almost never enforced, like many other relics from the past. What makes this one a special case? What about the millions of times christianity was made a mockery out of?

And I am very aware that blasphemy laws were enacted to "protect" (or rather silence the criticism of) Christianity. Does that make any difference to you? It certainly does not to me. I don't care whether it's a Muslim burning a Bible, a Christian burning the Quran or an Atheist burning both. If you do so, you are an asshole regardless.

It makes a big difference because it shows the law is archaic. And certainly not something by its very nature that a modern secular county should be dealing with.

[Deleted]

It does, but I don't have to show it reverence if I don't want to. Nor should anyone else.

Arent you interested which wisdoms religion could offer?

[Zecora]

It does, but I don't have to show it reverence if I don't want to. Nor should anyone else.

Oh look, another person incapable of understanding that refraining from destroying something isn't the same as showing it reverence...colour me surprised.

[Odinfrost]

Does the person doing the burning recognize it?

Thats almost like saying that someone who doesn't see waterboarding as torture cannot be convicted of conducting torture

[Deleted]

Oh I'd agree normally, if it was the odd idiot here and there. But when you have a great number of people who act like this (being incapable of not acting like assholes, or uninterested in doing so) there might be a need for laws like this. I don't like it any more than you do, I assure you.

I am afraid that taking things like this to court will backfire. People who wouldn't have otherwise sympathised with the asshole now do, as they see him unfairly charged. And then the hysteric alt right will start to scream about the government bending backward to protect Sharia law and nonsense like that.

[zorkuus]

Arent you interested which wisdoms religion could offer?

It's usually nothing one couldn't get from somewhere else. Religion didn't invent morals.

[bladeXcrasher]

Arent you interested which wisdoms religion could offer?

Oh wow, lol, that's rich.