0 points

Can they still draw Mohammed though?

permalink
report
reply
0 points

Fuck religion. Time and time again eroding our rights. Shame on the Danish government who is bending down to violence and superstition.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

Democracy means letting people with other world views exist in peace.

Please consider how you want to be treated by this world and how you can make your own positive impact on humans around you.

I am an atheist myself and will vehemently defend secularism but your comment boils down to hate and demanding others have the exact same beliefs as you do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

You cannot honestly say you support both secularism and this law at the same time. Either you do, or you dont.

And this law does exactly what you said: impose a belief upon others

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

No, it stops you from burning a religious symbol in public. Secularity means that state and church are separate, which is a different matter. A lack of secularity would mean you can go on trial for not following the word of some god e.g. for loving someone from the same sex.

These are terrible and should be fought.

Bu this particular law is stopping assholes from being assholes.

Book-burnings also had a severely terrible history in the 3rd reich and are nothing but demonstrations of power, hate and close-mindedness.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I don’t think that applies here. Why would you ever burn a Quran IN PUBLIC? If you are not religious, or subscribe to other religions, why would you even own a quran? Quran burning in public has only one purpose, to provoke hate. Same as burning flags in public. Or hating certain groups of people in public. None of it is allowed or ok to do.

If you burn that thing at home or throw it in the trash, nobody will care. Otherwise it just falls into the “incite violence” category of things, because that is exactly the thing you are doing.

If moslems then go into a rage and be violent themselves, that isn’t ok either, that should be clear.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

You should be allowed to display your beliefs in public, regardless of how enraged they might make others. You shouldn’t be allowed to make direct threats, but anything else should be fair game.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

I completely agree with you and @pizzazz@lemmy.world. Keep in mind though that in most European countries some harmless displays of belief are already banned, for example burning the national flag.

Then in Germany and Austria you can be arrested just for looking at a swastika on your phone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Sending clear message that violence is an acceptable and working political tool. Climate protesters need to up their game.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

Governments should not be allowed to burn books.

Private citizens should be allowed to burn any books they own.

Neither governments nor private citizens should be allowed to harm or threaten people who burn their own damn books.

Example: you can purchase a dozen copies of “On The Origin of Species”, burn them, and I will very happily not threaten to behead you. Easy.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

I personally really do not like religion. And if you buy a quran and burn it at home, nothing will happen. Nobody will care.

But what is your desired outcome, if you take the book that is holy to some, and burn it infront of their eyes? There is only one answer to this and that answer is the reason for these laws. You cannot go to a pride parade and burn rainbow flags in front of their eyes either. It is rather obvious why.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

“The bill will make it punishable, for example, to burn the Quran or the Bible in public. It will only aim at actions in a public place or with the intention of spreading in a wider circle,” Hummelgaard said

Hummelgaard told a news conference that the recent protests were “senseless taunts that have no other purpose than to create discord and hatred.”

I agree with Hummelgaard. Those “protests” are used to create hatred. Even though it is also for me not comprehensible how people can be so sensitive about this, we all know the reaction it provokes. And even though we don’t agree and comprehend those feelings, we can still respect those feelings and just not senselessly create disruption. And hey… You can still burn as many Qurans in your private oven as you want.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The intent is secondary to the effect. If certain muslim people cannot put their religious sensibilities BELOW the secular human rights of their fellow country men, they LITERALLY need to leave. They are literally bad for us, and our social, secular order. EXACTLY like the hardcore christians are bad for human rights in the USA.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

“The bill will make it punishable, for example, for people of the same sex to kiss in public. It will only aim at actions in a public place or with the intention of spreading in a wider circle,” Hummelgaard said

I agree with Hummelgaard. Those “protests” are used to create hatred. Even though it is also for me not comprehensible how people can be so sensitive about this, we all know the reaction it provokes. And even though we don’t agree and comprehend those feelings, we can still respect those feelings and just not senselessly create disruption. And hey… You can still kiss as many people of the same sex in private as you want.

This isn’t an exaggeration: a few weeks ago in Ottawa we had anti-LGBT protests where rainbow flags were burned down – guess who was there? And while many of us were offended and appalled, nobody was threatened or beheaded in response, and we didn’t have politicians trying to pass a new law forbidding the burning of rainbow flags either.

The whole point of this is that in Europe we have fought for centuries in order to establish liberal democracies where freedom of speech and the separation of church and state are enshrined. We must not appease extremists who achieve change with threats of violence. There is a name for that.

In a democracy the act of burning a book, or a flag, is a canary in the coal mine: you know there is trouble when it dies.

The message is simple: we don’t threaten people who have different ideas.

permalink
report
parent
reply

you do realize that the people burning lgbt flags now, will burn lgbt people, or whoever they think to be lgbt, if they get the chance to?

Destroying symbols of a group is a step in the escalation to killing people of that group. Source: two millenia of antisemitism in europe. First you attack the symbols, then the places and finally the people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

We can not have a modern society where people feel strongly about religion. And there is really no point in appeasement of fundamentalists - they don’t want a compromise they allays want it all.

permalink
report
parent
reply

yeah, clearly the compromise needs to be burning symbols of a group in public to stir hatred and violence against that group. That is totally the reasonable compromise. Clearly the people wanting the right to burn things in public are not fundamentalist, after all basically everyone burns a Quran, or Torah or Bible for breakfast amirite?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

There seems to be deep misunderstanding why this is troublesome.

The Government burning any book is bad.

A private citizen should be allowed to burn any book he/she wants.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

A private citizen will still be allowed and protected to burn any book he or she wishes, in private.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Like you can be gay in muslim country, just in private.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

You can still burn the Quran at home according to the law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Thats a very thin defence. The point is that private citizens should be allowed to burn their own belongings as a form of protest/expression. That’s effectively been banned now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

You’re not allowed to be naked in public. Doesn’t matter if you want to protest jeans. You can’t be naked.

You’re not allowed to take a shit on the curb outside of whatever you want to protest either.

You’re not allowed to burn flags of forgein nations.

plenty of expressions that can be used to protest are banned. What’s so different here? You can still burn as many books as you want in your own backyard. You just can’t do it at the town square.

And as a final note. It’s a proposition. It hasn’t been voted on. How about you save your outrage until they’ve actually decided on what to do?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

You just can’t do it as a form of protest, which should be protected under free speech

permalink
report
parent
reply

Hate speech is not protected speech and people advocating for hate speech as “freeze peaches” usually want to abolish the actual freedom of speech

permalink
report
parent
reply

Europe

!europe@feddit.de

Create post

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)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

Community stats

  • 1

    Monthly active users

  • 2K

    Posts

  • 10K

    Comments

Community moderators