• TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I don’t see how someone burning a copy of a book that they paid for themselves is discrimination. It is criticism and protest, but not discriminatory. It isn’t denying anyone else’s access to the words in the book. It’s just making a political statement.

    Ideas should always be allowed to be criticized. Inanimate objects shouldn’t be given human rights.

    • samokosik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      So the general issue why burning such a copy should be considered incorrect is the fact that Quran, apart from being just another book, is a symbol of Islamic religion. Hence why it appears offensive to Muslims. Same logic applies to other symbols. Do you think it’s absolutely okay to come to a square and burn LGBTI or BLM flags. If you were a gay and saw someone else burning a rainbow flag, would you feel safe at such place?

      • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I will always support someone’s right to burn an inanimate object that they own themselves. I would think that person is an asshole, but would not feel threatened by it in anyway. I am what those BLM flag burners would consider a POC.

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      You’re bing purposefully obtuse. This does not stop criticism of Islam or the Quaran, or making political statements about Islam.

      It is banning an act that has been very specifically used with the intent of inciting hatred.

      • samokosik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I would not necessarily say it’s because people don’t understand Muslims. I myself have nothing in common with Muslims, as well.

        More likely the case is that there are 2 approaches to free speech. First one advocates for absolute free speech whilst the second is more aligned with “my liberty ends where yours begins” phrase.

        • kaffiene@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          I agree with you that we can contrast absolute free speech with a view that considers the effects we have on others. I’m all for the latter approach while I find the former infantile. I do still believe that not being islamic is an issue here. I don’t tell Christians how to feel about their faith because I am not one. I expect others to extend the same consideration to Muslims.