Some small church in my city is planning to have a Quran bonfire to commemorate 9/11. Normally I wouldn't care except for the fact that the media picked up on this and now there are protests in foreign countries with the usual burning of American flags and death to america chants (irony lol). Now I really want to go and check out all the drama.
I also want to show my support for the Quran burners. I wish that I could partake in the festivities as I would absolutely love knowing that my small actions contributed to pissing off millions of oversensitive morons around the world.
General Petreus 'condemned' the quran burning. He is worried that this will increase violence in Afghanistan. Enough is enough already. We can't live forever censoring our behavior out of fear that it will offend someone. Protecting our liberties/constitution should be the only cause that the military fights for, not the only cause that they won't fight for. /facepalm
Don't understand how burning Qurans commemorates 9/11 any more than burning Bibles would commemorate the crusades but whatever, let the idiots have their fun I guess.
When are you hosting the bible burning commemoration for all those killed by the Inquisition? How is disrespecting another religion speak to the tolerant small church of Yahweh?
You have free speech and the right to burn that holy text of one of the multitude of gods. However by doing that you are a bigot and I am ashamed to think that we share the same country of origin.
I'm sure the 'millions of oversensitive morons' dont live forever sensoring THEIR behaviour to protect their liberties or personal constitutions and then tragedies like 9/11 happen. Not that i'm comparing Quran burning to 9/11 or that i remotely even agree with those 'millions of oversensitive morons'. In fact, I pretty much agree with you. but the last paragraph of your blog i disagree with, we should censor our behaviour, especially our unnecessary displays of hate.
Honestly, yo, there's a big difference between going out of your way to be a jackass and taking a dump on a lot of people's deepest-held convictions and "not censoring your behavior."
On September 08 2010 06:22 BlackJack wrote: Some small church in my city is planning to have a Quran bonfire to commemorate 9/11. Normally I wouldn't care except for the fact that the media picked up on this and now there are protests in foreign countries with the usual burning of American flags and death to america chants (irony lol). Now I really want to go and check out all the drama.
I also want to show my support for the Quran burners. I wish that I could partake in the festivities as I would absolutely love knowing that my small actions contributed to pissing off millions of oversensitive morons around the world.
General Petreus 'condemned' the quran burning. He is worried that this will increase violence in Afghanistan. Enough is enough already. We can't live forever censoring our behavior out of fear that it will offend someone. Protecting our liberties/constitution should be the only cause that the military fights for, not the only cause that they won't fight for. /facepalm
It doesn't bother you that in order to promote freedom of speech, you're also joining a bunch of bigots, who also happen to be oversensitive? They've just grown up in a society where their idiotic oversensitivity is more freely expressed.
A bigot is still a bigot, the members of that church and the American public just have the luxury of being ignorant of 'fighting words.'
In fact, were their actions directed towards a local mosque and not foreign nationals, it would probably be construed as a threat and the "freedom of speech" party would be crashed by a bunch of FBI agents.
no wonder, i remember blackjack for racist comments and such. best jump in the fire with all the quran burners and all the haters from other countries. idiots... but yeah killing the other one before he can kill you is the most important thing in life.
I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
My question is why did the media have to pick up on this? Chances are now that things will get blown way out of proportion. =\
Also I don't think that burning the Quran really solves anything in relation to 9/11, except for stereotyping a whole ethnicity and their religion based off of the actions of some crazy radicals. Seriously though, I don't see the need to join these crazy people. Sure some of the muslims may have burned American flags, but just let them do that and have the moral high ground by not reciprocating their actions, and again, don;t stereotpye a whole ethnicity based on the actions of a few of its memebers....
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
not saying responding with violence is good, but do you really think it is necessary to burn a book that means a lot to some people is nice? .. this reminds me of the neo nazis talking about freedom of speech...
See, this angers me, and i am no muslim and no US hater. i just dont like such people and i think the world would be better without them.
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
That's not entirely true. If the intent is to intimidate, it may very well be illegal just as cross burning can be.
Also, there are far better ways to promote freedom of speech than book/cross burning.
If I were a muslim living in that county, I would take that church to civil court and get ton of money from it. You might not even need to be a FL resident, I'm not exactly sure on the law down there.
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
not saying responding with violence is good, but do you really think it is necessary to burn a book that means a lot to some people is nice? .. this reminds me of the neo nazis talking about freedom of speech...
See, this angers me, and i am no muslim and no US hater. i just dont like such people and i think the world would be better without them.
lol how did you get neo-nazi out of that, then conclude with "world would be better without them"
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
That's not entirely true. If the intent is to intimidate, it may very well be illegal just as cross burning can be.
Also, there are far better ways to promote freedom of speech than book/cross burning.
If it's illegal THAT is a serious issue. People should be able to burn whatever they want, holy book or not. Just because it's a special book to you doesn't mean the rest of the country has to follow your religious teachings (regarding the book itself). That is one of the basic legal principles that the United States is built upon, and that is why I partially want to see this burning happen: as a demonstration that it still holds true, no matter how intimidating or violently responsive Muslims are.
This is one of those cases where we can do it, but we probably shouldn't do it. First off it doesn't commemorate shit, its just one group of fanatics pissing off an even more fanatical group. Why is it that all of the ignorant, flag wearing, racist, religious white think "That guy over there that I have never met, and we only know of each other through several intermediate proxies, has different beliefs then me and has been told to think I am satan, and I stand for everything that is wrong with the world. To prove him wrong Im going to burn the most important religious symbol he has"
Yeah, this is the path to peace...
EDIT:
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
Christianity is a "religion of peace" and yet there has been the crusades, the inquisition, the silent approval of the holocaust, not to mention all the horrific stuff done in the bible in gods name.
What the religion says doesn't matter because in the end its humans that are following the relgion, and humans are petty, vindictive, and violent
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
That's not entirely true. If the intent is to intimidate, it may very well be illegal just as cross burning can be.
Also, there are far better ways to promote freedom of speech than book/cross burning.
If it's illegal and if it is THAT is a serious issue. People should be able to burn whatever they want, holy book or not. Just because it's a special book to you doesn't mean the rest of the country has to follow your religious teachings (regarding the book itself).
Intimidation supersedes freedom of speech, just as I don't have the right to call your house and threaten to kill you.
I don't know if there's any state legislature regarding that kind of intimidation but I'm sure it'd go through a civil court.
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
not saying responding with violence is good, but do you really think it is necessary to burn a book that means a lot to some people is nice? .. this reminds me of the neo nazis talking about freedom of speech...
See, this angers me, and i am no muslim and no US hater. i just dont like such people and i think the world would be better without them.
lol how did you get neo-nazi out of that, then conclude with "world would be better without them"
well, i just see a similarity in your and their way to argue. not saying your are a nazi, just as "smart". and yeah, i think the world would be better without racists, what is your problem with that?
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
That's not entirely true. If the intent is to intimidate, it may very well be illegal just as cross burning can be.
Also, there are far better ways to promote freedom of speech than book/cross burning.
If it's illegal and if it is THAT is a serious issue. People should be able to burn whatever they want, holy book or not. Just because it's a special book to you doesn't mean the rest of the country has to follow your religious teachings (regarding the book itself).
Intimidation supersedes freedom of speech, just as I don't have the right to call your house and threaten to kill you.
I don't know if there's any state legislature regarding that kind of intimidation but I'm sure it'd go through a civil court.
If you think burning a bunch of books constitutes illegal intimidation you have a terrible understanding of the law or this country's laws are badly messed up.
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
not saying responding with violence is good, but do you really think it is necessary to burn a book that means a lot to some people is nice? .. this reminds me of the neo nazis talking about freedom of speech...
See, this angers me, and i am no muslim and no US hater. i just dont like such people and i think the world would be better without them.
lol how did you get neo-nazi out of that, then conclude with "world would be better without them"
well, i just see a similarity in your and their way to argue. not saying your are a nazi, just as "smart". and yeah, i think the world would be better without racists, what is your problem with that?
The Nazis weren't trying to make a point about freedom of speech with respect to a violent group (my position on why I'd partially like to see the burning happen). And the "world would be better without X group" was mentioned because that IS very Nazi.
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
That's not entirely true. If the intent is to intimidate, it may very well be illegal just as cross burning can be.
Also, there are far better ways to promote freedom of speech than book/cross burning.
If it's illegal and if it is THAT is a serious issue. People should be able to burn whatever they want, holy book or not. Just because it's a special book to you doesn't mean the rest of the country has to follow your religious teachings (regarding the book itself).
Intimidation supersedes freedom of speech, just as I don't have the right to call your house and threaten to kill you.
I don't know if there's any state legislature regarding that kind of intimidation but I'm sure it'd go through a civil court.
If you think burning a bunch of books constitutes illegal intimidation you have a terrible understanding of the law or this country's laws are badly messed up.
The Supreme Court has ruled that cross burning may fall under intimidation laws. I fail to see how religious book burning is any different.
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
That's not entirely true. If the intent is to intimidate, it may very well be illegal just as cross burning can be.
Also, there are far better ways to promote freedom of speech than book/cross burning.
If it's illegal and if it is THAT is a serious issue. People should be able to burn whatever they want, holy book or not. Just because it's a special book to you doesn't mean the rest of the country has to follow your religious teachings (regarding the book itself).
Intimidation supersedes freedom of speech, just as I don't have the right to call your house and threaten to kill you.
I don't know if there's any state legislature regarding that kind of intimidation but I'm sure it'd go through a civil court.
If you think burning a bunch of books constitutes illegal intimidation you have a terrible understanding of the law or this country's laws are badly messed up.
The Supreme Court has ruled that cross burning may fall under intimidation laws. I fail to see how religious book burning is any different.
Maybe you should find a new country.
This is not cross burning. Cross burning "may" fall under intimidation (it won't, except in specific circumstances like burning it on a black person's lawn) doesn't have anything to do with this. There is no way that burning books on your own property, not physically directed at anyone, can be construed as intimidation, nor should it be. If you think that this should be in any way illegal than you are sadly not a proponent of basic freedoms, and this is coming form a person who votes left wing.
You do realize that people can legally say that Muslims are aggressive and all should be immediately deported without it being illegal, right? The book burning is a meta version of that. I mean that's just the basics of freedom of speech: unpopular speech is legal. The burning, or even saying "Islam is horrible and caused 9/11, all Muslims should be deported" does not constitute any of the exceptions to freedom of speech such as a direct threat or slander.
Burning an object on another person's property is a wholly separate crime from intimidation. If I were a muslim in Gaineville, I would see it as an act of intimidation.
On September 08 2010 06:59 Jibba wrote: Burning an object on another person's property is a wholly separate crime from intimidation. If I were a muslim in Gaineville, I would see it as an act of intimidation.
The courts won't. Just living in the same city as someone doesn't mean you are now allowed to control everyones actions and/or opinions. Again, a person who directly said that he hates all Muslims and all Muslims should be deported for causing 9/11 is legally entitled to that speech. If you support freedom of speech you have to support it for unpopular opinions that you disagree with.
You can throw in all the legal jargon and constitutional technicalities you want, I still don't see why anybody would even want to do something this primitive and idiotic.
On September 08 2010 06:58 Saturnize wrote: I agree with CZ. As long as this act is on their own persons property I fail to see how it falls under intimidation.
On September 08 2010 07:01 SubtleArt wrote: You can throw in all the legal jargon and constitutional technicalities you want, I still don't see why anybody would even want to do something this primitive and idiotic.
There are a bunch of separate arguments going on here.
1) Should these people burn the Qu'Rans
2) Do these people have a legal right to
3) Should these people have a legal right to.
I'm surprised and concerned that people think #2 may be false (lack of understanding of laws), but really concerned that some people are suggesting that it should be illegal because some people in the city might get their feelings hurt. Freedom of speech is supposed to protect unpopular opinions, and if you support it you have to support the legality of those opinions. You can disagree entirely about whether they should be said, but whether they should be legal or not is a different question of government and social principle.
On September 08 2010 06:37 green.at wrote: no wonder, i remember blackjack for racist comments and such. best jump in the fire with all the quran burners and all the haters from other countries. idiots... but yeah killing the other one before he can kill you is the most important thing in life.
Which was very obviously a joke and not even a joke by me. I pulled it directly from South Park or Family Guy or some other show, but I guess they have the cred to get away with it since people don't have a sense of humor unless they are watching cartoons.
Maybe you should actually read my posts in threads that matter, for example in the Ground Zero mosque thread and the Israeli soldiers shoots girl thread and you will see that I stood behind muslims in both threads, so to assume I have some kind of bias against muslims is ignorance. As a mater of a fact my grandfather was Syrian which means me 1/4 Syrian.
So let's see. I support the Muslims right to build a mosque at Ground Zero and I support some people's rights to burn some books. I would call that being consistent with supporting constitutional liberties. I would also call that being consistent with disliking overlysensitive people that will take to the streets and protest stupid things. I guess you would call that being prejudice?
On September 08 2010 06:59 Jibba wrote: Burning an object on another person's property is a wholly separate crime from intimidation. If I were a muslim in Gaineville, I would see it as an act of intimidation.
The courts won't. Just living in the same city as someone doesn't mean you are now allowed to control everyones actions and/or opinions. Again, a person who directly said that he hates all Muslims and all Muslims should be deported for causing 9/11 is legally entitled to that speech. If you support freedom of speech you have to support it for unpopular opinions that you disagree with.
Are you even aware of the many limitations placed on freedom of speech? I get the feeling that you aren't, and you fall under the group of people I mentioned in my first post here.
If there is a civil case, how it would be construed has yet to be seen. I don't think there's any Florida law prohibiting burnings, but it really isn't that farfetched to find damages from this. If it were in Virginia or another state with an intimidation/burning law, then at least the case would make it to trial.
On September 08 2010 06:59 Jibba wrote: Burning an object on another person's property is a wholly separate crime from intimidation. If I were a muslim in Gaineville, I would see it as an act of intimidation.
The courts won't. Just living in the same city as someone doesn't mean you are now allowed to control everyones actions and/or opinions. Again, a person who directly said that he hates all Muslims and all Muslims should be deported for causing 9/11 is legally entitled to that speech. If you support freedom of speech you have to support it for unpopular opinions that you disagree with.
Are you even aware of the many limitations placed on freedom of speech? I get the feeling that you aren't, and you fall under the group of people I mentioned in my first post here.
If there is a civil case, how it would be construed has yet to be seen. I don't think there's any Florida law prohibiting burnings, but it really isn't that farfetched to find damages from this.
Quick question: Do you believe that these book burnings should be illegal, if done in the spirit of hating Islam and blaming Muslims for 9/11 and nothing more?
I'm not asking about "is illegal," I'm asking about your opinion on "should." Should criticism (even extreme) or hatred of a religion or group of people be illegal, in your opinion?
On September 08 2010 06:58 Saturnize wrote: I agree with CZ. As long as this act is on their own persons property I fail to see how it falls under intimidation.
Where did you receive your JD from?
What is a JD?
Anyways, I don't see why this topic is all about how the law should be dealt with instead of about how deplorable the actions of the people are. While I think they are kind of douche bags I still think that they should be able to do what they want on their own property.
burning Qurans to commemorate 9/11? why not ban swimming everywhere in the US because 1 kid died to a shark? Not all Muslims are behind 9/11 or think its a good thing, its a few bad eggs imo.
On September 08 2010 06:59 Jibba wrote: Burning an object on another person's property is a wholly separate crime from intimidation. If I were a muslim in Gaineville, I would see it as an act of intimidation.
The courts won't. Just living in the same city as someone doesn't mean you are now allowed to control everyones actions and/or opinions. Again, a person who directly said that he hates all Muslims and all Muslims should be deported for causing 9/11 is legally entitled to that speech. If you support freedom of speech you have to support it for unpopular opinions that you disagree with.
First, thats for the courts to decide, not any of us. And second, there is a big difference between supporting some ones right to free speech and supporting what they are saying. Going and burning shit with them, that is supporting what they are saying.
I can't speak for anyone else, but if I was a muslim anywhere in the US I would feel pretty intimidated, just like I would feel intimidated by the reactions that are happening in the middle east if I was there. I don't support this, and I'm not even religious, but I'm white, and with people burning American flags, and protesting in the street, I wouldn't feel safe.
And in all honesty, does anyone buy this is to commemorate 9/11. The sole reason for this clearly is to demonstrate hatred for a group of people and intimidate them
On September 08 2010 06:58 Saturnize wrote: I agree with CZ. As long as this act is on their own persons property I fail to see how it falls under intimidation.
What you seem to be ignoring or avoiding is the line between free speech and hate speech. From my understanding of the law it has to do with intention. People commonly burn American flags(In USA and other places) but is often not considered hate speech or illegal.
Ever heard of sit-ins? Ever say to black people "why do you go and sit at that whites only table when you know it's only going to perpetuate hatred?"
This NEEDS to be done. This needs to be done often enough that they don't riot everytime we do it. It needs to be done often enough so that television stations and newspapers aren't afraid to show an image of Mohammed. That's why I want to do it, not because I want to stand side by side with bigots.
On September 08 2010 07:11 Turkagent wrote: What you seem to be ignoring or avoiding is the line between free speech and hate speech. From my understanding of the law it has to do with intention. People commonly burn American flags(In USA and other places) but is often not considered hate speech or illegal.
I don't know whether it constitutes hate speech, but it shouldn't. Hate speech shouldn't be a crime. There are already exceptions to freedom of speech that protect against threats and such, so hate speech doesn't do anything to protect people. It just criminalizes opinions, thoughts and views, and however vile you may think they are you are putting yourself against freedom of speech if you support that.
On September 08 2010 06:59 Jibba wrote: Burning an object on another person's property is a wholly separate crime from intimidation. If I were a muslim in Gaineville, I would see it as an act of intimidation.
The courts won't. Just living in the same city as someone doesn't mean you are now allowed to control everyones actions and/or opinions. Again, a person who directly said that he hates all Muslims and all Muslims should be deported for causing 9/11 is legally entitled to that speech. If you support freedom of speech you have to support it for unpopular opinions that you disagree with.
Are you even aware of the many limitations placed on freedom of speech? I get the feeling that you aren't, and you fall under the group of people I mentioned in my first post here.
If there is a civil case, how it would be construed has yet to be seen. I don't think there's any Florida law prohibiting burnings, but it really isn't that farfetched to find damages from this.
Quick question: Do you believe that these book burnings should be illegal, if done in the spirit of hating Islam and blaming Muslims for 9/11 and nothing more?
I'm not asking about "is illegal," I'm asking about your opinion on "should." Should criticism (even extreme) or hatred of a religion or group of people be illegal, in your opinion?
No. Messages of unified values are completely allowed, and I'm all for letting the KKK or neo-Nazis spill their filth in public.
I think you need to pay more attention to my posts, because I'm not posting what I feel, I'm posting what's possible. I feel that both sides feeling outrage and contempt are unmeasurably stupid and destructive towards their own ends, but that they should be allowed to be that stupid and destructive as long as its only causing harm to themselves. What I know and am arguing is that freedom of speech does not allow for intimidation or threatening hate speech and so if I were a Muslim family man living in Gainesville near that church, I would interpret it as a threat to myself and my children and I would seek legal action against the church. Whether they choose to grant me damages would be up to the judge, but I'd certainly have a case.
On September 08 2010 06:58 Saturnize wrote: I agree with CZ. As long as this act is on their own persons property I fail to see how it falls under intimidation.
Where did you receive your JD from?
What is a JD?
Anyways, I don't see why this topic is all about how the law should be dealt with instead of about how deplorable the actions of the people are. While I think they are kind of douche bags I still think that they should be able to do what they want on their own property.
Because the law is what protects their ability to do what they want on their own property...
On September 08 2010 06:59 Jibba wrote: Burning an object on another person's property is a wholly separate crime from intimidation. If I were a muslim in Gaineville, I would see it as an act of intimidation.
The courts won't. Just living in the same city as someone doesn't mean you are now allowed to control everyones actions and/or opinions. Again, a person who directly said that he hates all Muslims and all Muslims should be deported for causing 9/11 is legally entitled to that speech. If you support freedom of speech you have to support it for unpopular opinions that you disagree with.
Are you even aware of the many limitations placed on freedom of speech? I get the feeling that you aren't, and you fall under the group of people I mentioned in my first post here.
If there is a civil case, how it would be construed has yet to be seen. I don't think there's any Florida law prohibiting burnings, but it really isn't that farfetched to find damages from this.
Quick question: Do you believe that these book burnings should be illegal, if done in the spirit of hating Islam and blaming Muslims for 9/11 and nothing more?
I'm not asking about "is illegal," I'm asking about your opinion on "should." Should criticism (even extreme) or hatred of a religion or group of people be illegal, in your opinion?
No. Messages of unified values are completely allowed, and I'm all for letting the KKK or neo-Nazis spill their filth in public.
I think you need to pay more attention to my posts, because I'm not posting what I feel, I'm posting what's possible. I feel that both sides feeling outrage and contempt are unmeasurably stupid and destructive towards their own ends, but that they should be allowed to be that stupid and destructive as long as its only causing harm to themselves. What I know and am arguing is that freedom of speech does not allow for intimidation or threatening hate speech and so if I were a Muslim family man living in Gainesville near that church, I would interpret it as a threat to myself and my children and I would seek legal action against the church. Whether they choose to grant me damages would be up to the judge, but I'd certainly have a case.
Ok. We clearly disagree on the legal exceptions to freedom of speech and what constitutes intimidation and such, but that's not an issue that be resolved here without hours of citing precedents and such.
Though I'm fine with you supporting both sides of this issue....I do have to wonder what's the point of burning the Quran? Aren't we being just as bad as radicals who burn the flag abroad?
I mean....sure we have a freedom to do something, but when we resort to book burning to prove a point, I think we're sort of losing our way. >.>
If I were a muslim living in that county, I would take that church to civil court and get ton of money from it. You might not even need to be a FL resident, I'm not exactly sure on the law down there.
what a hero
I wouldn't show my face near a quran burning, however, it'd be more than a little embarrassing to be associated with those imbeciles.
Not the same thing, but there is freedom of speech and then there is abusing the freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is like the saying "The customer is always right.". Some times yes, some times no.
Not the same thing, but there is freedom of speech and then there is abusing the freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is like the saying the customer is always right. Some times yes, some times no.
Well, I can pretty much guarantee this is legal based on A) common sense understanding of the law and B) that no news station has talked about the legality of it. The latter suggests quite clearly that it is legal, though it's obviously a roundabout inductive way of reasoning it.
That and the fact that the KKK can march down black streets saying a lot of things and that's all legal. Burning books in your own backyard is a few levels down on the possible "intimidation" levels of that.
I always found book burnings of any kind stupid, since you have to either buy the book, or the book you stole has to be replaced most of the time.. so in the end, you actually end up helping whatever organization financially when you meant to hurt it -_-
Not the same thing, but there is freedom of speech and then there is abusing the freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is like the saying "The customer is always right.". Some times yes, some times no.
Its a bit of a different story. Germany law has a rather huge caveat when it comes to Nazi's and the holocaust. While he would have been able to say what he said in the US with no problem, Germany is a different place. There was a man who was arrested because he taught he dog to do the hitler solute on command and then proceeded to do this in public
On September 08 2010 06:59 Jibba wrote: Burning an object on another person's property is a wholly separate crime from intimidation. If I were a muslim in Gaineville, I would see it as an act of intimidation.
The courts won't. Just living in the same city as someone doesn't mean you are now allowed to control everyones actions and/or opinions. Again, a person who directly said that he hates all Muslims and all Muslims should be deported for causing 9/11 is legally entitled to that speech. If you support freedom of speech you have to support it for unpopular opinions that you disagree with.
Are you even aware of the many limitations placed on freedom of speech? I get the feeling that you aren't, and you fall under the group of people I mentioned in my first post here.
If there is a civil case, how it would be construed has yet to be seen. I don't think there's any Florida law prohibiting burnings, but it really isn't that farfetched to find damages from this.
Quick question: Do you believe that these book burnings should be illegal, if done in the spirit of hating Islam and blaming Muslims for 9/11 and nothing more?
I'm not asking about "is illegal," I'm asking about your opinion on "should." Should criticism (even extreme) or hatred of a religion or group of people be illegal, in your opinion?
No. Messages of unified values are completely allowed, and I'm all for letting the KKK or neo-Nazis spill their filth in public.
I think you need to pay more attention to my posts, because I'm not posting what I feel, I'm posting what's possible. I feel that both sides feeling outrage and contempt are unmeasurably stupid and destructive towards their own ends, but that they should be allowed to be that stupid and destructive as long as its only causing harm to themselves. What I know and am arguing is that freedom of speech does not allow for intimidation or threatening hate speech and so if I were a Muslim family man living in Gainesville near that church, I would interpret it as a threat to myself and my children and I would seek legal action against the church. Whether they choose to grant me damages would be up to the judge, but I'd certainly have a case.
Ok. We clearly disagree on the legal exceptions to freedom of speech and what constitutes intimidation and such, but that's not an issue that be resolved here without hours of citing precedents and such.
It's left to the judge to decide. There is no legal definition of intimidation, however there is a legal right to interpret burnings as intimidation.
Still, throw some cute crying kids (Arab kids tend to be super cute) outside the courtroom, waiting for their young father who owns his own restaurant/dry cleaner/gas station/whatever on CNN and soon everyone thinks your church is full of bastards. In the PR war, the church would lose. And if I'm their congress person, I'm begging the church not to do it.
Not the same thing, but there is freedom of speech and then there is abusing the freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is like the saying "The customer is always right.". Some times yes, some times no.
U.S. freedom of speech is different from a lot of other western countrys in that we have very small if any limitations on hate speech whereas in other countries there are even instances of people going to jail and being prosecuted for hate speech, for example Ake Green and Geert Wilders
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
That's not entirely true. If the intent is to intimidate, it may very well be illegal just as cross burning can be.
Also, there are far better ways to promote freedom of speech than book/cross burning.
If it's illegal THAT is a serious issue. People should be able to burn whatever they want, holy book or not my entire house. Just because it's a special book to you doesn't mean the rest of the country has to follow your religious teachings (regarding the book itself) because it clearly shows that I do not care about other people's religion. That is one of the basic legal idiotic principles that the United States is built upon, and that is why I partially want to see this burning happen: as a demonstration that it still holds true that the idea it self is stupid and promotes racism/outcry across the world, rather than a speech of freedom, no matter how intimidating or violently responsive Muslims are.
Fixed.
If you want to join the burning, it's up to you. I'm not going to try to stop someone from promoting outcry in other countries; some people never understand what they are up to.
On September 08 2010 06:22 BlackJack wrote: Some small church in my city is planning to have a Quran bonfire to commemorate 9/11. Normally I wouldn't care except for the fact that the media picked up on this and now there are protests in foreign countries with the usual burning of American flags and death to america chants (irony lol). Now I really want to go and check out all the drama.
I also want to show my support for the Quran burners. I wish that I could partake in the festivities as I would absolutely love knowing that my small actions contributed to pissing off millions of oversensitive morons around the world.
General Petreus 'condemned' the quran burning. He is worried that this will increase violence in Afghanistan. Enough is enough already. We can't live forever censoring our behavior out of fear that it will offend someone. Protecting our liberties/constitution should be the only cause that the military fights for, not the only cause that they won't fight for. /facepalm
It doesn't bother you that in order to promote freedom of speech, you're also joining a bunch of bigots, who also happen to be oversensitive? They've just grown up in a society where their idiotic oversensitivity is more freely expressed.
A bigot is still a bigot, the members of that church and the American public just have the luxury of being ignorant of 'fighting words.'
In fact, were their actions directed towards a local mosque and not foreign nationals, it would probably be construed as a threat and the "freedom of speech" party would be crashed by a bunch of FBI agents.
No, it doesn't bother me that much to join a bunch of bigots because it doesn't matter to the Muslims that are protesting this. Because 1 guy in 300 million decides to burn a few books, those people over there want to kill ME regardless if I contribute or not. If I am going to take the blame I might as well join in on the fun lol. I guess in an ideal world I would burn a Quran and a bible, so I could piss off the Muslims and the church people at the same time.
On September 08 2010 07:24 GreatFall wrote: Ok, so you are upset that they are burning flags in response to burning Qurans so you want to burn a Quran? You are a fucking idiot.
No. Try to keep up. I am not annoyed that they are burning flags. I am annoyed that they think that they have a right to burn a flag AND that I don't have a right to burn a Quran. I would stand right along side them and burn an American flag if someone tried to say they didn't have a right to. I would stand along side Americans and burn a flag if someone said we didn't have a right to. But thankfully the U.S. suporeme court said we DO have a right to burn an American flag.
I'd have no problem burning either a Quran or a Bible or whatever else if I really needed a fire (or just for shitz & giggles really), but doing it with the most press possible just to piss off people and show that I can? No thx
On September 08 2010 06:22 BlackJack wrote: Some small church in my city is planning to have a Quran bonfire to commemorate 9/11. Normally I wouldn't care except for the fact that the media picked up on this and now there are protests in foreign countries with the usual burning of American flags and death to america chants (irony lol). Now I really want to go and check out all the drama.
I also want to show my support for the Quran burners. I wish that I could partake in the festivities as I would absolutely love knowing that my small actions contributed to pissing off millions of oversensitive morons around the world.
General Petreus 'condemned' the quran burning. He is worried that this will increase violence in Afghanistan. Enough is enough already. We can't live forever censoring our behavior out of fear that it will offend someone. Protecting our liberties/constitution should be the only cause that the military fights for, not the only cause that they won't fight for. /facepalm
It doesn't bother you that in order to promote freedom of speech, you're also joining a bunch of bigots, who also happen to be oversensitive? They've just grown up in a society where their idiotic oversensitivity is more freely expressed.
A bigot is still a bigot, the members of that church and the American public just have the luxury of being ignorant of 'fighting words.'
In fact, were their actions directed towards a local mosque and not foreign nationals, it would probably be construed as a threat and the "freedom of speech" party would be crashed by a bunch of FBI agents.
I guess in an ideal world I would burn a Quran and a bible, so I could piss off the Muslims and the church people at the same time.
In that case, I'll join you. Can I bring Dan Brown and Stephanie Meyers?
While I don't want to get into the freedom of speech argument, I have a question. You say "because one person burns a book people over there want to kill me". 99.99% it won't come back to bite you.
But I still don't see how you can sweep the impact of this incident under the rug in terms of it undermining the work Americans are trying to do in stabilizing their occupations and gaining the trust of the local population. Doesn't this made for TV demonstration have a negative impact on those efforts? From that point of view alone it puts other people in danger and wastes the time and resources that have been invested into the whole situation. I am not sure how you can be flippant about that.
edit - my personal opinion is that this "pastor" is just trying to get his church in the spotlight to rake in the money from those weakminded bigots that will flock there. The quotes I read from him were pretty pathetic "We are open to changing our mind and I am praying about the issue". What a douchebag.
On September 08 2010 07:24 GreatFall wrote: Ok, so you are upset that they are burning flags in response to burning Qurans so you want to burn a Quran? You are a fucking idiot.
No. Try to keep up. I am not annoyed that they are burning flags. I am annoyed that they think that they have a right to burn a flag AND that I don't have a right to burn a Quran. I would stand right along side them and burn an American flag if someone tried to say they didn't have a right to. I would stand along side Americans and burn a flag if someone said we didn't have a right to. But thankfully the U.S. suporeme court said we DO have a right to burn an American flag.
Understand now?
Not really. Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean you need to run out and do it just to prove a point to some ignorant people. You are being an idiot as I said.
On September 08 2010 06:22 BlackJack wrote: Some small church in my city is planning to have a Quran bonfire to commemorate 9/11. Normally I wouldn't care except for the fact that the media picked up on this and now there are protests in foreign countries with the usual burning of American flags and death to america chants (irony lol). Now I really want to go and check out all the drama.
I also want to show my support for the Quran burners. I wish that I could partake in the festivities as I would absolutely love knowing that my small actions contributed to pissing off millions of oversensitive morons around the world.
General Petreus 'condemned' the quran burning. He is worried that this will increase violence in Afghanistan. Enough is enough already. We can't live forever censoring our behavior out of fear that it will offend someone. Protecting our liberties/constitution should be the only cause that the military fights for, not the only cause that they won't fight for. /facepalm
It doesn't bother you that in order to promote freedom of speech, you're also joining a bunch of bigots, who also happen to be oversensitive? They've just grown up in a society where their idiotic oversensitivity is more freely expressed.
A bigot is still a bigot, the members of that church and the American public just have the luxury of being ignorant of 'fighting words.'
In fact, were their actions directed towards a local mosque and not foreign nationals, it would probably be construed as a threat and the "freedom of speech" party would be crashed by a bunch of FBI agents.
I guess in an ideal world I would burn a Quran and a bible, so I could piss off the Muslims and the church people at the same time.
In that case, I'll join you. Can I bring Dan Brown and Stephanie Meyers?
btw don't you agree that if I had made this thread "I am going to burn a bible to protest these people burning a Quran" that people probably would have comended me? Oh the double standards.
On September 08 2010 07:24 GreatFall wrote: Ok, so you are upset that they are burning flags in response to burning Qurans so you want to burn a Quran? You are a fucking idiot.
No. Try to keep up. I am not annoyed that they are burning flags. I am annoyed that they think that they have a right to burn a flag AND that I don't have a right to burn a Quran. I would stand right along side them and burn an American flag if someone tried to say they didn't have a right to. I would stand along side Americans and burn a flag if someone said we didn't have a right to. But thankfully the U.S. suporeme court said we DO have a right to burn an American flag.
Understand now?
They're protesting your burning of their book.
You idiots started it. A small extremist group of muslims terrorised America and you go and piss on a religion that a fifth of the world follows. Hate on the terrorists but don't hate on Islam.
On September 08 2010 06:22 BlackJack wrote: Some small church in my city is planning to have a Quran bonfire to commemorate 9/11. Normally I wouldn't care except for the fact that the media picked up on this and now there are protests in foreign countries with the usual burning of American flags and death to america chants (irony lol). Now I really want to go and check out all the drama.
I also want to show my support for the Quran burners. I wish that I could partake in the festivities as I would absolutely love knowing that my small actions contributed to pissing off millions of oversensitive morons around the world.
General Petreus 'condemned' the quran burning. He is worried that this will increase violence in Afghanistan. Enough is enough already. We can't live forever censoring our behavior out of fear that it will offend someone. Protecting our liberties/constitution should be the only cause that the military fights for, not the only cause that they won't fight for. /facepalm
It doesn't bother you that in order to promote freedom of speech, you're also joining a bunch of bigots, who also happen to be oversensitive? They've just grown up in a society where their idiotic oversensitivity is more freely expressed.
A bigot is still a bigot, the members of that church and the American public just have the luxury of being ignorant of 'fighting words.'
In fact, were their actions directed towards a local mosque and not foreign nationals, it would probably be construed as a threat and the "freedom of speech" party would be crashed by a bunch of FBI agents.
No, it doesn't bother me that much to join a bunch of bigots because it doesn't matter to the Muslims that are protesting this. Because 1 guy in 300 million decides to burn a few books, those people over there want to kill ME regardless if I contribute or not. If I am going to take the blame I might as well join in on the fun lol. I guess in an ideal world I would burn a Quran and a bible, so I could piss off the Muslims and the church people at the same time.
So in a protest against generalizing as such "1 guy in 300 million decides to burn a few books, those people over there want to kill ME regardless if I contribute or not", you're going to offend 1.5 billion muslims because of a select few fundamentalists?
What if one out of those 1.5 billion start to think, "If I am going to take the blame for fundamentalists my whole life because of my beliefs I might as well join in on the fun lol." O_O
Anyway no one is really questioning their right to do it, it's more that it's a stupid thing to do.
Quran burning? Sounds great! I'll join you guys. Oh, hope you don't mind me bringing a few stacks of Bibles, Torahs and other religious scriptures as well. It's all for freedom of speech, right?
Satire aside, people in general are born with a filter in their brain, commonly known as "social antennae", which helps them judge their actions in relation to those around them. For example, Bob is an avid rugby fan and personally consider it far superior to other sports due to the enjoyment he gets out of it, but today he's at a barbeque with some friends who are avid football fans. During conversation, the topic of the similarities and differences between rugby and football, and in the back of Bob's mind, arguments around rugby's superiorty lines up. Confident in his own arguments and passion about rugby, Bob now spends the next half hour in debate with his friends - calm and good-mannered at first, but as time goes and both sides of the discussion realises neither side will concede their belief and accept the others, the discussion gets more agitated and irrational. Eventually, Bob has had enough of his friends' arrogance and decides to leave. On his way home, he shouts at a random passer-by to release some of his agression - this passer-by later on kicks his dog to channel his negative emtion onto someone else. The dog, in turn, runs in panic from his home, leaps across a fence and ends up in Bobs back yard, where he bites the hand of an unsuspecting Bob.
Now, if Bob had a functioning set of social antennae, he would still see the difference in opinion between himself and his friends, but instead of educating his friends, he decides against it and instead enjoys a casual conversation about somethiing both enjoy, although in different forms.
I think the issue at least in the states is very clear. If they do it on their own property, with their own property and follow fire code then it is completely legal. It is a political statement just as burning the flag, or any other book. As long as they do not make specific threats, for example, "I will go out and kill someone," then its all allowed. There are no special protections placed on physical objects. If I own a book I can more or less do what I want with it.
Weather it is a good idea or not is up to the people involved, not up to the government.
A small extremist group of muslims terrorised America and you go and piss on a religion that a fifth of the world follows. Hate on the terrorists but don't hate on Islam.
On September 08 2010 07:39 Manifesto7 wrote: While I don't want to get into the freedom of speech argument, I have a question. You say "because one person burns a book people over there want to kill me". 99.99% it won't come back to bite you.
But I still don't see how you can sweep the impact of this incident under the rug in terms of it undermining the work Americans are trying to do in stabilizing their occupations and gaining the trust of the local population. Doesn't this made for TV demonstration have a negative impact on those efforts? From that point of view alone it puts other people in danger and wastes the time and resources that have been invested into the whole situation. I am not sure how you can be flippant about that.
I guess I will answer that with a question: Why is this international news? Why is a church in my city with 50 members in their congregation making international headlines and being addressed by the commander of all U.S. forces in the middle east? I'm sorry but I don't think we can go forever censoring our episodes of South Park and our newspapers poltiical cartoons out of fear that the middle east will hate us. Do you think that it is acceptable to live in a country of 300 million people and if ONE guy decides to be a douchebag that hundreds of thousands of people will want to wipe out your country?
Here's a quote from today's school newspaper: "We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decsion of the President and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18 year old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
I know for a fact that this forum overwhelmingly came out in support of Matt Stone and Trey Parker when they had their whole incident with offending Muslims. Why does it make a difference to defend Matt Stone and Trey Parker over some random bigots when you and I both know that the muslims don't differentiate between entertainers and bigots? It's all the same to them so it's pointless to choose a "more worthy cause."
On September 08 2010 07:24 GreatFall wrote: Ok, so you are upset that they are burning flags in response to burning Qurans so you want to burn a Quran? You are a fucking idiot.
No. Try to keep up. I am not annoyed that they are burning flags. I am annoyed that they think that they have a right to burn a flag AND that I don't have a right to burn a Quran. I would stand right along side them and burn an American flag if someone tried to say they didn't have a right to. I would stand along side Americans and burn a flag if someone said we didn't have a right to. But thankfully the U.S. suporeme court said we DO have a right to burn an American flag.
Understand now?
They're protesting your burning of their book.
You idiots started it. A small extremist group of muslims terrorised America and you go and piss on a religion that a fifth of the world follows. Hate on the terrorists but don't hate on Islam.
Lol like this is the first time they have burned American flags? Get real, buddy.
On September 08 2010 07:56 BlackJack wrote: Here's a quote from today's school newspaper: "We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decsion of the President and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18 year old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
I'm sorry, but is the entire school district somewhat stupid or is the church your school district?
And a movement by a small church is what the government wants to do? Psh. I can post a Gretech rage thread here, and then argue that it is the will of the American government to punish Blizzard for what they have done to e-Sports.
On September 08 2010 07:58 BlackJack wrote: Lol like this is the first time they have burned American flags? Get real, buddy.
Lol like this is the first time Americans tried to burn Quran? Get real, buddy.
On September 08 2010 06:22 BlackJack wrote: Some small church in my city is planning to have a Quran bonfire to commemorate 9/11. Normally I wouldn't care except for the fact that the media picked up on this and now there are protests in foreign countries with the usual burning of American flags and death to america chants (irony lol). Now I really want to go and check out all the drama.
I also want to show my support for the Quran burners. I wish that I could partake in the festivities as I would absolutely love knowing that my small actions contributed to pissing off millions of oversensitive morons around the world.
General Petreus 'condemned' the quran burning. He is worried that this will increase violence in Afghanistan. Enough is enough already. We can't live forever censoring our behavior out of fear that it will offend someone. Protecting our liberties/constitution should be the only cause that the military fights for, not the only cause that they won't fight for. /facepalm
It doesn't bother you that in order to promote freedom of speech, you're also joining a bunch of bigots, who also happen to be oversensitive? They've just grown up in a society where their idiotic oversensitivity is more freely expressed.
A bigot is still a bigot, the members of that church and the American public just have the luxury of being ignorant of 'fighting words.'
In fact, were their actions directed towards a local mosque and not foreign nationals, it would probably be construed as a threat and the "freedom of speech" party would be crashed by a bunch of FBI agents.
I guess in an ideal world I would burn a Quran and a bible, so I could piss off the Muslims and the church people at the same time.
In that case, I'll join you. Can I bring Dan Brown and Stephanie Meyers?
btw don't you agree that if I had made this thread "I am going to burn a bible to protest these people burning a Quran" that people probably would have comended me? Oh the double standards.
Jesus people do not have the right to not be offended. Its pretty sickening that people assumed BlackJacks some kind of racist because he has issues with Islam, and Muslims violent response to any slight against there religion. You can have issues with a religion without being some kind of bigot. I'm sure some at the book burning will indeed be bigots but that's there own problem, and should not invalidate Blackjacks reason for being there. A climate of fear where people are afraid to show or do anything that could be perceived as offensive to the Islamic world exists. Do to the violent reprisal of Muslims at such actions. Its seen in General Petreus statements, and its seen in this very threads responses. Blackjack will not limit his own rights just so he can not offend other peoples sensibilities, and I applaud him.
The main problem is the media. Why are they covering this ? Seriously who cares if a bunch of idiots are burning a book lol ? I mean they are just feeding the hate.
On September 08 2010 07:39 Manifesto7 wrote: While I don't want to get into the freedom of speech argument, I have a question. You say "because one person burns a book people over there want to kill me". 99.99% it won't come back to bite you.
But I still don't see how you can sweep the impact of this incident under the rug in terms of it undermining the work Americans are trying to do in stabilizing their occupations and gaining the trust of the local population. Doesn't this made for TV demonstration have a negative impact on those efforts? From that point of view alone it puts other people in danger and wastes the time and resources that have been invested into the whole situation. I am not sure how you can be flippant about that.
I guess I will answer that with a question: Why is this international news? Why is a church in my city with 50 members in their congregation making international headlines and being addressed by the commander of all U.S. forces in the middle east? I'm sorry but I don't think we can go forever censoring our episodes of South Park and our newspapers poltiical cartoons out of fear that the middle east will hate us. Do you think that it is acceptable to live in a country of 300 million people and if ONE guy decides to be a douchebag that hundreds of thousands of people will want to wipe out your country?
People are dumb and sensationalist news organizations make money off it.
Here's a quote from today's school newspaper: "We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decsion of the President and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18 year old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
I know for a fact that this forum overwhelmingly came out in support of Matt Stone and Trey Parker when they had their whole incident with offending Muslims. Why does it make a difference to defend Matt Stone and Trey Parker over some random bigots when you and I both know that the muslims don't differentiate between entertainers and bigots? It's all the same to them so it's pointless to choose a "more worthy cause."
The distinction is between setting fire to books, which is seen as a universally bad act in all of Western society, and drawing, which is only bad when Naruto animators do it.
On September 08 2010 07:56 BlackJack wrote: Here's a quote from today's school newspaper: "We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decsion of the President and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18 year old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
I'm sorry, but is the entire school district somewhat stupid or is the church your school district?
And a movement by a small church is what the government wants to do? Psh. I can post a Gretech rage thread here, and then argue that it is the will of the American government to punish Blizzard for what they have done to e-Sports.
On September 08 2010 07:58 BlackJack wrote: Lol like this is the first time they have burned American flags? Get real, buddy.
Lol like this is the first time Americans tried to burn Quran? Get real, buddy.
Actually I should clarify. The school newspaper is no longer affiliated with the school. It's the largest run student newspaper in the country. And that article I was quoting was actually an AP article that was printed in the newspaper. So suffice it to say I have no idea what point you were trying to make there.
On September 08 2010 07:56 BlackJack wrote: Here's a quote from today's school newspaper: "We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decsion of the President and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18 year old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
I'm sorry, but is the entire school district somewhat stupid or is the church your school district?
And a movement by a small church is what the government wants to do? Psh. I can post a Gretech rage thread here, and then argue that it is the will of the American government to punish Blizzard for what they have done to e-Sports.
On September 08 2010 07:58 BlackJack wrote: Lol like this is the first time they have burned American flags? Get real, buddy.
Lol like this is the first time Americans tried to burn Quran? Get real, buddy.
Actually I should clarify. The school newspaper is no longer affiliated with the school. It's the largest run student newspaper in the country. And that article I was quoting was actually an AP article that was printed in the newspaper. So suffice it to say I have no idea what point you were trying to make there.
Well, given your level of intelligence, you probably won't get it.
'Here's a quote from today's school newspaper: "We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decsion of the President and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18 year old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.'
Yup, it's very clear. It clearly states the word 'Afghanistan' there.
On September 08 2010 08:02 InToTheWannaB wrote: Jesus people do not have the right to not be offended. Its pretty sickening that people assumed BlackJacks some kind of racist because he has issues with Islam, and Muslims violent response to any slight against there religion. You can have issues with a religion without being some kind of bigot. I'm sure some at the book burning will indeed be bigots but that's there own problem, and should not invalidate Blackjacks reason for being there. A climate of fear where people are afraid to show or do anything that could be perceived as offensive to the Islamic world exists. Do to the violent reprisal of Muslims at such actions. Its seen in General Petreus statements, and its seen in this very threads responses. Blackjack will not limit his own rights just so he can not offend other peoples sensibilities, and I applaud him.
It's probably a result of most Muslims being dark skinned and a lot of citics of Islam being racists that any criticism of Islam is seen as bigotry. However it's okay to say anything you want about those evangelical rednecks on this forum. Like I said, it's a double standard created by people that want to be so politically correct that they are too ignorant to see that treating criticism of Islam differently than criticism of Christianity is prejudice.
On September 08 2010 07:56 BlackJack wrote: Here's a quote from today's school newspaper: "We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decsion of the President and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18 year old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
I'm sorry, but is the entire school district somewhat stupid or is the church your school district?
And a movement by a small church is what the government wants to do? Psh. I can post a Gretech rage thread here, and then argue that it is the will of the American government to punish Blizzard for what they have done to e-Sports.
On September 08 2010 07:58 BlackJack wrote: Lol like this is the first time they have burned American flags? Get real, buddy.
Lol like this is the first time Americans tried to burn Quran? Get real, buddy.
Actually I should clarify. The school newspaper is no longer affiliated with the school. It's the largest run student newspaper in the country. And that article I was quoting was actually an AP article that was printed in the newspaper. So suffice it to say I have no idea what point you were trying to make there.
Well, given your level of intelligence, you probably won't get it.
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
That's not entirely true. If the intent is to intimidate, it may very well be illegal just as cross burning can be.
Also, there are far better ways to promote freedom of speech than book/cross burning.
If it's illegal THAT is a serious issue. People should be able to burn whatever they want, holy book or not my entire house. Just because it's a special book to you doesn't mean the rest of the country has to follow your religious teachings (regarding the book itself) because it clearly shows that I do not care about other people's religion. That is one of the basic legal idiotic principles that the United States is built upon, and that is why I partially want to see this burning happen: as a demonstration that it still holds true that the idea it self is stupid and promotes racism/outcry across the world, rather than a speech of freedom, no matter how intimidating or violently responsive Muslims are.
Fixed.
If you want to join the burning, it's up to you. I'm not going to try to stop someone from promoting outcry in other countries; some people never understand what they are up to.
All you have done in this thread is take cheap shots and insult people. Please post something worthwhile.
On September 08 2010 07:56 BlackJack wrote: Here's a quote from today's school newspaper: "We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decsion of the President and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18 year old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
I'm sorry, but is the entire school district somewhat stupid or is the church your school district?
And a movement by a small church is what the government wants to do? Psh. I can post a Gretech rage thread here, and then argue that it is the will of the American government to punish Blizzard for what they have done to e-Sports.
On September 08 2010 07:58 BlackJack wrote: Lol like this is the first time they have burned American flags? Get real, buddy.
Lol like this is the first time Americans tried to burn Quran? Get real, buddy.
Actually I should clarify. The school newspaper is no longer affiliated with the school. It's the largest run student newspaper in the country. And that article I was quoting was actually an AP article that was printed in the newspaper. So suffice it to say I have no idea what point you were trying to make there.
Well, given your level of intelligence, you probably won't get it.
On September 08 2010 06:39 cz wrote: I want to see them go ahead with it just to show that it's allowed in this country and riots in the Muslim world don't change that. Nobody will get hurt unless the adherents of the "religion of peace" are the ones doing it.
That's not entirely true. If the intent is to intimidate, it may very well be illegal just as cross burning can be.
Also, there are far better ways to promote freedom of speech than book/cross burning.
If it's illegal THAT is a serious issue. People should be able to burn whatever they want, holy book or not my entire house. Just because it's a special book to you doesn't mean the rest of the country has to follow your religious teachings (regarding the book itself) because it clearly shows that I do not care about other people's religion. That is one of the basic legal idiotic principles that the United States is built upon, and that is why I partially want to see this burning happen: as a demonstration that it still holds true that the idea it self is stupid and promotes racism/outcry across the world, rather than a speech of freedom, no matter how intimidating or violently responsive Muslims are.
Fixed.
If you want to join the burning, it's up to you. I'm not going to try to stop someone from promoting outcry in other countries; some people never understand what they are up to.
All you have done in this thread is take cheap shots and insult people. Please post something worthwhile.
It's a shame that my town had a Quran burning instead of a Scientology protest. I forgot that the line between being a bigot and a truth spreader was all about choosing which religion to bash. I have to remember to only join crusades that the keyboard warriors think are cool and trendy.
No matter if it's all about free speech, it's going to look like a pro-terrorist/anti-US propaganda. Your soldiers are dying in Afghanistan to give you the privilege to burn books.
On September 08 2010 07:39 Manifesto7 wrote: While I don't want to get into the freedom of speech argument, I have a question. You say "because one person burns a book people over there want to kill me". 99.99% it won't come back to bite you.
But I still don't see how you can sweep the impact of this incident under the rug in terms of it undermining the work Americans are trying to do in stabilizing their occupations and gaining the trust of the local population. Doesn't this made for TV demonstration have a negative impact on those efforts? From that point of view alone it puts other people in danger and wastes the time and resources that have been invested into the whole situation. I am not sure how you can be flippant about that.
I guess I will answer that with a question: Why is this international news? Why is a church in my city with 50 members in their congregation making international headlines and being addressed by the commander of all U.S. forces in the middle east? I'm sorry but I don't think we can go forever censoring our episodes of South Park and our newspapers poltiical cartoons out of fear that the middle east will hate us. Do you think that it is acceptable to live in a country of 300 million people and if ONE guy decides to be a douchebag that hundreds of thousands of people will want to wipe out your country?
I guess I see a difference between doing something that offends someone and doing something to offend someone. I wouldn't have made my point in the first case, but deliberately provoking someone leaves some blood on your hands.
And it is news because the media establishment gets advertising dollars from reporting that which incites. A whole other issue that boggles my mind and I won't get in to here. In fact the whole issue, from the church to the news, is about money more than politics of religion.
On September 08 2010 07:39 Manifesto7 wrote: While I don't want to get into the freedom of speech argument, I have a question. You say "because one person burns a book people over there want to kill me". 99.99% it won't come back to bite you.
But I still don't see how you can sweep the impact of this incident under the rug in terms of it undermining the work Americans are trying to do in stabilizing their occupations and gaining the trust of the local population. Doesn't this made for TV demonstration have a negative impact on those efforts? From that point of view alone it puts other people in danger and wastes the time and resources that have been invested into the whole situation. I am not sure how you can be flippant about that.
I guess I will answer that with a question: Why is this international news? Why is a church in my city with 50 members in their congregation making international headlines and being addressed by the commander of all U.S. forces in the middle east? I'm sorry but I don't think we can go forever censoring our episodes of South Park and our newspapers poltiical cartoons out of fear that the middle east will hate us. Do you think that it is acceptable to live in a country of 300 million people and if ONE guy decides to be a douchebag that hundreds of thousands of people will want to wipe out your country?
I guess I see a difference between doing something that offends someone and doing something to offend someone. I wouldn't have made my point in the first case, but deliberately provoking someone leaves some blood on your hands.
And it is news because the media establishment gets advertising dollars from reporting that which incites. A whole other issue that boggles my mind and I won't get in to here. In fact the whole issue, from the church to the news, is about money more than politics of religion.
I think the problem is that this demonstration incites such reactions and not that the media chooses to report that which incites. I believe that the only way to stop these incitations is by saturation and not by avoidance. For example, one person draws Mohammed and it's a riot, if everyone draws Mohammed then there is nobody to target. They can't take to the streets everyday, especially if they have families to support. The violence has got to get worse before it can get better, just like with integration.
On September 08 2010 06:22 BlackJack wrote: Some small church in my city is planning to have a Quran bonfire to commemorate 9/11. Normally I wouldn't care except for the fact that the media picked up on this and now there are protests in foreign countries with the usual burning of American flags and death to america chants (irony lol). Now I really want to go and check out all the drama.
I also want to show my support for the Quran burners. I wish that I could partake in the festivities as I would absolutely love knowing that my small actions contributed to pissing off millions of oversensitive morons around the world.
General Petreus 'condemned' the quran burning. He is worried that this will increase violence in Afghanistan. Enough is enough already. We can't live forever censoring our behavior out of fear that it will offend someone. Protecting our liberties/constitution should be the only cause that the military fights for, not the only cause that they won't fight for. /facepalm
It doesn't bother you that in order to promote freedom of speech, you're also joining a bunch of bigots, who also happen to be oversensitive? They've just grown up in a society where their idiotic oversensitivity is more freely expressed.
A bigot is still a bigot, the members of that church and the American public just have the luxury of being ignorant of 'fighting words.'
In fact, were their actions directed towards a local mosque and not foreign nationals, it would probably be construed as a threat and the "freedom of speech" party would be crashed by a bunch of FBI agents.
Pretty much this. In America you have the great freedom to burn whatever text you want... it doesn't mean that people will praise you or look fondly at you for it. In fact I'd say if you're going to support burning a religious text because of some action extremists took in the past, then you sir are a douche.
People should go there on the other side of the street and burn some fuckin crosses just to piss off those oversensitive little pricks. that way, everyones pissed off!
also lol at everyone calling blackjack intolerant. HEY ITS NOT TRENDY TO HATE IDIOTS BECAUSE THEY ARE OF A CERTAIN RELIGION YOU CAN ONLY HATE IDIOTS THAT ARE OF A DIFFERENT RELIGION
On September 08 2010 07:39 Manifesto7 wrote: While I don't want to get into the freedom of speech argument, I have a question. You say "because one person burns a book people over there want to kill me". 99.99% it won't come back to bite you.
But I still don't see how you can sweep the impact of this incident under the rug in terms of it undermining the work Americans are trying to do in stabilizing their occupations and gaining the trust of the local population. Doesn't this made for TV demonstration have a negative impact on those efforts? From that point of view alone it puts other people in danger and wastes the time and resources that have been invested into the whole situation. I am not sure how you can be flippant about that.
I guess I will answer that with a question: Why is this international news? Why is a church in my city with 50 members in their congregation making international headlines and being addressed by the commander of all U.S. forces in the middle east? I'm sorry but I don't think we can go forever censoring our episodes of South Park and our newspapers poltiical cartoons out of fear that the middle east will hate us. Do you think that it is acceptable to live in a country of 300 million people and if ONE guy decides to be a douchebag that hundreds of thousands of people will want to wipe out your country?
I guess I see a difference between doing something that offends someone and doing something to offend someone. I wouldn't have made my point in the first case, but deliberately provoking someone leaves some blood on your hands.
And it is news because the media establishment gets advertising dollars from reporting that which incites. A whole other issue that boggles my mind and I won't get in to here. In fact the whole issue, from the church to the news, is about money more than politics of religion.
I think the problem is that this demonstration incites such reactions and not that the media chooses to report that which incites. I believe that the only way to stop these incitations is by saturation and not by avoidance. For example, one person draws Mohammed and it's a riot, if everyone draws Mohammed then there is nobody to target. They can't take to the streets everyday, especially if they have families to support. The violence has got to get worse before it can get better, just like with integration.
So by all hating each other, we can learn o love each other.
Personally I find it ironic that a lot of the people supporting this burning as a first amendment right are the same ones who are opposed to the muslim community center 2 blocks from the twin towers' former site.
On September 08 2010 07:39 Manifesto7 wrote: While I don't want to get into the freedom of speech argument, I have a question. You say "because one person burns a book people over there want to kill me". 99.99% it won't come back to bite you.
But I still don't see how you can sweep the impact of this incident under the rug in terms of it undermining the work Americans are trying to do in stabilizing their occupations and gaining the trust of the local population. Doesn't this made for TV demonstration have a negative impact on those efforts? From that point of view alone it puts other people in danger and wastes the time and resources that have been invested into the whole situation. I am not sure how you can be flippant about that.
I guess I will answer that with a question: Why is this international news? Why is a church in my city with 50 members in their congregation making international headlines and being addressed by the commander of all U.S. forces in the middle east? I'm sorry but I don't think we can go forever censoring our episodes of South Park and our newspapers poltiical cartoons out of fear that the middle east will hate us. Do you think that it is acceptable to live in a country of 300 million people and if ONE guy decides to be a douchebag that hundreds of thousands of people will want to wipe out your country?
I guess I see a difference between doing something that offends someone and doing something to offend someone. I wouldn't have made my point in the first case, but deliberately provoking someone leaves some blood on your hands.
And it is news because the media establishment gets advertising dollars from reporting that which incites. A whole other issue that boggles my mind and I won't get in to here. In fact the whole issue, from the church to the news, is about money more than politics of religion.
I think the problem is that this demonstration incites such reactions and not that the media chooses to report that which incites. I believe that the only way to stop these incitations is by saturation and not by avoidance. For example, one person draws Mohammed and it's a riot, if everyone draws Mohammed then there is nobody to target. They can't take to the streets everyday, especially if they have families to support. The violence has got to get worse before it can get better, just like with integration.
So by all hating each other, we can learn o love each other.
I don't approve of the book burning, but freedom of speech is just as important in America as freedom of religion. Just don't get upset when violence intensifies. Burning a book/flag/symbol is not the most intelligent way to "protest" anything peacefully.
On September 08 2010 10:36 Antoine wrote: Personally I find it ironic that a lot of the people supporting this burning as a first amendment right are the same ones who are opposed to the muslim community center 2 blocks from the twin towers' former site.
Very good point.
I have to add, does burning Qu'rans have anything to do with 9/11? Some people are actually dumb enough to support that? Are you guys a bit slow?
Burning Qu'rans, fine if wasting your time and money is something you like to do. It's a worthless hunk of paper filled with violence and other horrors. Burning Bibles, fine - I usually just desecrate the free bible in a hotel room. It's a larger worthless hunk of paper, which is also filled with violence and other horrors. (Murder/Rape/Slavery/Racism/Sexism,etc.)
Burning Qu'rans because of 9/11? How about burning Bibles on May 31st when George Tiller was murdered by a Christian? How about April 19th, for the Oklahoma city bombing. I can afford a couple of Bibles a year if I need to. You christians sure deserve it! (Sarcasm, btw)
What's that, what are you saying? It's different? Now is it?...
It's frustrating because many of you will never understand why this is a ridiculous idea. I know some people have a lot of fun burning books but you're wasting your time. At least you're not destroying knowledge like our ancestors did. Good ole' book burning. So freaking sad.
Maybe, but it probably would be even better WITH "drug lords" if we removed anti-drug laws. =D
I'm probably going to go ot right now, but trust me, you do not want multi-billion dollar pharma-chem companies with a monopoly on pot and crack. You'll prefer drug lords in the long run.
On September 08 2010 10:36 Antoine wrote: Personally I find it ironic that a lot of the people supporting this burning as a first amendment right are the same ones who are opposed to the muslim community center 2 blocks from the twin towers' former site.
I also find it pretty hilarious. Every time you think you've seen the height of ignorance someone always manages to top it.
People burning the Quran are no better than the extremists they are trying to protest against. They would be better off reading it and trying to learn more about the religion. What a waste of time and effort.
Look at the history of ignorance surrounding book burning. Yeah I'd love to be on the same page as the Nazi party on wikipedia.
I feel sorry for the people buring books because they must've led some pretty sheltered and uneducated lives. It's a shame this is coming from America because many countries see the United States as a role models of sorts.
On September 08 2010 15:35 krndandaman wrote: This just sounds really immature. Book burning just to piss off a group of people?
Sounds like the asshole in highschool who would constantly ask retarded questions on purpose to piss off the teacher.
I totally agree, I have no desire to burn the Koran, so why would I start doing it when I find out it pisses a load people off, it just seems so contrary.
If they are burning it because they believe it will do damage to the idea of Islam, then they are certainly going the wrong way about combating an idea, you don't marginalise an idea with fire, you do it with intelligent criticism.
-Edit
Also it occurs to me, that if I ever wanted to destroy a Koran for whatever reason, I wouldn't purge it with fire, how unmode, I would recycle it, so it could be made into a book which was more worthwhile.
However, I'm OK with it. It's like when you've been laddering all day and someone starts BMing you. You can't think of anything witty, so you just BM them back. No, its not optimal but it can be liberating. Better than the Quran/Koran burners blowing up a mosque or something.
You should never fight fire with fire, but it still feels good sometimes. It's pretty harmless to the current status quo.
Edit: Burning is too terroristy. If they really wanted to get under their skin, they should beat the Quran to a pulp WITH the bible. That would turn some heads. Also, I'm interested to see if this is possible.
Go watch a John Woo movie. I'd recommend The Killer, but Hard Boiled Works to, as does A Better Tomorrow.
In John Woo's world, there are cops and there are mobsters, and they are on opposite sides. There is a cop/mobster axis and you are on one end or the other.
However, there is also an honorable and dishonorable axis, and it is perpendicular to the cop/mobster axis, so it divides Woo's moral universe into quadrants. You can be an honorable cop or a dishonorable one, and similarly you can be an honorable mobster or a dishonorable one. The way Woo tests his characters is by making them decide which axis is more important to them. If you're a good cop, do you take down the honorable mobster because he's a crook, or do you recognize that you share a similar code and help him defeat the dishonorable mobsters?
That's sort of what's going on here. There are people who believe in freedom and tolerance and diversity. There are both Muslims and... well hell I'm not sure what word to use here. I'm going to use Americans, but I'm a little uncomfortable with it. But there are both Muslims and Americans in that camp.
There is also a camp of religious and cultural extremists who want to demonize the other side and everything they do. And there are both Muslims and Americans in that camp as well.
Draw Muhammad day was about the freedom/repression axis. It was about people of either faith who value freedom standing up to those who would suppress it in the name or religion. I seem to recall Muslims on Reddit (and any Muslim who's on Reddit, you can pretty well figure where he falls on the freedom/represson axis) saying that they had no problem with Draw Muhammad day.
This wackjob who's going to be burning Qurans is working the other axis entirely. This is all about Christian America on one side, and the Islamic world on the other, and one side pissing all over the other to show that we hate them. I object to it because I think working the the Islam/America axis is a real dick move.
tl; dr: There's a big difference between saying to a small subset of Muslims who hate "we're not going to live in fear of your hatred," and saying to all Muslims "we hate you just because of who you are."
Fuck em. Those people everybody else is worried about offending celebrated in the streets when 9/11 happened. Or do you guys not remember all those people dancing in the streets all across the middle east?
On September 08 2010 16:53 dogabutila wrote: Fuck em. Those people everybody else is worried about offending celebrated in the streets when 9/11 happened. Or do you guys not remember all those people dancing in the streets all across the middle east?
There was definitely not people dancing "all across the middle east". You don't think Muslims were killed in 9/11 also? The people celebrating were extremists.
Saying "fuck em" to people who support and like America and American policies is just outrageously dumb. No wonder there are so many problems with your country right now. People are too busy fighting amongst themselves over petty issues.
On September 08 2010 16:53 dogabutila wrote: Fuck em. Those people everybody else is worried about offending celebrated in the streets when 9/11 happened. Or do you guys not remember all those people dancing in the streets all across the middle east?
America is full of idiots -.-. Isnt the united states one of the most religious superpower in the world? You would think we would move on with religion by now.
On September 08 2010 15:09 vek wrote: Look at the history of ignorance surrounding book burning. Yeah I'd love to be on the same page as the Nazi party on wikipedia.
I wouldn't wish to either, but there have been other potential book-burners who weren't as deplorable as the Nazi's:
Democritus is supposed to have written some seventy books dealing with a range of subjects, from ethics to mathematics, from physics to music, from literature to medicine, history, and prognostication. It is a pity that none survives. According to Aristoxenus, who lived a century later, Plato wanted to burn all of Democritus's books but was dissuaded by his disciples, who pointed out that the books were already so widely distributed that burning them would do no good. Hundreds of pages of Plato's dialogues come down to us; not a single complete page of Democritus. - Charles Van Doren, A History of Knowledge, 1991 Ballantine Books.
All arguments about the freedom of speech aside, I think Plato's pupils and disciples had the right idea.
Also I really liked the post from reddit (below) as I think he neatly sums up the situation far more poignantly than anyone else has in this thread.
Go watch a John Woo movie. I'd recommend The Killer, but Hard Boiled Works to, as does A Better Tomorrow.
In John Woo's world, there are cops and there are mobsters, and they are on opposite sides. There is a cop/mobster axis and you are on one end or the other.
However, there is also an honorable and dishonorable axis, and it is perpendicular to the cop/mobster axis, so it divides Woo's moral universe into quadrants. You can be an honorable cop or a dishonorable one, and similarly you can be an honorable mobster or a dishonorable one. The way Woo tests his characters is by making them decide which axis is more important to them. If you're a good cop, do you take down the honorable mobster because he's a crook, or do you recognize that you share a similar code and help him defeat the dishonorable mobsters?
That's sort of what's going on here. There are people who believe in freedom and tolerance and diversity. There are both Muslims and... well hell I'm not sure what word to use here. I'm going to use Americans, but I'm a little uncomfortable with it. But there are both Muslims and Americans in that camp.
There is also a camp of religious and cultural extremists who want to demonize the other side and everything they do. And there are both Muslims and Americans in that camp as well.
Draw Muhammad day was about the freedom/repression axis. It was about people of either faith who value freedom standing up to those who would suppress it in the name or religion. I seem to recall Muslims on Reddit (and any Muslim who's on Reddit, you can pretty well figure where he falls on the freedom/represson axis) saying that they had no problem with Draw Muhammad day.
This wackjob who's going to be burning Qurans is working the other axis entirely. This is all about Christian America on one side, and the Islamic world on the other, and one side pissing all over the other to show that we hate them. I object to it because I think working the the Islam/America axis is a real dick move.
tl; dr: There's a big difference between saying to a small subset of Muslims who hate "we're not going to live in fear of your hatred," and saying to all Muslims "we hate you just because of who you are."
Go watch a John Woo movie. I'd recommend The Killer, but Hard Boiled Works to, as does A Better Tomorrow.
In John Woo's world, there are cops and there are mobsters, and they are on opposite sides. There is a cop/mobster axis and you are on one end or the other.
However, there is also an honorable and dishonorable axis, and it is perpendicular to the cop/mobster axis, so it divides Woo's moral universe into quadrants. You can be an honorable cop or a dishonorable one, and similarly you can be an honorable mobster or a dishonorable one. The way Woo tests his characters is by making them decide which axis is more important to them. If you're a good cop, do you take down the honorable mobster because he's a crook, or do you recognize that you share a similar code and help him defeat the dishonorable mobsters?
That's sort of what's going on here. There are people who believe in freedom and tolerance and diversity. There are both Muslims and... well hell I'm not sure what word to use here. I'm going to use Americans, but I'm a little uncomfortable with it. But there are both Muslims and Americans in that camp.
There is also a camp of religious and cultural extremists who want to demonize the other side and everything they do. And there are both Muslims and Americans in that camp as well.
Draw Muhammad day was about the freedom/repression axis. It was about people of either faith who value freedom standing up to those who would suppress it in the name or religion. I seem to recall Muslims on Reddit (and any Muslim who's on Reddit, you can pretty well figure where he falls on the freedom/represson axis) saying that they had no problem with Draw Muhammad day.
This wackjob who's going to be burning Qurans is working the other axis entirely. This is all about Christian America on one side, and the Islamic world on the other, and one side pissing all over the other to show that we hate them. I object to it because I think working the the Islam/America axis is a real dick move.
tl; dr: There's a big difference between saying to a small subset of Muslims who hate "we're not going to live in fear of your hatred," and saying to all Muslims "we hate you just because of who you are."
So by John Woo logic Americans and Muslims (or Christians and Muslims as it should state imo) should band together to defeat religious extremists? That's how I interpreted it... and it makes extremely good sense.
If you read the comments on a conversative site such as freerepublic.com you can see its far more than just an exercise in free speech, theres real hatred from some people. Comments such as basically celebrating a muslim cab driver being knifed in New York, saying he probably had it coming. Theres a very nasty racist vibe from a lot of conservative Americans right now... and this kind of event is just a way to show it while still having 'free speech' to use as flimsy justification.
On September 08 2010 06:22 BlackJack wrote: I also want to show my support for the Quran burners. I wish that I could partake in the festivities as I would absolutely love knowing that my small actions contributed to pissing off millions of oversensitive morons around the world.
It's not about being over sensitive though. It's the fact that this kind of festering hatred creates divide and unrest in our country. Getting mad and showing the world what a bunch of dumb intolerant fucks we are is exactly what the terrorists want us to do.
Because of 9/11, we have pissed all over civil liberties, people are using hate to rationalize political decisions like in NYC, and that venom has spilled all over the public. It creates divisiveness and unrest. Burning Quran only fuels that fire.
On September 08 2010 06:35 Jibba wrote: It doesn't bother you that in order to promote freedom of speech, you're also joining a bunch of bigots, who also happen to be oversensitive? They've just grown up in a society where their idiotic oversensitivity is more freely expressed.
A bigot is still a bigot, the members of that church and the American public just have the luxury of being ignorant of 'fighting words.'
In fact, were their actions directed towards a local mosque and not foreign nationals, it would probably be construed as a threat and the "freedom of speech" party would be crashed by a bunch of FBI agents.
This basically is the only problem, it might seem interesting to OP at first but in reality he will be spending time with a bunch of cretins that are just as crazy as extreme muslims about worshiping their own deity. Not like it's a gathering of philosophizing rebels trying to change the world, it's a bunch of brainwashed hicks. Could still be fun to watch though.
I didn't want to comment on this whole disaster, but someone in another thread earlier posted a video:
I just wanted to point this out:
Great movie, I think everyone should check it out if they haven't already. It's a good look at what our world could very well come to. Idiots like the book burners think they're getting somewhere, but they're not accomplishing anything. Just thought I'd throw that out there.
Interesting video about schools, is this actually true? I don't think it's this bad or is it?
edit: okay there's a lot of bias in there, like that black kid who couldn't read, there's idiots like that in every country. Too much sensationalism in this.
On September 09 2010 06:24 News wrote: Interesting video about schools, is this actually true? I don't think it's this bad or is it?
edit: okay there's a lot of bias in there, like that black kid who couldn't read, there's idiots like that in every country. Too much sensationalism in this.
Yeah, that was the video that the other guy posted, I assume to demonstrate his belief that Americans are stupid. Personally, I don't think Americans are that dumb - I think we're all getting there.
"Hey I'm immature and relish the notion of pissing off random people who don't know just because I can since they're thousands of miles away. I'm going to explicitly acknowledge the fact that this would probably add fuel to the terrorist fire that would unnecessarily hurt American troops, but I don't care because I'm blinded by my own insanity!"
After I stopped shaking and coaxed the eyes out from the back of my head while trying to read the majority of posts in this topic, I tried responding and midway through a long-winded reply when I got to the question of why, specifically, these people are burning Qurans. So I tried googling it and found this.
Even some of the United States' more bigoted citizens are against this, and there's no way to construe this as anything other than one zealously ignorant understanding of an otherwise beautiful faith that can provide a strong moral guidepost for its adherents raging against another. What this "burning a Quran" thing does is paint this decade-long conflict as religiously motivated, which a) obscures the real problem, and b) reduces the maturity of the discourse over the conflict.
The real problem concerns violent Wahhabist sects who oppose American/Western military bases, which they see as explicitly colonial, and the West's support for Israel, itself also an outcome of postcolonial infiltration. But they remain Wahhabists, not actual Muslims. The difference between these two is the difference between Vatican 2.0/looser Protestant sections of the worldwide Christian majority and like the fucking Amish.
But the more people discuss this in terms of religion versus religion, us versus them (q.v. the whole New York mosque debate, where... + Show Spoiler [digression] +
like, there's a mosque four blocks away from Ground Zero already, and if I were so inclined between Ground Zero and that mosque that's already there, I could buy a falafel with some doogh and then get my spank on at a porno store; it's New York City, and if you aren't living there and you think that it's insensitive to build a mosque two blocks away, you're being played by election season punditry
), the more the conflict distorts into "we're Christians against Muslims. Christians are virtuous and glorious and Muslims are the blood-thirsty nihilistic scourge of the Earth." And when anyone thinks that they're paragons of virtue, that they are faultless, and that they can indiscriminately hate against an entire group of people, then they can do some pretty horrible, dishonourable, unjust, discriminatory things. Q.v., 9/11.
Will this hurt American troops? I don't think it will hurt them any more than they're already threatened. This picture of an anti-Islam United States has already propagated to some degree amongst the more zealous radical Wahhabists (never met any of these people, mind you). Perhaps it could be used to distort how skeptical Muslims in these countries view this conflict, and therefore boost insurgency group numbers just a bit. But that's a consequence of distorting this dialogue to religious terms.
It's disingenuous to ask whether this is legally protected by the Bill of Rights. Yeah, it is, as is shouting fire in a movie theater, or singing "Massa's in the Cold Ground" and doing a minstrel show on MLK Day. Ostensibly you can, but should you? Is this really the best thing you can think to do with the power of freedom of speech, something that billions don't have?
I'm not completely sure that the OP isn't just trolling, but if you think burning Qurans on television is a good thing to do because it's going to make people angry, you can't be a day over 15. And if you still think like a misanthropic teenager in a closed world, where your worldview isn't challenged by this, and you're over the age of 15, then I have more pity than understanding or anger, and regret ever having posted in this topic.
Yeah if this were near me I'd go and burn bibles with them. I think they'd understand why this is wrong then, because I'm assuming not a single person who isn't Christian would be interested in something like this, for obvious reasons...
On September 09 2010 09:35 LlamaNamedOsama wrote: "Hey I'm immature and relish the notion of pissing off random people who don't know just because I can since they're thousands of miles away. I'm going to explicitly acknowledge the fact that this would probably add fuel to the terrorist fire that would unnecessarily hurt American troops, but I don't care because I'm blinded by my own insanity!"
^ That's what I got from the OP
Read beyond the OP and you will find my reasoning. It's more or less based upon Desensitization
Maybe it's not the most sound theory, but I am really getting annoyed of the alternative that everyone offers these days which is "If drawing cartoons can get you killed, then don't draw cartoons. Problem solved!"
Aren't you sickened to see the leaders of this country and the generals of our military trying to peer pressure some random hick out of burning a few books?
Hey, this book is what you base your life and beliefs around. We're going to burn a bunch of copies of it. What, you don't like that? Man you're so oversensitive! Not that I have the same opinion as those people but for god or nature or whatever-you-believe-in's sake, try to be understanding of others and promote general well-being.
So yes, I agree that we should be able to burn books if we want. But does it make you a massive asshole? Probably.
Or you know, hmm, maybe they understand to at least some limited degree that being an asshole doesn't stop others from being assholes. I mean, what is this besides being an ass and then saying "why so srs, u mad?" when the provoked get... provoked?
On September 09 2010 12:06 travis wrote: How is it being oversensitive?
Hey, this book is what you base your life and beliefs around. We're going to burn a bunch of copies of it. What, you don't like that? Man you're so oversensitive! Not that I have the same opinion as those people but for god or nature or whatever-you-believe-in's sake, try to be understanding of others and promote general well-being.
So yes, I agree that we should be able to burn books if we want. But does it make you a massive asshole? Probably.
It doesn't matter what the book means to you. If you're going to take to the streets because a few people 10,000 miles away burned a few copies then that's being oversensitive.
Try to be understanding? Are you understanding of their position that you should be killed because some guy in Florida is going to burn their holy book? If you can understand that then maybe you can teach it to me
On September 09 2010 12:06 travis wrote: How is it being oversensitive?
Hey, this book is what you base your life and beliefs around. We're going to burn a bunch of copies of it. What, you don't like that? Man you're so oversensitive! Not that I have the same opinion as those people but for god or nature or whatever-you-believe-in's sake, try to be understanding of others and promote general well-being.
So yes, I agree that we should be able to burn books if we want. But does it make you a massive asshole? Probably.
It doesn't matter what the book means to you. If you're going to take to the streets because a few people 10,000 miles away burned a few copies then that's being oversensitive.
Try to be understanding? Are you understanding of their position that you should be killed because some guy in Florida is going to burn their holy book? If you can understand that then maybe you can teach it to me
well
1.)how does burning the books actually help anything, doesn't it just increase hatred?
and
2.)what about all the non-violent people who simply consider it holy but would never do anything in response besides feel bad and/or resent it?
I do understand the principle behind it, for you at least. And there is merit to it. Standing up for what principles you believe in. But isn't it really more complicated than that? Isn't there something to be said for being meek? You can believe in the principles and not back down but there is a difference between not backing down and pushing forward.
On September 09 2010 12:06 travis wrote: How is it being oversensitive?
Hey, this book is what you base your life and beliefs around. We're going to burn a bunch of copies of it. What, you don't like that? Man you're so oversensitive! Not that I have the same opinion as those people but for god or nature or whatever-you-believe-in's sake, try to be understanding of others and promote general well-being.
So yes, I agree that we should be able to burn books if we want. But does it make you a massive asshole? Probably.
It doesn't matter what the book means to you. If you're going to take to the streets because a few people 10,000 miles away burned a few copies then that's being oversensitive.
Try to be understanding? Are you understanding of their position that you should be killed because some guy in Florida is going to burn their holy book? If you can understand that then maybe you can teach it to me
It's possible to understand why some Muslims have the jihad mentality because of the different culture and exposure people in the Middle East have. But making the argument of "we're going to burn your religious texts symbolically... oh you're mad? We were right all along you backwards people" doesn't work.
There's a seriously huge different between what you can do and what you should do. You can burn religious texts, or any text someone holds dear. But that on no level means that you should. You can't possibly argue you're both a tolerant and sensible individual when you're destroying a non-destructive thing people hold dear. (Remember the Qur'an is not destructive, it's the religious extremists advocating war on other religious groups, using the Qur'an as their religious backing).
On September 09 2010 12:06 travis wrote: How is it being oversensitive?
Hey, this book is what you base your life and beliefs around. We're going to burn a bunch of copies of it. What, you don't like that? Man you're so oversensitive! Not that I have the same opinion as those people but for god or nature or whatever-you-believe-in's sake, try to be understanding of others and promote general well-being.
So yes, I agree that we should be able to burn books if we want. But does it make you a massive asshole? Probably.
It doesn't matter what the book means to you. If you're going to take to the streets because a few people 10,000 miles away burned a few copies then that's being oversensitive.
Try to be understanding? Are you understanding of their position that you should be killed because some guy in Florida is going to burn their holy book? If you can understand that then maybe you can teach it to me
well
1.)how does burning the books actually help anything, doesn't it just increase hatred?
and
2.)what about all the non-violent people who simply consider it holy but would never do anything in response besides feel bad and/or resent it?
I do understand the principle behind it, for you at least. And there is merit to it. Standing up for what principles you believe in. But isn't it really more complicated than that? Isn't there something to be said for being meek? You can believe in the principles and not back down but there is a difference between not backing down and pushing forward.
1) I could also say the forced integreation increased hatred, but we probably can't say that it didn't help anything. This book burning does increase hatred, but why does it increase hatred? It increases hatred because it is international news and the story is making it over to Afghanistan where this is seen as American arrogance and a disrescpect to Islam (because thats exactly what it is lol). But the question is, after this quran burning, how much media attention are they going to get on their 2nd Quran burning? How much on the 3rd Quran burning. How much on their 10th? Nobody is going to care anymore. This needs to not be a big deal (because it isnt!!!!). This nees to not get the attention of General Petreus and Hillary Clinton. The only reason this is such a huge story is because since the Danish cartoon fiasco everybody has been censoring everything that would offend Muslims. You think you're being tolerant of their feelings but all you're realing doing is creating a powder keg that is going to explode when someone finally does something and refuses to be censored. The longer we censor ourselves the bigger the explosion is going to be. We can either go on censoring ourselves forever or we can get it over with and open the floodgates to open up Islam to the same criticism that every other religion on the face of the earth is subjected to. Once the floodgates are open and the river is flowing, and there are 1000s of insults thrown at Islam, then I doubt they will be taking to the streets 1000s of times per year to burn effigys of everyone that has insulted their religion. However, maybe they will, In which case I truly envy whatever textile shop in Afghanistan sells the American flags because business will be good.
2) Yeah kind of true. I admit I got a little bit tunneled vision and forgot about muslims in my city that might be offended, however lets be clear that it should only be muslims in my city that would be offended because unless you're a radical then you shouldn't be offended by something so insignificant happening hundreds of miles away. Either way I will tell a small anecdote. I don't know if it's the same group of religious nutjobs but there is a group of poeple that come to the university and shout hate speech in the main plaza that has the most foot traffic of anywhere on campus. One guy wears some kind of backpack/harness with a 10+ foot pole attatched to it and a giant sign with whatever message he has for the day. I think most people have learned to ignore them. I think most muslims in my city have too much intelligence to be offended by ignorant people.
3) Sure I would rather see a different group of people making this stand. Unfortunately the Simpsosn really say it best in that regard
The good thing about religious nutjobs is that they aren't afraid to die for their backwards views.
I guess I will answer that with a question: Why is this international news? Why is a church in my city with 50 members in their congregation making international headlines and being addressed by the commander of all U.S. forces in the middle east?
I'm shocked and appalled by your comments blackjack. Have you no concept of respect? Its not an issue of the media, people being oversensitive, free speech or rights or whatever stupid political agenda you might think. Its about living in a society where we live with and respect our neighbors with zero prejudice. A society built on the amalgamation of millions of people and their cultures and beliefs.
That's why this has mass media attention. That's why the new york "mosque" has such media attention. The actions of those individuals go so fervently against what we commonly define our own society as and what we praise so much of when telling others about it. People have no issue with people's rights to free speech, but we can sure as hell have a problem with them being bigoted idiots. Its so painfully obvious the true reasons they want to burn the book.
To say you'd want to join in on the burning to serve your own purposes is incredibly selfish and quite frankly, despicable.
First I dont know why this got so much media attention? I am a muslim and ofcourse this is going to offend me. Do people not understand that we Muslims have the utmost respect for the Quran? That we have to Make "Wudhu" wash our selfs properly before touching a Quran? That we keep the Quran in a high safe place? I guess only a muslim truely understands how imporant a Quran is for us.I really don't know what I would of done in this situation to be honest. Why don't you people just get along? Thank god i live In New Zealand its so peaceful here. Everyone respects each other no one cares who u are or what you belive in and let me tell you it works miracles. Maybe if countries like America stopped all this hate bullshit and just got along, things would be alot more different.
On September 08 2010 16:53 dogabutila wrote: Fuck em. Those people everybody else is worried about offending celebrated in the streets when 9/11 happened. Or do you guys not remember all those people dancing in the streets all across the middle east?
There was definitely not people dancing "all across the middle east". You don't think Muslims were killed in 9/11 also? The people celebrating were extremists.
Saying "fuck em" to people who support and like America and American policies is just outrageously dumb. No wonder there are so many problems with your country right now. People are too busy fighting amongst themselves over petty issues.
Sure, hyperbole. But the Palestinians definitely were as caught on camera. And they were doing it in Iran and a few other places where I don't remember.
But yea, the PA was threatening journalists and it's a miracle that this tape made it out, a bunch of others did not. Extremeists? no. Whole neighborhoods, multiple ones even, were celebrating.
I guess I will answer that with a question: Why is this international news? Why is a church in my city with 50 members in their congregation making international headlines and being addressed by the commander of all U.S. forces in the middle east?
I'm shocked and appalled by your comments blackjack. Have you no concept of respect? Its not an issue of the media, people being oversensitive, free speech or rights or whatever stupid political agenda you might think. Its about living in a society where we live with and respect our neighbors with zero prejudice. A society built on the amalgamation of millions of people and their cultures and beliefs.
That's why this has mass media attention. That's why the new york "mosque" has such media attention. The actions of those individuals go so fervently against what we commonly define our own society as and what we praise so much of when telling others about it. People have no issue with people's rights to free speech, but we can sure as hell have a problem with them being bigoted idiots. Its so painfully obvious the true reasons they want to burn the book.
To say you'd want to join in on the burning to serve your own purposes is incredibly selfish and quite frankly, despicable.
Oh please. There are so many racists in this country that hold hate rallys so often. This has absolutely nothing to do with respect or intolerance or whatever. This has everything to do with "they might kill us if we do this."
I guess I will answer that with a question: Why is this international news? Why is a church in my city with 50 members in their congregation making international headlines and being addressed by the commander of all U.S. forces in the middle east?
I'm shocked and appalled by your comments blackjack. Have you no concept of respect? Its not an issue of the media, people being oversensitive, free speech or rights or whatever stupid political agenda you might think. Its about living in a society where we live with and respect our neighbors with zero prejudice. A society built on the amalgamation of millions of people and their cultures and beliefs.
That's why this has mass media attention. That's why the new york "mosque" has such media attention. The actions of those individuals go so fervently against what we commonly define our own society as and what we praise so much of when telling others about it. People have no issue with people's rights to free speech, but we can sure as hell have a problem with them being bigoted idiots. Its so painfully obvious the true reasons they want to burn the book.
To say you'd want to join in on the burning to serve your own purposes is incredibly selfish and quite frankly, despicable.
Oh please. There are so many racists in this country that hold hate rallys so often. This has absolutely nothing to do with respect or intolerance or whatever. This has everything to do with "they might kill us if we do this."
Actually, it kinda does have everything to do with respect and intolerance. Doesn't matter if bunches of other racists have hate rallies, those are ignorant, bigoted, and stupid too. Hey, people across the world still commit murder, I guess that means it's okay for me to kill you then?
So some people talk about the potential harm to troops or inflammation of Islamic people. Sure, that's an argument. Ignoring that completely, it's still a completely douche move, so no, you can't excuse a bigoted preference.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_25_3Mw8bZKM/S9nY6kPIKAI/AAAAAAAAATk/2cx3afHpPGA/s1600/SIMPSONS_1625205c.jpg)
