The answer to both of those from the left is a pretty resounding "yes", so I'm not sure why it's so dunkworthy to say the same thing for this. And the linked thread is saying exactly that.
The motion wasn't "don't burn qurans" though. It was essentially "Acknowledge that broadcasting yourself burning a religious text is intended as incitement."
There's a reason China, Vietnam, and Cuba are all in favor of it
There's a reason China, Vietnam, and Cuba are all in favor of it
Geopolitics?
Anyways, I can't find the actual text of the resolution anywhere, but the snippets in news articles seem to be about doing this to any religious text or other sacred object, not specific the Quran. If that's the case then I'm more in favor of it.
At least for China, you can get arrested for burning the Quran. It has little to do with geopolitics and more to do with not letting Islamophobia get a foothold in your country.
I think China's POV on this is that speech intended purely to piss people off shouldn't be broadcast at all, and that even well-intended speech that is critical of a group should be limited to certain contexts in order to prevent needless conflict.
It is hateful incitement against a religious group. It should be viewed identically to performatively burning an lgbt flag, which is similarly hateful incitement against lgbt people. Hatespeech should be a crime and this is that.
The only reason it's not illegal in america is that it's "freedom of speech" bullshit.
That's all I was able to find, too. As far as I can tell it includes all religious texts, and its only connection to Islam is that the motion is largely a response to a pattern of antagonism by Europeans toward Muslim refugees.
Generally, they try to provoke Muslim communities into breaking their precious civility so that they can call them aggressive for being incited by something that isn't legally recognized as incitement. That reasoning only works under the presupposition that refugees have less right to be in the country than citizens, but considering that the west is responsible for the conditions leading to every refugee needing to seek refuge, it's a very silly stance
Hard disagree. You should not be able to burn a bible. This is a hate crime whether it's directed at christians or muslims or any other religious group.
can you hate crime a group that isn't marginalized? the thing that makes burning a koran bad is the social context of it and where most of us live burning a bible is like saying
if a mayo in "the west' has a bug up their ass about islam and not rightwing christianity i'm very suspicious of their motives of course, but if anybody who actually is harmed by islamic nation-states or societies wants to light that shit up they should have our support in doing so unless they go full ayaan hirsi ali.
Religious hate should not be treated the same. The religious hate has a very real consequences in the form of actually causing religious hatred to stir in all segments of society that boils over into real action. The act of calling someone a mayo causes absolutely fucking nothing.
the thing that makes burning a koran bad is the social context of it and where most of us live burning a bible is like saying
This is simply not true here in europe where we have christians that hate other christians and will literally kill each other over it if you do not crack down on this behaviour. It's a more complex matter.
do they burn eachothers bibles to be deliberately provocative? also christian infighting would seem to be on more equal footing than our other examples.
regardless, burning a catholic bible for having the wrong books in it in occupied ireland is a completely different gesture than an irish feminist burning a bible because the catholic church does evil shit and the cultural dominance of their shitty ideas gets people killed.
do they burn eachothers bibles to be deliberately provocative?
Yes. It was clearly specified in the Catechism of St. Pius X:
32 Q: What should a Christian do who has been given a Bible by a Protestant or by an agent of the Protestants?
A: A Christian to whom a Bible has been offered by a Protestant or an agent of the Protestants should reject it with disgust, because it is forbidden by the Church. If it was accepted by inadvertence, it must be burnt as soon as possible or handed in to the Parish Priest.
We crack down on this shit because historically to NOT crack down on this shit has caused trouble after trouble.
that doesn't sound like the kind of public spectacle burning that we usually talk about. nobody gives a shit if you burn something and don't tell anyone about it.
surely we can prevent holy war without enshrining majoritarian fragility into law.
The answer to both of those from the left is a pretty resounding "yes", so I'm not sure why it's so dunkworthy to say the same thing for this. And the linked thread is saying exactly that.
The motion wasn't "don't burn qurans" though. It was essentially "Acknowledge that broadcasting yourself burning a religious text is intended as incitement."
There's a reason China, Vietnam, and Cuba are all in favor of it
Geopolitics?
Anyways, I can't find the actual text of the resolution anywhere, but the snippets in news articles seem to be about doing this to any religious text or other sacred object, not specific the Quran. If that's the case then I'm more in favor of it.
At least for China, you can get arrested for burning the Quran. It has little to do with geopolitics and more to do with not letting Islamophobia get a foothold in your country.
I think China's POV on this is that speech intended purely to piss people off shouldn't be broadcast at all, and that even well-intended speech that is critical of a group should be limited to certain contexts in order to prevent needless conflict.
It is hateful incitement against a religious group. It should be viewed identically to performatively burning an lgbt flag, which is similarly hateful incitement against lgbt people. Hatespeech should be a crime and this is that.
The only reason it's not illegal in america is that it's "freedom of speech" bullshit.
"Harmony"
deleted by creator
That's all I was able to find, too. As far as I can tell it includes all religious texts, and its only connection to Islam is that the motion is largely a response to a pattern of antagonism by Europeans toward Muslim refugees.
Generally, they try to provoke Muslim communities into breaking their precious civility so that they can call them aggressive for being incited by something that isn't legally recognized as incitement. That reasoning only works under the presupposition that refugees have less right to be in the country than citizens, but considering that the west is responsible for the conditions leading to every refugee needing to seek refuge, it's a very silly stance
Hard disagree. You should not be able to burn a bible. This is a hate crime whether it's directed at christians or muslims or any other religious group.
can you hate crime a group that isn't marginalized? the thing that makes burning a koran bad is the social context of it and where most of us live burning a bible is like saying
if a mayo in "the west' has a bug up their ass about islam and not rightwing christianity i'm very suspicious of their motives of course, but if anybody who actually is harmed by islamic nation-states or societies wants to light that shit up they should have our support in doing so unless they go full ayaan hirsi ali.
Religious hate should not be treated the same. The religious hate has a very real consequences in the form of actually causing religious hatred to stir in all segments of society that boils over into real action. The act of calling someone a mayo causes absolutely fucking nothing.
This is simply not true here in europe where we have christians that hate other christians and will literally kill each other over it if you do not crack down on this behaviour. It's a more complex matter.
do they burn eachothers bibles to be deliberately provocative? also christian infighting would seem to be on more equal footing than our other examples.
regardless, burning a catholic bible for having the wrong books in it in occupied ireland is a completely different gesture than an irish feminist burning a bible because the catholic church does evil shit and the cultural dominance of their shitty ideas gets people killed.
Yes. It was clearly specified in the Catechism of St. Pius X:
We crack down on this shit because historically to NOT crack down on this shit has caused trouble after trouble.
that doesn't sound like the kind of public spectacle burning that we usually talk about. nobody gives a shit if you burn something and don't tell anyone about it.
surely we can prevent holy war without enshrining majoritarian fragility into law.