The Burning of Quran – A Modern Act of Barbarism

[Vendetta]

I think burning the Quran is not speech rather blatant disrespect of Islam.

 

[Badran]

The OP is rather vague as to what the topic is supposed to be about except that he/she considers the burning of the Quran to be an act of barbarism.
And while we agree that burning books in general is a stupid form of expression, it -is- an expression of free speech, and while we consider it to be moronic, it is on that we should accept without turning to violence.

I did not mention Muslims in my post as far as I can see.

I understand that. The thing is, nobody, including the OP, suggested that violence is an appropriate response to this. It was only brought up by people who would rather comment on that rather than the topic itself.

There are many things that people get offended by that does not include burning holy books, some of which has been mentioned in this tread, including the burning of flags, destruction of monuments and the "hanging" of dolls of politicians, all of which not only could, but I assume are, intended to offend.
And even so, we must keep in mind that no matter how much we treasure these items, they are still just things.
That's all.

I understand and agree. My only point is that anything else wasn't really suggested, so i failed to see how is that the bottom line of the thread. In other words, i'm not really objecting to what you said, rather wasn't sure why was it the bottom line, as i understood it to mean that you think the OP is suggesting something, other than this incident or act being barbaric.

 

[Badran]

If your faith is SO fragile that this makes any difference to your world then you need to examine the strength of your beliefs.

I think thats a rather simplistic reading of the reasons for anger by some people. Its not a question of their faith being affected to a certain level, or at all. I think its a matter of what message do those people get from the incident in question, and how do they react to that kind of thing.

Some people perceive such things as insults, so they're in that case angry for reasons not really related to religion, except in the sense that it is their religion which happens to be the thing insulted in this case. In other words, they would probably do the same when anything else they hold dear is insulted.

 

[Father Heathen]

I think burning the Quran is not speech rather blatant disrespect of Islam.

Is disrespect not speech?

 

[idav]

There is irony when a bible believer burns a quran. Atheists don't seem to feel a need to burn up peoples myths.

 

[Ilisrum]

There is irony when a bible believer burns a quran. Atheists don't seem to feel a need to burn up peoples myths.

Nicely observed.

 

[Vendetta]

Is disrespect not speech?

If we take the literal view no its not free speech cause there is nothing said

 

[Pillsongchurch]

I think thats a rather simplistic reading of the reasons for anger by some people. Its not a question of their faith being affected to a certain level, or at all. I think its a matter of what message do those people get from the incident in question, and how do they react to that kind of thing.

Some people perceive such things as insults, so they're in that case angry for reasons not really related to religion, except in the sense that it is their religion which happens to be the thing insulted in this case. In other words, they would probably do the same when anything else they hold dear is insulted.

I could find religious peoples assertion that me, my wife and children deserve to be tortured for eternity quite offensive as well, but this is the world we live in.

 

[jarofthoughts]

I understand that. The thing is, nobody, including the OP, suggested that violence is an appropriate response to this. It was only brought up by people who would rather comment on that rather than the topic itself.

I understand and agree. My only point is that anything else wasn't really suggested, so i failed to see how is that the bottom line of the thread. In other words, i'm not really objecting to what you said, rather wasn't sure why was it the bottom line, as i understood it to mean that you think the OP is suggesting something, other than this incident or act being barbaric.

I hear you, but the reason I wrote what I did was because when we consider something to be barbaric, then it must by necessity be barbaric compared to something else. The word originally means someone who is foreign or who does not speak the language, but I think we can assume it was here intended to mean primitive or ignorant (a very common usage of the word) usually as a contrast to being civilized.

So, compared to some of the reactions we have seen by certain groups to the burning of the Quran, is the burning itself really that barbaric?

 

[beenie]

I hear you, but the reason I wrote what I did was because when we consider something to be barbaric, then it must by necessity be barbaric compared to something else. The word originally means someone who is foreign or who does not speak the language, but I think we can assume it was here intended to mean primitive or ignorant (a very common usage of the word) usually as a contrast to being civilized.

So, compared to some of the reactions we have seen by certain groups to the burning of the Quran, is the burning itself really that barbaric?

Inciteful and disrespectful? Yes. Barbaric? No.

 

[Father Heathen]

If we take the literal view no its not free speech cause there is nothing said

If its "nothing said" then there should be no problem, right? But seriously, you can't say that disrespect isn't the expression of a feeling toward something. Expression is speech, as it conveys something.

 

[Pillsongchurch]

I hear you, but the reason I wrote what I did was because when we consider something to be barbaric, then it must by necessity be barbaric compared to something else. The word originally means someone who is foreign or who does not speak the language, but I think we can assume it was here intended to mean primitive or ignorant (a very common usage of the word) usually as a contrast to being civilized.

So, compared to some of the reactions we have seen by certain groups to the burning of the Quran, is the burning itself really that barbaric?

Thats a good point. The reaction to the insult should be proportional to the insult.

 

[Vendetta]

If its "nothing said" then there should be no problem, right? But seriously, you can't say that disrespect isn't the expression of negative feelings toward something. Expression is speech, as it conveys something.

I guess I look at speech as ideas that are conveyed in a coherent manner. Burning a book without provocation expresses disdain for the belief.

 

[Father Heathen]

I guess I look at speech as ideas that are conveyed in a coherent manner. Burning a book without provocation expresses disdain for the belief.

So something is only free speech if you agree with it?

 

[Vendetta]

So something is only free speech if you agree with it?

No. Its speech if it conveys an idea. There is a difference between saying I hate islam let me burn this book and saying nothing and just burning it.

 

[Father Heathen]

No. Its speech if it conveys an idea. There is a difference between saying I hate islam let me burn this book and saying nothing and just burning it.

I assume that you don't believe that flag burning should fall under protected speech, either?

 

[Looncall]

Thats a good point. The reaction to the insult should be proportional to the insult.

That's a good point. In a way, the extreme reaction to the burning sort of confirmed the statement made in doing the burning. If the followers of a holy book run out and riot at the drop of a hat, it does not speak well for what is in the book.

 

[Badran]

I hear you, but the reason I wrote what I did was because when we consider something to be barbaric, then it must by necessity be barbaric compared to something else. The word originally means someone who is foreign or who does not speak the language, but I think we can assume it was here intended to mean primitive or ignorant (a very common usage of the word) usually as a contrast to being civilized.

So, compared to some of the reactions we have seen by certain groups to the burning of the Quran, is the burning itself really that barbaric?

There is no comparison of course between some of the reactions done and burning the book. I don't find both as tied together as you do, but i understand your reasoning for clarifying this.

 

[Badran]

I could find religious peoples assertion that me, my wife and children deserve to be tortured for eternity quite offensive as well, but this is the world we live in.

There is a difference between holding a view, expressing that view, and in what way does one choose to express it.

That said, i'm not sure i understand whats your point by this considering what it is responding to. I was saying that i think the reasons for anger are more complicated that being merely a matter of their faith being affected. Thats not to justify the reactions done, merely addressing what it is that they might be angry about.

 

[Badran]

In a way, the extreme reaction to the burning sort of confirmed the statement made in doing the burning. If the followers of a holy book run out and riot at the drop of a hat, it does not speak well for what is in the book.

That might've been the case if most Muslims around the world from different cultures and countries did this, which would speak poorly about most Muslims and Islam. However some people doing so does not come near to say anything about Muslims in general.