cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/1213100
Archived version: https://archive.ph/KnuKV
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230808193804/https://www.euronews.com/2023/08/08/sweden-struggles-to-handle-the-fallout-from-repeated-quran-burning-protests
One has a right to burn any book they own.
If that offends you, perhaps it’s not the country for you
So why don’t we see atheists burning Bibles?
Burning books like this requires enough targeted hatred and a need to offend the targets. It also is usually more effective if your target is a minority (not specifically racial, just a much weaker target), as that bolsters your position of power and lessens the likelihood of retaliation.
Atheists sometimes have that much hatred, but at least where I am Christianity isn’t small enough to be a minority, so the fear of backlash might be holding back some of the hatred type atheists.
Another reason may depend on why someone became an atheists. Many of us don’t hate religious people directly, we just have issues with what organized religion gets away with. People like me came to this conclusion by comparing scientific evidence to blind faith. By nature, faith will be more emotional and reactionary, whereas if you come to a position after learning and changing yourself, you’re more open to understanding why it’s not really a good idea to hate like that.
Though I’d call myself agnostic vs an atheist.
Burning books like this requires enough targeted hatred and a need to offend the targets.
In other words… white supremacists can’t mainstream their ideology by burning Bibles.
Have you heard of black metal?
I have heard of black metal. I have also heard black metal itself - I think I’ve heard elevator music that’s less boring than black metal.
Just saying those are atheists burning bibles lol
Oh really? And the Christo-fascists has nothing to say about that?
Nergal is constantly in court over such things
That’s an easy take.
Let’s play with the idea. It’s legal to burn photographs.
Now imagine if your child died in a horrible way. Someone then comes up to you and burns a photograph of your child in front of you. It’s perfectly legal, but you’d probably be less cool about it. But hey, perhaps this isn’t a country for you? No, it’s obviously a shitty thing to do because it’s a deliberate action to trigger to you. (Shit like that has actually happened.)
The book burning idiots could go buy as many Korans as they like and have a mighty bonfire in their backyard and no one would bat an eye, but that’s not what they do. They go in front of the embassies of the countries that they want to provoke, call the press for coverage and post it everywhere so people can see how brave and free they are, hiding in the safety of free speech.
If they actually have anything to say to the religious leaders, they should go fucking say it to them. They don’t. Because they know there’d be very real consequences if they did it in Iran. They aren’t brave enough to do that.
I don’t give a shit about the importance of religion or bonfires, but I am pissed that these idiots are abusing the freedom of speech to spread hatred. They don’t want to burn books because they like fire. They do these “protests” because they’re racist assholes who want Muslims to feel unwelcome.
With freedom comes a responsibility. They aren’t being responsible with it.
If someone destroys MY photograph that’s destruction of property. If I burn a book not YOUR book that’s no different than burning newspaper.
Russian psyops in full swing baby
Look, I am not pro russia or anything but like, how? The phenomena of people with ortodox muslim beleifs being really, really offended desecration of Quran isn’t exacly new. How would Russia play into this?
The guy arranging the burning of the Quran this spring, have been working for RT and have a Russian wife. The play here is to agitate Turkey to make the NATO process more difficult
Huh, didn’t know that. Makes sense…
it’s a really cheap way for Russia to try to destabilize surrounding countries, where there are efforts to get rid of Russia’s influence by joining NATO and so on… there is no religious or intellectual debate going on… it’s just someone trying to start a fight… luckily the Swedes are far too intelligent to fall for it…
Not unlikely.
When they set fire to the Swedish embassy in Baghdad (unsure if it was) as retaliation, what are the chances that there was a copy of the Qur’an in that building?
All these countries criticising Sweden for this like they have no understanding how freedom of speech and the right to protest work.
deleted by creator
I’m always disturbed when Muslims actually are baited by this. They know the guys that set it up this way are not their friends, right?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The government’s line is increasingly that both the Quran burnings themselves and the outrage over them are being fuelled by foreign agents provocateurs and disinformation efforts – including from Russia - which is enraged at the prospect of Sweden joining NATO.
Ministers have so far ruled out amending Sweden’s freedom of speech law or banning Quran burnings outright, with Kristersson insisting that there is a place for responsibility as opposed to state restriction.
Starting this month, border guards are being given enhanced stop-and-search and electronic surveillance powers, a move that Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmer says will allow them “to identify people coming into Sweden who could represent a threat to security.”
Earlier this year, ex-prime minister and Social Democrats leader Magdalena Andersson told national broadcaster SVT that those burning the Quran in protest are “useful idiots” doing an unwitting service to those seeking to divide Swedish society, and that they had a duty to consider the consequences of their actions.
With ideas like these front and centre in its platform, the party has risen to become the second-largest in the Swedish parliament, and it is now sustaining the current coalition government via a confidence and supply agreement, meaning its voice in public debate is louder than ever.
After at least a decade of notoriously harsh comments about Muslims, he tweeted last week that Islam is “an anti-democratic, violent and misogynistic religion/ideology”, describing the prophet Muhammad as “a warlord, mass murderer, slave trader and robber”.
I’m a bot and I’m open source!
fyi this summary is nonsense and gets multiple things wrong. great example of ai getting confused.
FYI, it cannot get anything wrong, it takes sentences directly from the article. Sure, it might not be a good summary (I haven’t checked), but it definitely doesn’t contain any falsehoods (unless the article does as well).
specifically, the context for the 5th paragraph is replaced, making it seem like it’s talking about the social democrats when in reality it is talking about the sweden democrats. Your logic is flawed, falsehoods can be and are introduced despite each sentence being taken straight from the article.