comment: >
  
  A bit more disrespect of stupid old ideas would do our species a lot of good
context: This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 82%. (I'm a bot)
  
  
  Sweden's prime minister has condemned as "Deeply disrespectful" the desecration of the Holy Quran in Stockholm, which has raised tensions with Turkey as the Nordic country courts Ankara over its Nato bid.
  Far-right politician Rasmus Paludan set fire to a copy of the Holy Quran on Saturday in front of Turkey's embassy in the Swedish capital.
  Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said on Sunday "No words are enough to adequately condemn the abhorrable act of desecration of the Holy Quran by a right-wing extremist in Sweden".
  
  
  Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Holy^#1 Sweden^#2 Stockholm^#3 Quran^#4 Turkey^#5 >
  
  In that decision, it says people have the right to have their religious feelings protected. What the fuck? Europe gets a lot of things right, but their speech laws need adjusting. >
  
  Germany for interest doesn’t have freedom of speech at all. Say what you will of the US, they have NEVER banned a political party >
  
  German "Constitution" (Grundgesetz) Article 5:
  Article 5
  [Freedom of expression, arts and sciences]
  (1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.
  Germany has freedom of speech. >
  
  Exactly, but note they reference a banned political party, and there’s only one notable party banned in Germany… >
  
  There have been two parties that were banned in the 50s. One of them a Nazi party, the other a Stalinist one and both  financed by the Soviet Union. >
  
  Seems like 2 very reasonable exceptions >
  
  When a party begins to hinder the freedom of others it becomes an issue. Very important distinction. >
  
  Especially considering that if given the choice, both parties would have banned all others if they managed to gain power. >
  
  Or a flag for that matter. 
  The people have an obligation to recognize when they're being manipulated and not take the bait. >
  
  At least a country is a real thing >
  
  it's not though >
  
  Who’s funding your foodstamps >
  
  Just like a organized religion a central governening body given imaginary power by enough people. >
  
  If a government has the power to throw you in jail or kill you, it ain't imaginary power. >
  
  What’s been in large part the problem with many Muslims’ reactions over the last few years is the demeasurate nature of their anger over relatively trivial things. 
  Many Muslims seem to be expecting non Muslims to associate the same degree of sanctity to items and concepts they hold holy, but most of the civilized world really doesn’t care about that much (caricatures, one book… etc). Hence why you often hear the argument “well no one gets killed when someone does a bad joke about Jesus”. 
  Overall, it is really only those individual Muslims’  (which is most certainly not the whole Muslim population) problem and I find it quite ridiculous when society treats them like unruly children instead of expecting the same values that every other citizen has to demonstrate and live by. >
  
  China or Myanmar oppressing Muslim minorities, which is about as legitimate a case for defensive jihad as it gets? Crickets. 
  Blasphemy? Now that’s gonna start a riot. >
  
  Because the men directing the violence are cowards. They send out impressionable young boys to do their bidding. They don’t want a real war. Just hot button issues to use as justification for their ongoing power and need for zealots. >
  
  this is true  atleast in Pakistans war against India. no real moderate Pakistani wants to take over India. many of them are friends in western nations >
  
  Can confirm. My neighbours are Pakistani and my family is Indian. We live in harmony in Canada, look out for one another, share food, and celebrate each other's festivals/holy days. 
  Most people just want to co-exist and be happy. Extremists want to drive a wedge between people to gain power, but there's so much more to life than fear and hatred. >
  
  100 pct. from Canada as well >
  
  Blasphemy should never be punished. Don't ever side with those who wish their god would come before the rule of law. Sure this move wasn't classy, but a free society should not protect this book more than any other book. >
  
  Disrespectful? Maybe. Completely legal, yes >
  
  Also justified. Considering how these assholes are treating their hosts. >
  
  They’re obviously doing this to provoke the muslims but seriously who cares? It’s just a book it’s not like they burned all the Qurans in the worlds and muslims can’t use them anymore. The muslims community should just be mature and move on like nothing happaned >
  
  I thought about this trying to see it from the Muslim perspective and going into a rage still doesn't make sense.
  Uthman, one of the most righteous Caliphs one who knew Mohammad personally ordered Qurans to be burned en mass to settle a religious dispute. Qurans must be getting destroyed at a constant rate somewhere in the world due to neglect, accident or being recycled. One mass printed copy being burned in Norway is nothing.
  I'll defend anyone's right to burn a book in protest but Its a good sign the person hasn't got anything rational to say. >
  
  I’m a Muslim. The proper way to dispose of the Quran, or any text with God’s name, is to burn it and bury the waste. Aside from this, what I don’t understand is why even give these people the pleasure of your upset emotion, because that’s EXACTLY what they want. Just condemn it and move on. >
  
  Exactly. Rage bait, and it sets back everyone of the faith in that country if they take it.
  If one side burns a book to piss people off, and the other side starts lashing out over it, both sides are dipshits that we shouldn't give attention to. One side has something to gain though, and the other something to lose, so it's on the members of the faith to try and be the better people in this instance >
  
  Rage bait is the right weird to use for it. Gonna remember that. >
  
  It feels like that's all politicians do these days. Use rage bait to divide people. >
  
  Muslim just seem so petty and entitled when they act this way. >
  
  I feel like shit like this is bound to happen when there's been such massive immigrations into European countries lately. I'm not saying it's right but when two people groups with massively different cultures and values end up living along side each other in such a short amount of time shit like this is always gonna happen eventually. Been the same all throughout history if not worse. >
  
  Typically the governments of the places bringing the people in would defend their countries values and morals, though. >
  
  In Europe publicly holding your own culture or values as being important gets you thrown in the same camp as neonazis. They made their bed and are now shocked at all the right of center and full right leaning parties gaining more and more traction every year. 
  Their leaders don’t value or fear to express value for their culture, values, and history, but the public still do apparently. Eastern Europe is just telling the migrants to fuck off, Italy has a new right wing PM, Poland already went that way, Marine Le Penn wins more of the vote every election, >
  
  I think it's deeply embarrassing when western leaders condemn the burning of the Koran as an act of protest.
  People are allowed to say what they want.  If the Muslims want to get upset about it, they are just showing that the people who burned the Koran in protest were right. >
  
  Except the people who burn these Korans are not doing it as some brave act from free speech. They’re doing for no reason other than to piss people off and stir shit up. These aren’t brave defenders of freedom of speech, these are professional shit-disturbers who contribute nothing to society. 
  I guarantee people like Rasmus Paludan don’t care one bit about children or terrorism or anything, they’re just trying to get people to hate Muslims. >
  
  
  I guarantee people like Rasmus Paludan don’t care one bit about children or terrorism or anything, they’re just trying to get people to hate Muslims.
  
  The best thing the Muslims can do to get him to stop is to ignore him.  
  As long as he gets any attention for doing this, he will keep doing it. >
  
  Rather than capitulate to religious whining, do it again and toss a bible or Torah in for effect.
  "We don't give a shit" has always been the best response. >
  
  As long as anyone exists who would inflict violence for the burning of a book, that book must continue to be burned. >
  
  Our new PM is bending over to Erdogan so hard it's embarrassing. >
  
  I condemn the Swedish Prime Minister for treating sensibilities as more important than secularism and basic right of self-expression >
  
  You don't know anything about Rasmus Paludan if you think this was about secularism and self-expression. >
  
  It doesn't matter at all what the motivations were or who did it. Do you lose your right to free expression because you have awful motivations and awful ideas? >
  
  What are you even complaining about!? He was allowed to do his stupid stunt. Nobody attacked him, nobody stopped him, there has been no violence in response, he didn't "lose his right to free expression", so what are you even upset about? That people say it's disrespectful? That they don't think he should be doing that?
  It's so gross that Muslims are the collective target of scorn here, despite doing nothing wrong, but the exterminationist, ethno-nationalist beliefs of a literal pedophile are neutral, and irrelevant, and can't be counted against him. >
  
  The whole reason the Swedish PM made the statement he did was because they need Turkey, which is Muslim, to let them into NATO. That's the disgusting bit, having to bend to religious zeal to be part of NATO >
  
  It’s weird how fragile religious people are. Is their faith so insecure that they can’t handle the burning of some pages of paper bound together? Yes, burning a book in protest will inflame tensions and is a stupid way to prove a point. But it’s just a book. Print another one and stop acting like entitled brats. Amazing that these believers can’t understand that most other people don’t want their particular brand of religion infiltrating their public life. Freedom FROM religion and keeping religion out of the public sphere, out of government, is more important than tolerating the authoritarian misogynistic beliefs of oppressive religions. People should practice their religion in private and stop getting offended at every perceived slight against whichever make-believe daddy-in-the-sky they believe in.
  Edit typos >
  
  It's more than that imo. A combination of peer pressure, profiling urge and a culture centered on face and honor. In sociology there is a concept of "expected expectations", meaning anticipation of what you think others expect of you.
  Even if a person may not be offended themselves initially, they may still react with violence to raise their social standing within the in-group of muslim minorities, they may feel expectations from their ingroup to participate and react with fury and follow up on those expectations and so it keeps rolling.
  It's not too dissimilar from gang wars and their violent responses to being disrespected. You find it in more (sub)cultures that are all about face and respect. >
  
  Well then at that point they are basically just gangs imo >
  
  Yawn 🥱 >
  
  Weak. They should have burned another instead of bending over like that. You can burn 10000 bibles and there will be no issue. Yeah some religious people will get mad, but big deal.
  Islam is an ancient religion that hasn't adapted to the times at all. It's a religion of intolerance and hatred.
  Edit: And before someone comes in to disagree and say I'm "islamophobic", I have Muslim friends who live in the Saudi Arabia, and they will casually talk about how it's okay to execute gay people. The religion has bricked their morals. >
  
  Technically Islam is much less ancient than other religions, no? >
  
  It was created as av war religion agaisnt southern europe, and nothing has changed. >
  
  Yes, let's worry about paper burning as humans burn. >
  
  Disrespect is the point. I have no obligation at all to respect your bullshit book and religion. >
  
  There is absolutely no need to just provoke people by burning thr Quran.
  At the same time people need to grow up because its just a book. >
  
  That’s the fundamental disagreement. To us, burning it is a jerk move, but fundamentally the same as burning any other religious book, about equal to burning a Harry Potter book. To them, it’s magic sky zaddy’s special book, and a whirlwind of shit should befall whoever disrespects it. >
  
  Sure, but their point is that you knew how we felt about the book when you burnt it.  So how can even the most reasonable of reactions be anything short of resentment? >
  
  Hence why it’s jerk behavior for anyone to burn a religious text. You’re clearly trying to provoke a negative response. Do people have the right to burn religious books though?
  I can safely say that, edgy as I am, I would never be part of such a stunt though >
  
  I am an atheist so they mean nothing to me, but I'm also pretty communitarian in my social expectations. I would say things that can serve no purpose other than agitate some other part of the community should not be allowed in society. Should we put people in jail for burning a book? of course not.  But we should at least try to shame it.  
  I accept the fact that a modern conception of "free speech" includes the right to burn any book in most western countries. So in that sense they do currently have the right to burn whatever book they want. I'm just saying it's not clear that should be the case or that's the best approach.  Even if we aren't going to rethink that approach though, i am not sure it's good to be hung up on people's "right to burn a book" every time this happens. They clearly have the right; people pull this stunt a few times a year and no government in the places where free speech is a thing has stopped them. >
  
  I don't think it's worth shaming. You're giving power to a mass delusional fantasy murder cult. I'm not allowed to call for the murder of fascists in America burning lgbt books, why does any holy fantasy book get more rights? >
  
  I'm not defending people's belief in the book, I'm speaking out against intentionally agitating those people. Those two things are very different.  There is a difference between provoking thought and provoking anger. >
  
  Ok but if I tell you I'll be mad if you do some random stupid thing. Should you be shamed for making me angry? It's silly, nothing wrong has been done beyond some people needing a stronger psychology. >
  
  I'd say, it's really pointless to have these conversations at a 60,000 foot level divorced from the facts on the ground. But I'll indulge for a moment. Generally speaking yes, doing something you know is going to make someone angry for no reason other than to test if they'll actually get angry is seen as a stupid thing to do in society in almost any situation i can think of. >
  
  It's more pointless to lose context and keep talking.
  If I've spent 2000 years telling you the same stupid factually incorrect things based on this old book. Then you burn said book, now we're at a conversation. >
  
  religion is cancer to the brain.
  when religion does not bring you peace of mind but just more worries in life, your religion has failed. >
  
  It's more of a cancer to societies as a whole. I've definitely seen religion do wonders for people on an individual level. On societal levels they have done so much bad >
  
  
  I've definitely seen religion do wonders for people
  
  Do you have any such examples? >
  
  I've met people that were hopeless, spiraling out of control I.e serious drug addictions find religion and then really turn their life around. Or people that struggle with finding friends or a place of belonging finding their sense of community through church.
  Not for me, personally, but it did certainly help both individuals. 
  Now, do I think there are better ways both could have achieved those? Absolutely! However, I did want to note that in individual cases it can be good for people.
  It can also make people hateful bigots though too so I'm not a staunch defender. >
  
  
  Protesters demonstrate in front of the Consulate General of Sweden after Rasmus Paludan, leader of Danish far-right political party Hard Line and who also has Swedish citizenship burned a copy of the Koran near the Turkish Embassy in Stockholm, in Istanbul, Turkey, on January 21.
  
  This guy must spend his weekends burning books. Everytime I hear of him it's always for the same reason lmao. >
  
  It was absolutely disrespectful. Part of living in a free society is putting up with things that are completely disrespectful and offensive, while at the same time those who put up such demonstrations should be prepared when people exercise their own free speech in response >
  
  Yeah as long as it's speech and not violence, I think there has been a tendency for the reaction to involve violence though... >
  
  Should you allow white nationalists to wear white hoods and burn crosses? It’s just a cross after all, it’s not violence… >
  
  It is allowed here. They have just as much freedom to do this as someone burning the quran and they need to go through the same systems to be allowed to do it. >
  
  not true >
  
  Do we really care if someone’s holy book is desecrated? Why should I give a shit about YOUR sacred concepts. I have no sacred concepts and expect nothing from you in this regard.
  Jesus is an asshole.
  There. Do I like, owe Christians something now? Do YOUR beliefs obligate ME? Can your beliefs run my life? Do I need to check in with all religions before I do anything? >
  
  Ass kissing the islamists is a bad idea. Look how apeshit they get over some book.