Church Plans on Burning Qur'an on September 11th

Consolator · 09-11-2010, 03:26 PM

This may be slightly jumbled, just going to try to get my thoughts out..

I think that it's important to remember that when the US' Constitution was written, we were not in war with several Muslim nations. Technology and international affairs are much, much different than they were back then. I've always felt that we could learn a thing or two from Canada's current system. They (and Canadians, please correct me if I'm wrong), have freedom of speech with the exception of hate speech. Yes, I know, then there's the whole semantics of arguing what is hate speech and what isn't, but I think it's fairly clear in most cases.

I agree that under our system in the US, he has every legal right to burn the Qurans. In most cases, I think it's pretty distasteful to burn religious scriptures. I'm agnostic (bordering on atheist), but the emotional connection that many have to religion is undeniable. By burning their texts, you're giving an easily-misconstrued message. I am sure there are many people around the world who are on the fence / who may not have a very clear picture on how we in the US view Islam and freedom of religion. By this pastor burning the Qurans and the media going as crazy as it is, it is extremely easy to twist this event into something much more twisted than it actually is. Do we really want other nations to hate us any more than they already do? Someone earlier in this thread said that if you know your actions are going to piss a whole lot of people off, and accomplish little (if anything), why would you do it? Speaking of which does the pastor want to accomplish? Does anybody know?

I disagree with Zaqarbal's arguement that abstractions are not people. People everywhere latch themselves onto various ideals, and things, constantly. I think it's a bit of a stretch to make such a claim. People take things like that as personal attacks, whether you want to admit it or not.

I think Dr. Suessicide and Zaqarbal (particularly you, Zaq) should tone down the language. You're not going to accomplish anything by insulting each other.

Finally, someone earlier in this thread said that by not allowing the pastor to burn the Qurans, we're letting the terrorists win. I encourage you to consider some of the different types of "Christians" we have here in America, and how much some of their actions appear to be "terrorist acts." I think you could argue that by letting him burn the Qurans, we're letting American pseudo-Christian terrorists win.

Barnard17 · 09-11-2010, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Consolator

I disagree with Zaqarbal's arguement that abstractions are not people.

Certainly, how do we define a person if not by the actions they take and opinions they profess?

09-11-2010, 03:26 PM	#1 (permalink)
Consolator ¬¬!! Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Texas Posts: 98	This may be slightly jumbled, just going to try to get my thoughts out.. I think that it's important to remember that when the US' Constitution was written, we were not in war with several Muslim nations. Technology and international affairs are much, much different than they were back then. I've always felt that we could learn a thing or two from Canada's current system. They (and Canadians, please correct me if I'm wrong), have freedom of speech with the exception of hate speech. Yes, I know, then there's the whole semantics of arguing what is hate speech and what isn't, but I think it's fairly clear in most cases. I agree that under our system in the US, he has every legal right to burn the Qurans. In most cases, I think it's pretty distasteful to burn religious scriptures. I'm agnostic (bordering on atheist), but the emotional connection that many have to religion is undeniable. By burning their texts, you're giving an easily-misconstrued message. I am sure there are many people around the world who are on the fence / who may not have a very clear picture on how we in the US view Islam and freedom of religion. By this pastor burning the Qurans and the media going as crazy as it is, it is extremely easy to twist this event into something much more twisted than it actually is. Do we *really* want other nations to hate us any more than they already do? Someone earlier in this thread said that if you know your actions are going to piss a whole lot of people off, and accomplish little (if anything), why would you do it? Speaking of which does the pastor want to accomplish? Does anybody know? I disagree with Zaqarbal's arguement that abstractions are not people. People everywhere latch themselves onto various ideals, and things, constantly. I think it's a bit of a stretch to make such a claim. People take things like that as personal attacks, whether you want to admit it or not. I think Dr. Suessicide and Zaqarbal (particularly you, Zaq) should tone down the language. You're not going to accomplish anything by insulting each other. Finally, someone earlier in this thread said that by not allowing the pastor to burn the Qurans, we're letting the terrorists win. I encourage you to consider some of the different types of "Christians" we have here in America, and how much some of their actions appear to be "terrorist acts." I think you could argue that by letting him burn the Qurans, we're letting American pseudo-Christian terrorists win.