• maporita@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    If it were a Bible or a Torah that was burned we wouldn’t be having this conversation now because it wouldn’t have even made the news. There is only one major religion that reacts violently to incidents like this. I think that’s the point OP was making and it’s a valid one.

    • prole@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Way to completely miss (or ignore) the point I made.

      But you’re right, Christians have never committed violence in the name of their faith… Lol

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s not the same argument. Christians rarely, if ever, commit violence because of a public demonstration like burning a Bible or creating a likeness of Jesus. Christians do commit violence for other reasons though, but not for something that many would interpret as protected speech in western countries.

        If you shout “FIRE!” in a crowded building (e.g. a theater), you could be held liable for the panic that could ensue. Likewise, intentionally doing things that you know would encourage violence either locally or elsewhere in the world as a direct result of the speech could be held to the same standard.

        So what’s being outlawed here isn’t the burning of the Qu’ran, but the intentional incitement, which is very similar to the charges against former President Trump WRT the events of Jan. 6. If you did the same thing in a Christian context (e.g. by parading homoerotic images of Jesus outside a Baptist Church on Christmas or something), you could likely be charged. It’s the intention here that’s illegal, not the specific act.