Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The quran is an evil and vile book. Good on him id burn one myself
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NancyBiotch)
    The quran is an evil and vile book. Good on him id burn one myself
    You probably haven't even read it.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by therealOG)
    You probably haven't even read it.
    I haven't read Mein Kampf but I know it's an evil piece of work.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    It is his property, and if he wants to burn it, on his property, then he should be allowed. If he videoed it with the intent to use it in a negative manner, as part of a hate campaign etc then this is a different matter but the act of burning a book should not be criminalised. If I want to walk outside and burn my copy of the bible, or my translation of the Qur'an then I will.

    It is the intent and not the action that should be key, and if he filmed himself doing it then the intention can be seen to be to cause offence.
    This is surprising, coming from a labourite.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by beepbeeprichie)
    This is surprising, coming from a labourite.
    Not really, unless you mean the emphasis on property.

    It's the same as burning a cabinet or a sofa. If you are adhering to rules about having such fires in your garden then fair enough.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beepbeeprichie)
    I haven't read Mein Kampf but I know it's an evil piece of work.
    Yep, so now you're comparing the Koran to Mein Kampf; utter hyperbole. You really are one stupid, ignorant fool. (This is coming from an atheist btw).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    Whilst I agree with the fact that it is a waste of time, I still stand up for his right to express himself and his liberty to view any religion as he so pleases. Arresting him simply for expressing his views is extremely authoritarian and totalitarian by the government.
    I was going to draw up a hypothetical example to make you reconsider this stance. On second thoughts, it's far easier to express my contempt by telling you that you're wrong. I think we're quite clear on a stance of not tolerating intolerance.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fusilero)
    But is it a crime? The Burning of the Qu'ran and The Burning of the British Flag should be perfectly reasonable courses of actions to take in regards to one's own personal property.

    We should have had a revolution back in the 19th Century, guillotine a few d00ds and Hanoverians left right and centre and have a Universal Declaration of Human Rights and a Constitution.
    I don't think it is a crime, doing it in public is however very disrespectfull.
    It just seems increadibly unfair that he was arrested for burning the Qu'ran yet at the same time extremist muslims are burning our flag here in Britain and abroad without punishment.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by therealOG)
    Yep, so now you're comparing the Koran to Mein Kampf; utter hyperbole. You really are one stupid, ignorant fool. (This is coming from an atheist btw).
    I wasn't comparing them. I was making the point that you don't have to of read x in order to be able to legitimately condemn x.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    Not really, unless you mean the emphasis on property.

    It's the same as burning a cabinet or a sofa. If you are adhering to rules about having such fires in your garden then fair enough.
    Should people be able to own guns and drugs, then?
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by beepbeeprichie)
    Should people be able to own guns and drugs, then?
    People are allowed to own drugs and guns.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by therealOG)
    Inciting racial hatred and prejudice is against the law foool.
    And lots of the law is bull****.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    People are allowed to own drugs and guns.
    I mean 'illegal drugs' which they can't and only a very small amount of people are allowed guns (why should I need a legitimate purpose to have a gun?).
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mina-z)
    What do you mean simply a 'view point'.. If I hate the Bible (which I don't btw) expressing my 'view point' would be 'screw jesus!' . How can you not see this? Me saying that I hate the bible etc is just as controversial as Galileo expressing his views to the devout religious people of that era. To us someone giving a new scientific theory is obviously not offensive anymore but it was hundreds of years ago. It was very 'offensive' hence why the punishment.
    Also sex in public is an action, you can't say oh free speech therefore free sex in public too.
    so is burning the koran yet everyone claims thats protected under free speech.

    saying you hate the bible is perfectly fine, burning one in public wouldn't be.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by beepbeeprichie)
    I mean 'illegal drugs' which they can't and only a very small amount of people are allowed guns (why should I need a legitimate purpose to have a gun?).
    No, people should not be allowed guns. I'm undecided regarding drugs. People can, however, own books and they can burn them, as well as any legal drugs and guns they may own.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    "If the boot was on the other foot"... etc
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    No, people should not be allowed guns. I'm undecided regarding drugs. People can, however, own books and they can burn them, as well as any legal drugs and guns they may own.
    If people can burn books and cause people's deaths (indirectly) why can't they own guns?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    this place has truly gone to ****
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barzy_j)
    a 'book'? utter ignorance, humble yourself.
    Humble yourself for defending a mind set where a book can be worth more than a human life. Although in this case the man was foolish and of course "only" went to prison, lives have been taken for burning the Koran.

    To value a book more than a life is barbaric.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by beepbeeprichie)
    If people can burn books and cause people's deaths (indirectly) why can't they own guns?
    This is illogical and presumptuous.

    Me saying hello to someone can indirectly cause their death. Ergo people should never say hello to someone.

    Go back and read my original point about the intent being key.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.