• sugarcake@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago
      • it has to be passed in a democratically elected parlament. It may not get passed.
      • it is an extension of an existing law that forbid burning of flags (except the Danish flag Dannebrog)
      • book burnings are for morons
      • fuck you
        • sugarcake@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, I am proud to say that it is. Burning the danish flag is barely a provocation. The law is intended to stop individuals from provoking or threatening foreign nations, who may feel differently.

            • tal@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_desecration

              It looks like most countries in mainland Europe either restrict flag desecration in general or desecration of their national flag.

              Of the mainland Europe countries for which data exists, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, and Romania permit it, and Denmark prohibits desecration of international flags but permits desecration of the national flag.

              It looks like the British tradition is to permit it – the UK, Ireland, Australia, the US, and Canada permit it (though New Zealand does not).

              It looks like most countries around the world prohibit desecration of their own flag but permit desecration of those of others.

              The only other countries that take the Danish approach (permit desecration of own but not of others) are Uruguay and Japan.

              It looks like Europe is actually one of the most-restrictive places in the world in terms of flag desecration. Few countries around the world restrict both desecration of one’s own flag and the flag of other countries; almost all are in Europe, with only Israel and South Korea doing the same outside of Europe.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s a difference between burning books because you want to eliminate what they contain, and burning the holy text of the religion you suffered under. I think it’s bad for people who weren’t raised under oppression justified by Islam to burn the Quran, but the person who started all this was an immigrant from Iraq. To some people the Quran is a symbol of peace love and their deeply held beliefs. I’ve known wonderful and liberated women who wore hijab. But to others it’s a symbol of brutal oppression, like the Iranian atheist lesbian I once met. The fact is that this situation is far more morally complicated than many equivalents would be.

        • tal@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think that the interesting question is really whether Islam is a good idea or a bad idea. I think that the interesting question is whether a form of condemnation of anything – Islam, another religion, or anything else – should be prohibited because some people don’t like it being condemned.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Replace Islam with Judaism and it becomes less clear. Hatred towards a religious minority can get really fucking bad and should be stamped out. But also hatred towards your own oppressors is always justified.

            Burning a religious text as a public demonstration isn’t a mild condemnation. It doesn’t fall within the realm of civil discourse.

            So yeah I think it should be allowed unless Dutch people start actively targeting Muslims. At which point the right to such demonstrations may need reconsideration.

          • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            You dont need to burn a Quran to condem Islam.Also it is not a form of constructive criticism. What would you say if people flock to burn Torahs instead? Would you also tell the jewish organizations that would protest it to be less sensitive?

            • tal@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              You dont need to burn a Quran to condem Islam

              No, but you certainly can choose that as your form of expression.

              What would you say if people flock to burn Torahs instead?

              That’s fine too.

      • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        1 year ago
        • fuck you
        • fuck you
        • fuck you
        • fuck you
        • burning the fucking Quoran is the right way to dispose of it according to itself
        • a democratically elected government can do undemocratic things (and they often do)
        • the existing law is idiotic
        • sugarcake@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          burning the fucking Quoran is the right way to dispose of it according to itself

          Please link to the verse of the Quran you refer to. I don’t believe you.

          Why is the existing law idiotic? What problems do you have with it?