The UN is a joke.
Also, fuck your holy book. We need to burn holy books every day until these Neanderthals understand how free speech and democracy works. If you want to live in a theocratic dictatorship, don’t move to the West!
As one who has never burned a book to the best of my recollection, I’m flummoxed by the pleading for respect of dogma.
It’s one thing to be respectful of other human beings, in adherence to the social contract. It’s quite another to demand respect for an arbitrary thing, such as a point of view.
For example, I refuse to knowingly use Apple products in my house and, by extension of the same principle, my family chooses to use products on offer by companies who respect the rights conferred by ownership rather than effectively leasing a device to me with provisions. If I am vocal about my distaste for the way Apple does business, and you happen to be an Apple user, I expect that you understand that I mean no disrespect to you, the individual. I don’t care one whit what you use privately, provided it doesn’t perturb my rights to act differently from you. Anyone who has had this conversation from either perspective knows that being an Apple user is practically a religion on its own, so I think the comparison is apt.
And yet, nobody is going to put up a serious problem if I smash an iPhone. People understand that destroying a physical object in protest is not meant as a personal affront.
Meanwhile, religions throughout history have committed no small number of human rights violations and atrocities that pale in comparison to burning a book. Nobody has ever caused harm to another human being by setting fire to a book in protest, unless they then threw that book at someone wearing flammable pajamas.
what counts as a holy book? what if i get a group together and we all declare something like Game of Thrones to be holy?
For those looking for corroboration from a more obviously neutral source: here you go
Twenty-eight countries voted in favour, 12 voted against, and seven countries abstained.
Unholy shit, it actually passed? I hoped the title was clickbait.
“The opposition of a few in the room has emanated from their unwillingness to condemn the public desecration of the Holy Koran or any other religious book,” he said.
“They lack political, legal and moral courage to condemn this act […]”
No?? It’s just not right. Also makes no sense. You can have as many books as you like and do whatever you want with them, as everyone else.
“The opposition of a few in the room has emanated from their unwillingness to condemn the public desecration of the Holy Koran or any other religious book,” he said.
In point of fact: The opposition emanates from the fact that it’s a fucking book. I’m opposed to book burning as a general principle, but putting specific books that are supposedly written by someone’s imaginary friend into a special category where it’s illegal to burn them is entirely idiotic.
I’m opposed to book burning as a general principle
I think the details can make a huge difference here. Bad book burnings are meant to eradicate a book from existence, at least in a certain area. They mean to deprive people from accessing these books. This may include stealing books from people to burn them.
Harmless book burnings are nothing like that. They involve a person burning what they own (without stealing), with no attempts or hopes to reduce the number of books in circulation, and no goal to deny access.
The first is an actual threat to intellectual self determination. The other harms no one but the owner, who burns their own property.
Religious people would probably still be offended if you destroyed a copy of their scripture which you produced yourself.
Joke’s on them: My religious book is The Anarchist’s Cookbook
PSA: The Anarchists Cookbook is shit and gives very unsafe instructions. Use TM31-210 instead. It’s a bit older but you can’t get better than a government issued IED manual. For purely recreational reading only of course.
