120

The Danish government will try to find legal means that will enable authorities to prevent the burning of copies of the Quran in front of other countries’ embassies in Denmark, Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen has said.

“The burnings are deeply offensive and reckless acts committed by few individuals. These few individuals do not represent the values the Danish society is built on,” Rasmussen said in a statement on Sunday.

“The Danish government will therefore explore the possibility of intervening in special situations where, for instance, other countries, cultures, and religions are being insulted, and where this could have significant negative consequences for Denmark, not least with regard to security,” he said.

Denmark and Sweden have found themselves in the international spotlight in recent weeks following protests where the Quran, the Islamic holy book, has been damaged or burned.

In a separate statement on Sunday, Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said he had been in close contact with his Danish counterpart Mette Frederiksen, and that a similar process was already under way in Sweden.

“We have also started to analyse the legal situation already … in order to consider measures to strengthen our national security and the security of Swedes in Sweden and around the world,” Kristersson said in a post to Instagram.

Outrage in Muslim countries

This month, far-right activists have carried out a number of public burnings of Islam’s holy book in front of the Iraqi, Egyptian, and Turkish embassies in the Danish capital.

On Monday, two members of the ultra-nationalist Danish Patriots stomped on a copy of the Quran and set it alight in a tin foil tray next to an Iraqi flag.

Earlier this month in Sweden, an Iraqi citizen living in the country, Salwan Momika, 37, stomped on the holy book and set several pages alight.

The public burnings in the Scandinavian countries have sparked widespread outrage across Muslim countries, with Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Iran, Morocco, Qatar and Yemen lodging protests in response.

Sweden and Denmark have said they deplore the burning of the Koran but cannot prevent it under their rules protecting freedom of expression.

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) earlier this month approved a resolution on religious hatred and bigotry following several burnings.

Pakistan and other Organisation of Islamic Cooperation countries backed the motion, along with a number of non-Muslim majority countries including India and Vietnam. The United States and the European Union opposed the resolution on the grounds it interfered with freedom of expression.

In his statement, Rasmussen added that whatever measure was taken “must of course be done within the framework of the constitutionally protected freedom of expression and in a manner that does not change the fact that freedom of expression in Denmark has very broad scope”.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Obsession@lemmy.world 63 points 1 year ago

I hoped it was clickbait, but it isn't. What the fuck Denmark.

[-] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The Danish government will try to find legal means that will enable authorities to prevent the burning of copies of the Quran in front of other countries’ embassies in Denmark

Emphasis mine. This isn't some major restriction of free speech or anything, it's just a way to prevent idiots from trying to ruin diplomatic relations between Denmark and other countries.

[-] Obsession@lemmy.world 62 points 1 year ago

So someone who escapes from a fundamentalist Muslim country can't protest that regime in front of said country's embassy anymore?

Nah, still fucking stupid.

[-] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 9 points 1 year ago

We still don't know the exact wording of the law. So there's no way to know and no need to jump to outrage conclusions right now.

[-] Obsession@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago

I'm going to jump to outrage because the entire premise of the proposed law is ridiculous, regardless of the wording.

This is a blasphemy law under the guise of international relations.

[-] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 10 points 1 year ago

It could also be more akin to a hate speech law. We don't know yet. Jumping to outrage before we know is counterproductive and unnecessary.

I'll be right beside you with the outrage if it turns out to be actually outrageous when it lands - but let's see.

[-] SuddenDownpour@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

We don't really want religions to have the right to determine what is and is not hate speech against them. If given the chance, some of these people would define women not having their hair hidden or someone undergoing gender transition as offensive.

[-] Ichi_matsu@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Trying not to take away your point. But is it really hate speech tho?

[-] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 4 points 1 year ago

I suppose that's a question for a lawyer.

[-] laylawashere44 3 points 1 year ago

Yes, because burning the Quran isn't actually a big deal in Islam and is condoned as a disposal method. Every Muslim knows this.

So if you are an ex-mislim burning a Quran in front of an embassy, what else could be your message? The Quran isn't tied to a country so it can't be a protest against the country. It also can't be a legitimate protest against Islam, since it's condoned by the religion. You cannot protest by complying.

So that really only leaves one thing the Quran burning can mean: a threat to Muslims as a group. 'I'm setting a thing you are associated with and like on fire.'.

It's even more obvious when it's a non-muslim doing it.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 15 points 1 year ago

It is a restriction on free speech, though, however you want to frame it. A free society should not countenance it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The good news is that the burnings are still legal in front of danish embassies in Denmark. Which of course is nonsense, but why stress that it's in front of foreign embassies, that doesn't even make any kind of sense, it's the only kind of embassies there is. But that's how the government chose to put it!?

Instead og this diplomacy nonsense, giving in to fanatic muslims and undermining our democracy. We should rather invite them to a danish hygge meeting, with danish beer and traditional danish roast pork, and say they can bring their dogs if they want.

We shouldn't let religious fanatics dictate what we do in Denmark, that has zero impact and does zero harm to them. While they still have a death sentence on Salman Rushdie, and perform terrorist acts in Europe!!

This is a slippery slope that will never end, until we say enough is enough.

[-] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Oh no, some people are burning paper outside my building. I guess it's time to declare war.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] FlapKap@feddit.dk 12 points 1 year ago

Denmark doesn't have unrestricted free speech. Censorship is against the constitution but hate speech, inciting violence or defamation is illegal and until 2017 blasphemy was illegal. There is some legal basis for punishing speech that is bringing the country into danger or is severely insulting another nation. I am not a lawyer so I don't know if it's applicable or if it will hold up in court.

Note that the government does not want to ban burning books. Just prevent/punish doing it as a provocation against another country.

I also want to stress that I am not defending the Danish government or the book burners. I just want to bring some needed nuance to the discussion

[-] P1r4nha@feddit.de 5 points 1 year ago

Also there's presedence in a lot of countries that restrict protesting in front of embassies.

For instance in Switzerland in front of US and UK embassies. Not that I'm for that. I hope the police in Bern gets reigned in soon for their conduct.

[-] angrymouse@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Oil money my friend, oil money can buy everything.

[-] SuddenDownpour@lemmy.world 48 points 1 year ago

I'm an Ex-christian. Religion has provoked plenty of suffering against me and my family through my life. I want to have the right to burn a Bible. The same way, I want Ex-muslims to have the right to burn the Quran.

[-] poplargrove@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm an exmuslim and dont see the point of desecration. It isnt going to change anyones mind or bring me acceptance (in fact I'd argue it will do the opposite). I want my worldview to be seen as rational and respectable, not angry and represented by empty acts.

I will however defend the right to criticize and say controversial things about Islam that have actual substance to them.

[-] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Desecration shows that there's no god reacting to the offense. It is a rational attack on faith.

[-] kaizervonmaanen@reddthat.com 4 points 1 year ago

Well any of his servants reacting to it would prove that claim wrong. That is like saying that the president don't exist because there is no reaction when you try to burn down the white house. You can get away with it of course, but it isnt good reasoning.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I'm out of the loop, but is this the idea of burning Qurans, or is this an afterthought? I have been divided on the subject, as I support free speech, but I don't enjoy the support of provoking aggression by undermining someones faith.

If the idea behind burning Qurans is to prove that there is no religious force that stops us, that's something different. Like showing the people that there is no reason to enforce the ancient rules and laws of whipping people for having extramarital sex, cutting of hands of thieves, claiming the right to bear arms or stoning people for cheating in marriage.

[-] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

If the idea behind burning Qurans is to prove that there is no religious force that stops us, that’s something different. Like showing the people that there is no reason to enforce the ancient rules and laws of whipping people for having extramarital sex, cutting of hands of thieves, claiming the right to bear arms or stoning people for cheating in marriage.

Yes.

It's mostly for the doubters riding the fence.

Of course, then comes the other problem with how "apostates" are treated.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] poplargrove@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Islam went through persecution during its formative period, by the religious and political status quo that existed (only to later go to war, subjugate other religions, enslave). The Quran already has explanations and consolations for persecution so they will rationalize the burnings using these.

Kindly, "where is your god now" will have no effect, assuming they look at it that way to begin with. That will be at the cost of ruining our (exmuslims) reputation, which imo isnt worth it.

[-] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A persecution complex is built-in as a default feature for the Abrahamic ones. I'm sure it's not unique to them, but it's a default feature, part of the marketing.

The cult dynamic of creating a cult identity works very nicely with converting criticism into a positive feedback loop for belief fervor. Instead of criticism being received honestly and evaluated accordingly, it's seen as conspiracy and mysterious/sinister/occult oppression. It's most obvious with the martyr fallacy, the notion that: "someone died for some idea/story/prophecy, therefore the story is true!". The past few years of pandemic have demonstrated repeatedly that it is a fallacy. And the backfire effect has its limits.

Kindly, “where is your god now” will have no effect, assuming they look at it that way to begin with. That will be at the cost of ruining our (exmuslims) reputation, which imo isnt worth it.

It's precisely for the doubters. The believers who are comfortable do not care.

Deeming some story "sacred" is an appeal to authority, some ancient authority usually (so, to tradition), and it's used as a defense against criticism... against even trying to think about criticism. It marks some idea, some premise, as unquestionable. So ruining the illusion of sacredness is an important step in allowing inspection and criticism. Go ahead and ask exbelievers when they started to doubt and if they had fear of doubting in the first place.

[-] 5in1k@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Free speech covers reprehensible speech.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kokesh@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As stupid provoking those medieval idiots is, it definitely shouldn't be illegal. If I decide to start my grill with Quran in order to make me a dinner of pork chops, or draw Mohamed on piece of paper in order to pick up my dog's shit with it, it definitely shouldn't be illegal. Same way as saying Jesus is technically a zombie isn't illegal.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

As stupid provoking those medieval idiots is, it definitely shouldn’t be legal.

I think you mean illegal.

[-] cyd@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Well, the complication here is that the far-right groups pulling these stunts are allegedly being backed by Russia. The goal being to draw a backlash from Turkey in order to stop Sweden's NATO bid. They also burned a Torah to draw outrage from Israel, which is a country that Russia wants to keep on-site.

Free speech is being weaponized here, these are not random acts of self expression.

[-] aseth@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

They never actually burned the Torah. Both of the protestors that filed for permits for that backed out - one burned a blank sheet of paper instead.

They were just being performative and expected the Swedish police to be hypocrites, and were surprised when stuck to their values and didn't deny permission.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Based on the rest of your comment, I think you missed an "il" at the beginning there.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Honestly I am all for freedom of speech and am atheist, but I don't think burning books is a form of free speech that should be recognized.

I feel no matter the book, burning it is just low class and only done to fuel anger. It's more akin to hate speech than free speech.

There are plenty of other ways to get your point across, only 'bad guys' resort to burning books.

[-] HubertManne@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

I like your argument but I think I prefer the guy who says it should be a legal fire. Its more a property rights issue really. If you own the book and your burning it in a way that is legal then it should be as legal as burning a newspaper or whatever. I do think it should not be socially acceptable and especially as protest. People should look down on those who burn knowledge even if its a work of fiction like that.

[-] laylawashere44 9 points 1 year ago

Burning the Quran is an acceptable way to dispose of a copy in Islam. The protests really are about the intentions of the individual who are burning it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] charonn0@startrek.website 5 points 1 year ago

The freedom of speech isn't primarily concerned with the protection of uncontroversial or popular speech.

[-] Borger 12 points 1 year ago

Ex-muslim here. The Quran should not get special treatment in the eyes of the law from any other book.

I oppose hatred towards Muslims, but the religion itself isn't exempt from criticism, and yes, that does include idiots who want to set the book on fire to make some kind of stupid point.

I don't like it, but I don't like the world having to tiptoe around overly sensitive Muslims who think everybody should show the same respect to the book that they do. The outrage would be at nowhere near the same magnitude if it were the Bible. Grow the hell up and stop validating these dumbass book burners.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] ziggurat@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

I'm opposed to burning the Quran, but I am even more opposed to making it illegal to do so.

The wording quoted from the Danish politician by OP, assuming it is correctly quoted and translated sounds horrible and dystopian. Imaging making a law to make it illegal to do something that offends other people, or even offends other people from other countries. Now you have other people deciding on tummy feeling what is legal in your country. Absolutely disgusting.

Burning the Quran should continue to be legal, I just don't see why you would do that, or other books for that matter. There are way more price efficient ways to produce heat than book burning

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] janus2@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 1 year ago

Honestly the main problem I see here is people setting fire to items in a public space without proper combustion containment.

Like, sure, burn a book if you feel like it. But you should coordinate with the local fire department and use an approved and setting-appropriate container like a burn barrel, chiminea, etc.

Safety first, folks :]

[-] vaseltarp@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

This is signaling exactly the wrong message to the violent protesters. They see "if we throw a tantrum they do what we want" it will lead to more violent protest.

The opposite reaction would be appropriate. Tell tgem "If you continue to be violent we will mock your prophet and your book even more". If those people really listen to the Quran this should stop the violence.

During Mohammeds time the Muslims would mock the gods of the polytheists. When the polytheists finally had enough and threatened to mock Islam if they don't stop, "Allah" revealed

Surah 6:108

˹O believers!˺ Do not insult what they invoke besides Allah or they will insult Allah spitefully out of ignorance. This is how We have made each people’s deeds appealing to them. Then to their Lord is their return, and He will inform them of what they used to do.

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'll go ahead and say "just copy the German laws". §166 StGB:

Revilement of religious faiths and religious and ideological communities

  1. Whoever publicly or by disseminating content (section 11 (3)) reviles the religion or ideology^1^ of others in a manner suited to causing a disturbance of the public peace incurs a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or a fine.
  2. Whoever publicly or by disseminating content (section 11 (3)) reviles a church or other religious or ideological^1^ community in Germany or its institutions or customs in a manner suited to causing a disturbance of the public peace incurs the same penalty.

Historically speaking that section has been introduced after the 30 year war, when Lutherans and Catholics had it out for each other. It's why you don't see Lutherans calling Catholics Idolaters any more even though they still pray to Mary.

Apostasy, blasphemy, also religious critique etc. are all perfectly fine but if you're using religion as a vector of insult to disturb the public peace that's crossing the line. Burn all the Qurans you want just don't make a show out of it. Or print "The Quran, the holy Quran" on rolls of toilet paper and send them to public TV stations and mosques (actually happened).


^1^ "ideology" there is an iffy translation, what is meant is Weltanschauung. Say, Daoism is not a religion in the usual (German/western) sense but definitely a philosophy with deep epistemology and thus qualifies. So is Humanism.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

One problem with this sort of law is that it only ever targets minority religious opinions. You'd never see a priest get prosecuted for telling atheists they deserve to burn in hell, for example.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The atheists could file a complaint and force the issue.

If not then there's a larger problem with society.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago

Ideally it would work that way. The problem is that it never has worked that way.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] dan1101@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

If you delete a file containing the Quaran from your computer, is that bad too?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MajorHavoc@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

A great way to prevent burning of flags, religious texts and other icons is too reform how those organizations are perceived.

I've heard there's certain religious texts that claimn best-in-history expertise on doing good and the proper way to treat others.

Seems like some folks should, if they really believe it, spend more time reading their copy and less time worrying about anyone else's copy.

[-] 5too@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Leaving aside for the moment the free speech issues inherent here... if you want to control what someone does with a book after you sell it? You can't sell it. Lend it, rent it, whatever; but if it's sold, you've given up all right to determine what happens with it.

Don't want to invest in the infrastructure to do that? Then is it really that important to you?

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2023
120 points (100.0% liked)

World News

38969 readers
2310 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS