this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
79 points (93.4% liked)

World News

32143 readers
1083 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 62 points 1 year ago (15 children)

Does this apply to all works of fiction, or only those believed by extremist groups?

I can understand not being allowed to burn historically significant documents and books, but mass-produced books are just cheap fire tinder.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 25 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The centre-right government said it wanted to send a signal to the world.

That Denmark negotiates with terrorists?

[–] Faydaikin@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Depends on how they plan to handle it. If a new law was formed specifically around the Quran, there might be a case.

But if it's outlawing book burning in general, that's quite another story.

Personally, I don't understand why a law like that isn't already in place after WW2.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

But if it’s outlawing book burning in general, that’s quite another story.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” The intended target of this law is crystal clear.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] PuppyOSAndCoffee@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Burn whatever you want, hate whoever you please. It is unpleasant however better than the thought police sending you to the ice prisons for ungood ideas. This idea that censorship stops anything but innovation and creativity is ludicrous.

[–] ghosts@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Burn whatever you want, hate whoever you please.

Things a Nazi would say for 200, Alex.

It is unpleasant however better than the thought police sending you to the ice prisons for ungood ideas.

Better for whom? Not for the victims of hate crimes, of course.

[–] Assian_Candor@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago

Better for racists lol

[–] Assian_Candor@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yfw when you can’t say slurs without consequences angery

[–] PuppyOSAndCoffee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I agree...civil society should be intolerant of hate and its idols. The state, however, as a control structure, is a terrible judge of whom to hate and whom to love; Danes should be proud their government has done better than most...and strive to keep it that way.

The state must protect all its inhabitants from physical harm, educate on tolerance and empathy, and from there, abdicate who to love and hate to its citizens.

[–] Frederic@beehaw.org 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What about burning "The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster" or "Dianetics" books? Or Harry Potter, or LOTR books?

[–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 5 points 1 year ago

The law includes all religious texts. If an organization achieves religious status it will have the same protections.

[–] HowMany@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 year ago

Denmark... do you believe in fairies?

No.

Then quit acting like it.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (6 children)

To the people defending this proposed law - hypothetically, if I were to set up a white board outside a mosque and draw the prophet, would you also be in favor of the police arresting me for ... drawing?

If so, why?

[–] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think this may already be illegal. You would be inciting and degrading members of a legal religion in Denmark, which has been against the law there since 1939. Blasphemy Laws were taken off the books in 2017, but this is a step back in that same direction. But then there is amendments to the constitution, I don't fully understand.

[–] mintyfrog@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Hinduism often has a belief in, "sanctity of the cow, ... the belief that the cow is representative of divine and natural beneficence and should therefore be protected and venerated" (Brittanica).

One could argue that eating beef is inciting and degrading to [probably a select few] members of Hinduism.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] xilliah@beehaw.org 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

OK I sort of get it, not that I agree with it, but 2 years in jail? That's absurd.

I'm from a conservative area and have heard countless stories of people who were traumatized in the name of Christianity. If one of those people feels like desecrating the Bible then it's just a form of personal expression. If that upsets you well then start a conversation with them and learn from each other. Putting someone in jail is not the solution.

I'm just saying Christianity has a broad spectrum and has changed a lot over time. Even from a Christian point of view you must value criticism in order to find the way forward. That counts for all religions. And if you don't think so, you're just arrogant.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

If one of those people feels like desecrating the Bible then it’s just a form of personal expression.

If the planned Danish law is anything like the German ones (age-old, introduced after the 30years war) then that's absolutely fine. You can even do it publicly on SatanCon. Ritual blasphemy is just as much a protected religious expression as religious reverence, meaning that Christians aren't even allowed to revile you for it in a manner suitable to disturb the public peace.

Where things get iffy is doing it in front of a Church just to piss them off. Rule of thumb: If you're protesting a religious institution, keep religion out of it. E.g. back in the 60s people were protesting against the Churches' backwards sexual morals by kissing in front of churches. Much more effective than burning the Malleus Maleficarum.

[–] shiveyarbles@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's messed up, whatever happened to separation of church and state

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] iridaniotter@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Hate speech isn't free speech!

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hate speech has no objective definition.

[–] iridaniotter@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Language is a social phenomenon, yes.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 year ago

Hate Speech laws get an L from me. Hate crime laws where a crime motivated by prejudice awards extra jail time is just a better solution. Think about what this is really saying - if you burn the Quran, muslims will riot... in Iraq. And the Iraqi government will condemn you. Really?

[–] CascadeOfLight@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago

When you really think about it burning a book is, in fact, censorship theory-gary

[–] its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why not just make a law against inciting acts of aggression? Filming yourself burning religious texts is purposely trying to piss people off. That way it would cover anything that has the same goal without being just about religion. Freedom of expression, unless it's just trying to make others angry.

Lets the law handle each case individually.

[–] lukzak@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

How about we strive for a society where people can burn their own property without having to worry about violence?

The islamists that react violently are only proving the point of the people burning the books. Tbh if you try to hurt someone for just burning SOMETHING THEY OWN, maybe you don't deserve to live in a first world country.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I argue that law should be used against those who react to these burnings in an aggressive manner. Violence is already covered.

If they stop taking unnecessary offense, I assume the burnings will stop too.

[–] synae@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 1 year ago

Not necessarily, if I were to burn a Bible and no one cares but they still continue revoking abortion access (and further bigotry) then I will probably keep burning bibles ib protest of the christofascists.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›