Burning the Qur'an

what side are you on? again? I tought you r atheist? Lars and those barbarians are on same side. same as those who burn the qur'an. neither them are lesser than another




not only moron but insane. so still you follow this insane act?

Freedom.

yup freedom and moderation.

@mesumguy remember your "muslim teachings" does not represent the whole Islam community in general.

heck, I even have an uncle that is like 25% extremist if it has something to do with Israel, and he would probably condemn this act, but doesn't act more than that.

So I'm hypothesizing that in Sweden, mosques wouldn't have gone up anywhere near a theoretical GZ site.

Although that Mosque has nothing to do with this whatsoever.

Although it does have something to do with the fact that there are contradictions in your values.

This is not the same thing, this is disrespectful to an entire faith, millions of people on a whole other level. building a Mosque two blocks from GZ is not, and even if I can understand that victims to the WTC attack can find that building insensitively located it is not comparable.

Why is it not comparable? It's a specific minority of a group that is actively finding this act offensive, possibly willing to resort to violence.

By what you say, they should stop that.

The reason to why Park51 is being built is not to provoke/disrespect victims of 9/11, this has no, absolutely no other message than to desecrate the Quran and provoke Muslims, it is the sole purpose.

That's the difference. Yes, the location of Park51 is not optimal, but it's not there to be provocative and insulting, and it wouldn't be if people didn't connect Muslims to terrorism.

So insulting a bunch of people is a no no, but insulting a small group is fine? You're a real humanitarian bro.

EDIT:



So unintentionally hurting someone but going ahead with it is fine?

The foresting industries don't mean to hurt the eco-system. They just want to make money. Why are people complaining so much? They should be able to go on destroying wild life forever.

Actually, yes it is there to be provocative.

How is burning a book provocative? The owner of the book should be able to do whatever the fuck they want with their own property, no?

It's their right.

When many people think of provocative, they tend to think it means only the negative aspect most people use it for.

All it means is trying to stir up emotions.

So yes it is.

Oh dear, now you're just being stupid for the hell of it. <_<



As I've stated both here and in the thread about Park51, I see the reason to why some 9/11 victims are offended by the building, but I don't think that their reason is a valid one. Trying to forbid some peacefully living Muslims in the NYC from expanding their services (Something the need to do) close to GZ (The place where the services is needed) and also adding a useful facility to the area is just ignorant. These people (probably) had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack, they are not being disrespectful.

Burning the Quran for the sole reason of provoking the Islamic community is disrespectful.



If he was burning Qurans in his backyard because of some personal agenda I wouldn't care, but doing it in public in order to provoke a violent reaction is stupid.



No it's not, it's there to "help bridge the gap between the moderate Muslim community and the rest of the US" by more or less forcing people to interact more with each other.

I would prefer you not to try and refer to me as stupid. Thank you.

Well first off, it's nice you think that. But there is also the extremist here who believe it matters a lot.

Basically, you said we shouldn't provoke the extremist over there, because they might use it as an excuse to use violence and kill people.

Except the extremists here have also been shown to have a similar disposition at times as well. To name just a couple of examples would be the KKK and Neo-Nazi groups.

Though they are not the only ones by any means.

The community center being built is going to be provoking them. It might be the intentions in provoking just their human side and come together, but instead it is going to provoke their violent side.

Which can give them an excuse to become violent.

So basically, you would have a very similar situation between the two. Two extreme groups looking for an excuse to become violent.

You answered one should be stopped because of it, but you're ok with the other one.

This is what we're calling you out on kid.



Which is a form of provocation.

Or you're not very keen on people who utilize satire?



I see the reason why Muslims are offended by the burning, but I don't think that their reason is a valid one. I mean the books have been bought by these people meaning they can do whatever they want with them, correct? The qur'an is their property meaning they are allowed to do what they will with it.

Depends on the situation, not here. And Kalistean, this was where the stupid was directed, not to you. I just took a long time writing the post, I'm sorry.

To answer both of you.

As Kalistean says, the building of Park51 can, and probably will be used as an excuse for extremists to act violent, but the buildings purpose was not to provoke these people into taking action, this has two sides, one that's promoting peace and tolerance, and another that can be taken as insulting.

The burning of the books is supposed to provoke the violent side of extreme Muslims into taking a violent action, it has no other side than the bad one.

And PersonDude, yes it's the person who bought the books property and he can do whatever he wants with them, but when he puts it out in a way like this it becomes a public matter. Maybe that's just my indoctrination from a country where doing this would be deemed illegal, I don't know, but openly like that express hate and disdain against a group of people is wrong.

yes, but the bad side IS going to be there. And you were stating that you shouldn't do something that would give them reason to do something.

And you want to know something, this is exactly how governments use whatever power you give them to get more power. Sure it's something big and major now. But it won't take them too much to push a little more each time.

This is why people are so against giving government certain powers. Because it HAS been used that way before. And they will again.

There is always going to be two or more sides to every situation. And they love to group them together. So one will affect the other and once you allow it in one, you can't do much about it in the next one and then the next one.

What's the point of this? In the end, all you get is two offended religions. Fucking idiots.