Burning the Koran, history and law.

In case you hadn't noticed, there is 'world-wide outrage' about a Pastor's decision to host a 'Burn the Koran Day' at his church in Florida, USA.

I say he should go for it. Subject to local government ordinances, his congregation and he shall be breaking no State or Federal law by burning the Koran. Indeed, their right so to do is granted under the 1st Amendment, US Constitution thus:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or

prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or

of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition

the Government for a redress of grievances."

Here in Britain we do not have a codified Constitution; whereas the King's rebels in the Colonies were able to start with a clean sheet, we have built up an evolved legal framework primary containing the Magna Carta, 1215 and the Bill of Rights, 1689.

Our Bill of Rights (not to be confused with the US Bill of Rights, which is a description of the first ten amendments to the US Constitution) is not as lexically precise as the US Const. 1st Amendment. It has never been considered by the Courts of Parliament or - by virtue of the lack of revolution - the Populus, as particularly necessary to give substantive legal mass to it; since Cromwell's death our arbiter of last resort has not been a legal framework, per se. The monarch has acted as a living constitution, ever mindful that the proper place for a head is upon the shoulders and not in a bloody mess at the foot of the block.

Never the less, the Bill of Rights of 1689 does speak to freedom of expression, thus:

"That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament

ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of

Parliament;"

Now one must read this in the historical context in which it was written. While the US Constitution was always intended to be forward-looking, codifying the ground upon which the new country's body of law would be built, our Bill of Rights was very much re-active in nature. The reaction was against James the Second and his pro-papist, anti-protestant religious-political alignment. The Bill of Rights was written to limit future monarchs from meddling with the will of the Parliament; hence that 'freedom of speech .. in Parliament ought not be [curtailed by the King]'. In other words 'The King can sod off, we the people will speak our mind and worship who we will'.

Notice the difference betwix the US Constitution and our Bill of Rights? The US Constitution was specifically formulated to confer upon the people 'inalienable rights' **. Our Bill of Rights on the other hand was drafted as a conscious reaction to the authoritarian nature of the State.

So on Saturday a small church in the US will burn several hundred copies of the Koran. This will enrage many Moslems around the world. Unfortunately, and thankfully, their 'outrage' will just have to be. The congregation of the church are 100% completely covered under the US Constitution to do what they shall, subject to local ordinances such as when they can and cannot have a bonfire. And jolly good luck to them too. Go for it, I say! They are idiots, but brave idiots. They are less protesting against the evil of Islam as they are celebrating and confirming their own Constitution. Fair play to them.

I wonder if our Bill of Rights would similarly afford us the legal protection to protest Islam in a similar vein?

-----

** homework question, extra marks will be awarded: how exactly does one confer upon oneself and one's fellow man 'inalienable rights'? This poser gets to the nub of the interlace betwix religious Law and human law.

"Where they burn books, they will also burn people."

"Where they burn books, they will also burn people."

Heine was protesting censorship in the 1820's. Censorship which would not be out of place in many Moslem countries today. In his day in Germany any printed material - including music - less than a certain length had to be granted permission from the state prior to publication. His quote was resurrected with hindsight after the Nazis begun burning books in the 1930's.

Except as a poetic warning, this does not change the nature of free speech.

(btw, a quote without reference is nigh on meaningless!)

Shouldn't this be against that treaty thing, what is it called, kiyoto, or something. Where I live we're not allowed to have bonfires, let alone take part in a hate crime.

Then again they ain't got Guy Fawkes to take all that anger out on. I see the 5th of November as our chance to say to the government "Oi, don't forget Guy Fawkes you lot.

Don't think Burn A K***N Day (no swear words just being careful!!) will catch on in Dubai.

Shouldn't this be against that treaty thing, what is it called, kiyoto, or something. Where I live we're not allowed to have bonfires, let alone take part in a hate crime.

 

Then again they ain't got Guy Fawkes to take all that anger out on. I see the 5th of November as our chance to say to the government "Oi, don't forget Guy Fawkes you lot.

!! Well no, the US never ratified Kyoto and even if they did it would not have forced an amendment to the US constitution to rescind the 1st amendment. As for a taking part in a 'hate crime', is being hateful a crime or a sin? If it is a sin then how do you adequate codify that Law (capital 'L') into a law without upsetting those who do not recognize the higher Being whose Law should not be transgressed?

Heine was protesting censorship in the 1820's. Censorship which would not be out of place in many Moslem countries today. In his day in Germany any printed material - including music - less than a certain length had to be first granted permission to be published by the state. His quote was resurrected with hindsight after the Nazis begun burning books in the 1930's.

Except as a poetic warning, this does not change the nature of free speech.

 

(btw, a quote without reference is nigh on meaningless!)

I know, it was quite ironic the Nazis burned his work in 1933, his warning would come come true.

I was just referring to it as it held some relevance, you're right, should have given the quote reference, truth is, I'm too tired and can't be arsed.

For what it's worth, I think the church should be allowed to burn the book, whether it's right or not is a different matter. They should think of the consequences, a lot of extremists are gonna be p!ssed off, but then again it's the same extremists that deem it ok to burn the US flag - Something the Americans are sensitive about. Who knows. The world is one ****ed up place.

I know, it was quite ironic the Nazis burned his work in 1933, his warning would come come true.

 

I was just referring to it as it held some relevance, you're right, should have given the quote reference, truth is, I'm too tired and can't be arsed.

 

For what it's worth, I think the church should be allowed to burn the book, whether it's right or not is a different matter. They should think of the consequences, a lot of extremists are gonna be p!ssed off, but then again it's the same extremists that deem it ok to burn the US flag - Something the Americans are sensitive about. Who knows. The world is one ****ed up place.

Interestingly, the King James Bible's full name is the 'Authorized King James Bible'. James the First ordered a new translation into English. It became known as the 'Authorized' Bible, but was never actually officially endorsed as such. The Puritans of the time, ever mindful of the menace of hierarchical religion, were not happy to have the 'State' impose a version of the Bible on the masses.

!! Well no, the US never ratified Kyoto

It was a joke.

What i want to know is where the hell are hey getting all these korans from? Amazon? Will they not just go up in value as happened to Beatles record sales when those 'brave and free' americans decided that they were a bit too naughty for their liking.

Dress it up anyway you choose but it's pure bigotry, nothing else. It has nothing to with anyone's rights, the American Constitution or Uncle Tom Cobbly and all. The church in question has signs outside stating "Islam Is Of The Devil", a clear indication that Islamaphobia is alive and kicking especially in the USA along with pure racist hatred and homophobia.

There is nothing in the Koran that endorses terroism yet it has been reported :

[Pastor Terry] Jones, who is also the author of a book titled "Islam is of the Devil," said protests are key to the mission of his church.

"We feel, as Christians, one of our jobs is to warn," said Jones. The goal of these and other protests are to give Muslims an opportunity to convert, he said.

In response to the posting of the event on Facebook a little more than a week ago, Jones said that people have been mailing Qurans( sp) to the church to burn.

What exactly is there to warn about ? Most Islamic terroist attacks since 9/11 have actually targeted Muslims, at least 60 died in the attacks on 9/11. Muslim organisations world wide condemn these terroist attacks which Al-Qaida claim are carried out in the name of Islam and yet it is a stated belief that Islam forbids the massacre of innocent people and suicide bombings. On that basis one would have to believe I suggest that Al-Qaida are not carrying out these attacks in the name of Islam nor indeed any religious belief or idealogy.

Unfortunately there are millions of Americans who are still bigots, in most cases they hate anyone who does not conform to the stereotypical white American way. This plan should be banned as it is nothing more than an attempt to incite further hatred against Muslims in particular but also would send a message that it is Ok to hate and oppose any religion which does not concur with your own beliefs. To believe otherwise would be foolish in the extreme, hatred and paranoia feed off just these kinds of acts and lead to an even more dangerous society than already exists.

There is no difference between this pastor and Abu Hamza, that hook handed lunatic, both preach hate and have no place in decent society, a fact backed by the universal condemnation of his action by us religeous leaders of all religions. This pastor wants to make a statement against extremist islam. Well the net efffect of his actions is likely to inflame further hatred of the US and further radicalisation of muslims.

There is a real chance that this will put coalition lives at risk in Iraq and Afghanistan.

There is one's 'constitutional rights' and then there is responsiblity, good manners and common sense. These latter qualities are not usually incorporated into any legal framework as they are regarded as too vague (cf the height of the Cultural Revolution when the Red Guards denounced, amonsgst others, 'Bad People').

It might be one's right to have freedom of speech but to shout 'Fire!' in a crowded cinema is a clear abuse of that right. Think of the Orangemen who insist on marching through Catholic/Republican areas in Northern Ireland and the BNP (and/or their fellow travellers) who wish to do similar in an area populated mostly by recent immigrants. In order to exercise their 'rights' to walk in any British street, they are prepared to specifically and quite deliberately cause offence, chaos and disruption.

This Pastor might have the right to burn the book (but I leave the finer points of that topic to those far cleverer than me) but if he does so he must accept the responsibility for any consequences his actions might produce. Invoicing him for the police costs, crowd control, fire brigade and any medical injuries sustained in the course of his exercising his rights might help to concentrate his thoughts.

And finally, as a Christian Pastor, he might like to consider the 'love-thy-neighbour' message his faith claims to foster. His intended actions are in clear contrast to this. As things stand, he should consider a career move.

The bloke's got a tiny fundie sect a huge amount of publicity with this, will probably increase his church attendances tenfold.

Surprised that none of those southern Baptist preacher arseholes have thought this up before, TBH. Their congregations may be thick, but they themselves are very sharp indeed.

This Pastor is a religious extremist, and as someone earlier pointed out he is no different to Abu Hamza when it comes to inciting hatred. He has selected and ignored what he wants out of the bible to go along with his islamophobic and shockingly ignorant agenda

The most ironic thing of all is, apart from the "Jesus is the son of God" bit and the Koran focusing on different prophets, he is basically burning several copies of a book of which the content is very similar to the Bible. A lot more similar than you might think. 'Violence' is one topic they have very similar views on.

I wonder if he is also going to burn the pages of the bible which talks about the importance of tolerating other people, especially those of a different religion. . . .

I'll look forward to the "Christian extremists in religious hate crime" headlines in the red-tops soon. . . .

This church has a massive membership of 50 of which about 30 regularly attend.

He needs permission for a bonfire, which has not been granted so it's likely that the fire department will turn up and put it out.

Southern Bible-belt Americans, as big a danger to World peace through their naivety as the Taliban.

They send young obsessed kids into Saudi, Iran, Somalia, Afghanistan et al as Missionairies, who then get arrested, normally beaten and finally deported, which causes them to rise up and protest and influence US Policy through their pet "Representatives" that they fund.

And yet should a Muslim travel to their part of the back woods to give lectures on the true meaning of Islam and the links between the great religions they would "Burn the Witch"

Religious Extremists, always right, never allowing anyone to have a different opinion. The whole damned lot of them on all sides (including the nutter Jews) should be shipped to the middle of the Sahara with guns and left to rot leaving the world a safer place for the rest of us

AS the OP quite rightly states, there is no law anywhere which says that this cannot take place, and as far as I'm aware nobody has told this Pastor Jones that he can't do what he is planning. But that isn't the real issue here is it...

I have been struggling to think myself just what single bit of good can come from this, and the conclusion I inevitably come to is that there isn't any. All it will serve to do is fuel the fires (pardon the pun) of extremism and generate more anti-western feeling amongst those who already see the west as being oppressive of Islam. It is a safe bet that video footage of the burning Qurans will end up in Taleban/Al-Qaeda propaganda videos accompanied by the slogan "Look what the evil western imperialists think of our sacred texts" or along those lines.

The US commander in Afghanistan has already gone on record stating that he believes it will put the lives of US service men and women at risk, and if this pathetic little attention-seeker cannot bring himself to listen to this advice and goes ahead anyway, then there are probably some good grounds for him to arrested and tried on charges of treason for deliberately putting his countrymen in harms way in a theatre of war.

If Pastor Terry Jones really wants to discredit a religion then he would be better off taking a leaf out of the book of his namesake and the film that he and his cohorts released in 1979.

Phil and Bexy:thumbup:

Wonder if the pastor is getting his copies of the Koran from an Islamic publisher. If I were a publisher I'd supply him with hundreds of copies of an Arabic translation of the Bible and make sure I charged him the full RRP.

BTW, what a nasty hatred insighting bigot this pastor is. If I wanted to believe in an invisible flying teapot orbiting the earth and someone wanted to publically smash my teacups or slash my teabags I'd be properly cheesed off. Thank goodness for secular rationalists like Bertrand Russell.

The blokes off his head and yet thw whole world has given him the audience his posturing has wanted.

FWIW, I don't see the problem burning any holy book, who gives a toss about religion if you have a life to live.

The blokes off his head and yet thw whole world has given him the audience his posturing has wanted.

 

FWIW, I don't see the problem burning any holy book, who gives a toss about religion if you have a life to live.

Sorry Barney - stupid comment - those on the Tube/Bus or in the Twin towers also had lives to live and had no gripe with any religious nutters. The problem is that those nutters believe it is their HOLY DUTY to take your life away from YOU and force YOU to live in a Mud Hut with no electricty.

This sh1t affects everyone unfortunately, and it keeps getting made worse by imbeciles like this on both sides AS WELL as the head in sand apologists in the PC core who will NOT support the moderates

Not stupid at all. I don't give a toss about religion. Sorry, if that's offensive now.

I have a simple idealogy, it's called mutual respect for my fellow person or thing, so you respect me and I respect you. I don't need a religion or a religious book to guide me. If I did, then Buddism is the only religion worth bothering with.

"All religions have been made by man" - Napolean......pretty self-explanatory why.

it is a big mistake

This church has a massive membership of 50 of which about 30 regularly attend.

He needs permission for a bonfire, which has not been granted so it's likely that the fire department will turn up and put it out.

And the pastor has three houses and a boat to maintain. I suspect his coffers will be swelled considerably by other US fundamentalists.

Burning the Koran is very uncivilised and brings us down to their level.

I'm going to respectfully commemorate 9/11 by burning some bigoted American pastors.

This from a country who until not that long ago burned people, namely the Clu Clux Klan.

On top of that, you only have to flick through the religious channels on Sky to see what absolute nutters and hypocrites most of the US bible bashers are.

Not stupid at all. I don't give a toss about religion. Sorry, if that's offensive now.

 

I have a simple idealogy, it's called mutual respect for my fellow person or thing, so you respect me and I respect you. I don't need a religion or a religious book to guide me. If I did, then Buddism is the only religion worth bothering with.

 

"All religions have been made by man" - Napolean......pretty self-explanatory why.

Not 'giving a toss' about this issue isn't mutual respect, it's just ignorance. As Phil said, these nutters will affect the whole world. Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Jedi... There are people out there who are willing to massacre innocent people in order to push their own objectives.

It's all well and good saying you don't see the problem with buring the Quran, but the reality is a problem. It's inciting religious hatred hundreds of thousands of Muslims accross the world will be watching that and thinking everyone in the West is a Bible Bashing nutcase out to get them.

Of course they shouldn't do it, it's a retarded thing to do. Nothing will be gained other than a lot of religious hatred. Whether they have the right to or not is irrelevant.

I could never see it happening here. You woud have to do a risk assesment and no doubt the health and safety brigade wouldn't allow it to happen (irrespective of the rights or wrongs)

The idiot has backed down. Stunt over.

http://www.nytimes.com/?emc=na

Not 'giving a toss' about this issue isn't mutual respect, it's just ignorance. As Phil said, these nutters will affect the whole world. Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Jedi... There are people out there who are willing to massacre innocent people in order to push their own objectives.

 

It's all well and good saying you don't see the problem with buring the Quran, but the reality is a problem. It's inciting religious hatred hundreds of thousands of Muslims accross the world will be watching that and thinking everyone in the West is a Bible Bashing nutcase out to get them.

 

Of course they shouldn't do it, it's a retarded thing to do. Nothing will be gained other than a lot of religious hatred. Whether they have the right to or not is irrelevant.

How about you let me live my life how I choose?

I won't give you any self-righteous nonsense and i'll respect the way you choose to live yours? Is that a fair deal.

I really don't care about religion, I see every day the impact it has upon people who just want to live a normal life, raise their kids the best they can and just try and be happy for the time we have here. I have no intention of allowing the bigots that hide behind their book of fictional scriptures to make me fearful of their vengeance just because I don't care about Allah's messenger[Mohammed] or any of the other religions and refuse to listen to their vicious intimidation techniques.

Basically, what will be will be, I ain't going to be worrying about it to be honest.

How about you let me live my life how I choose?

 

I won't give you any self-righteous nonsense and i'll respect the way you choose to live yours? Is that a fair deal.

 

I really don't care about religion, I see every day the impact it has upon people who just want to live a normal life, raise their kids the best they can and just try and be happy for the time we have here. I have no intention of allowing the bigots that hide behind their book of fictional scriptures to make me fearful of their vengeance just because I don't care about Allah's messenger[Mohammed] or any of the other religions and refuse to listen to their vicious intimidation techniques.

 

Basically, what will be will be, I ain't going to be worrying about it to be honest.

You don't have to give a toss about religion, you can belive what you want. What you're saying isn't "mutual respect" though. If you don't see a problem with this cult burning the Quran, that's just ignorance not respect. The fallout from stunts like this affects those religious and atheist equally. If the stunt had gone ahead and some Muslim nut job took exception (fairly likely) and decided to take revenge (plausible) by blowing up a shopping centre; dosens of people could be killed regardless of their belief system.

Verbal has summed it up perfectly.

**** it, i'm gonna dress up as w******d burn a copy outside his shop.

The idiot has backed down. Stunt over.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/?emc=na

Gutted. I was looking forward to laughing at some nutty muslims on tv going mental.

Gutted. I was looking forward to laughing at some nutty muslims on tv going mental.

Nope. It seems the 'nutty muslims' have calmed the idiot down.

Take the trouble to read the NYT piece...if you can. The picture with it will cause YOU to go mental.

Gutted. I was looking forward to laughing at some nutty muslims on tv going mental.

Oh trust me....

Once upon a time in a far away land I met some Taliban who had been fighting the Russians in a trip up to the top of the Swat Valley. No matter how sensible or logical debate will NEVER win those feckers over.

The thing that Barney simply misses is that they spend their days looking for the easiest shopping mall to blow themselves up in. They truly believe in the land of Milk & Honey & Virgins, not even showing them pictures of the only 8 year old Virgins left in the UK in their size 30 dresses changes their understanding.

One day, unfortunately, a friend of Barney's will be in West Quay when it goes down.

May he never ever have to say "If only I hadn't typed that"

The company I used to work for had a lad on an AA flight on 9/11, I have met these people.

Honestly, be afraid, be very fecking afraid, and most of the brains behind it all live in....

UK being paid Social Security by you idiots

I think we should burn robs hair and incite a war with Scotland.

Nope. It seems the 'nutty muslims' have calmed the idiot down.

 

Take the trouble to read the NYT piece...if you can. The picture with it will cause YOU to go mental.

OMG, that guy is a spitting image of a poster called the modern matron, and from looking at the pic you just think he looks like a normal looking guy.

Oh trust me....

 

Once upon a time in a far away land I met some Taliban who had been fighting the Russians in a trip up to the top of the Swat Valley. No matter how sensible or logical debate will NEVER win those feckers over.

Of course you'll never be able to win them over because they not civilised or mentally sane. It was the same in Rhodesia and try as Smith might to plead with Harold Wilson to gradually allow the blacks to vote once they were educated enough to vote (this isn't racist - it's un pc common sense) through establishing routes in western democratic christian morals, then he'd bring them into the fold. But oh no, the ****ing spastic left wingers that had no idea about the reality on the ground wanted a scramble out of Africa and blindly hope that people who were uncivilised on the main, and tribal in totality would be able to keep going what it took us thousands of years to establish. But the lefty will never have it, nor ever research the subject, because they always know best and Africans starving and dieing (which is blood on their hands) is nothing to do with them, but the fault of the white men who left these countries in fine economic shape.

Of course you'll never be able to win them over because they not civilised or mentally sane. .

OK I agree with you on Zim, but on this - which is the greater Civilisation? You answer in the "Brit Filter way"

Example - I spoke to a bloke in UK today on biz who simply could NOT understand why his client would not pay his consulting bill this weekend. The FACT that it is Eid and everything including banks are shut until Sunday/Monday was met with the "Bolox, all the banks are open here"

They ARE civilised. SImply they believe that living in mud huts with noe education and no electricity is THEIR version of Civilisatiion

Of course you'll never be able to win them over because they not civilised or mentally sane. It was the same in Rhodesia and try as Smith might to plead with Harold Wilson to gradually allow the blacks to vote once they were educated enough to vote (this isn't racist - it's un pc common sense) through establishing routes in western democratic christian morals, then he'd bring them into the fold. But oh no, the ****ing spastic left wingers that had no idea about the reality on the ground wanted a scramble out of Africa and blindly hope that people who were uncivilised on the main, and tribal in totality would be able to keep going what it took us thousands of years to establish. But the lefty will never have it, nor ever research the subject, because they always know best and Africans starving and dieing (which is blood on their hands) is nothing to do with them, but the fault of the white men who left these countries in fine economic shape.

Maybe we should just get rid of the darkies (both here and there) and then all of the world's problems will be solved.

Maybe we should just get rid of the darkies (both here and there) and then all of the world's problems will be solved.

But surely that is against everything Dune believes in

But surely that is against everything Dune believes in

His beliefs are riddled with contradictions as they are, this won't be the straw that breaks the camels back, this camel is far too strong (blinkered). And he'll hate that I'm calling him a camel. Because camels are for Arabs. Or something equally ridiculous.

 

...

 

And finally, as a Christian Pastor, he might like to consider the 'love-thy-neighbour' message his faith claims to foster. His intended actions are in clear contrast to this. As things stand, he should consider a career move.

Even more important is the distinctive Christian message to love your enemy.

"But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you". [Matthew 5:44]

Of course you'll never be able to win them over because they not civilised or mentally sane. It was the same in Rhodesia and try as Smith might to plead with Harold Wilson to gradually allow the blacks to vote once they were educated enough to vote (this isn't racist - it's un pc common sense) through establishing routes in western democratic christian morals, then he'd bring them into the fold. But oh no, the ****ing spastic left wingers that had no idea about the reality on the ground wanted a scramble out of Africa and blindly hope that people who were uncivilised on the main, and tribal in totality would be able to keep going what it took us thousands of years to establish. But the lefty will never have it, nor ever research the subject, because they always know best and Africans starving and dieing (which is blood on their hands) is nothing to do with them, but the fault of the white men who left these countries in fine economic shape.

Shut up Stanley. No one is interested in your racist/white power agenda.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11258739

Here we go.

His beliefs are riddled with contradictions as they are, this won't be the straw that breaks the camels back, this camel is far too strong (blinkered). And he'll hate that I'm calling him a camel. Because camels are for Arabs. Or something equally ridiculous.

That figures:

Definition of Dune:

Ridges or moulds of loose, wind blown sand (fine to medium) forming on the backshore and forming the coastal features at certain locations. Dunes are more or less vegetated. Dunes are active coastal form elements acting as a flexible sand reservoir

What a load of b ollocks on both sides. I would burn the lot of em.