the federal government has unlimited resources, and whether or not the church and pastor may be doing something within the constitution, the FBI can, and most likely would, charge him with some innocuous crime which would completely bankrupt him and the church. A jury trial, despite a completely constitutionally protected action, would convict him because people are emotional retards.

Hey, what's the news now? He's rethinking his rethinking of the book burning?

I guess they have just as much freedom to burn the Koran as the mosque-builders have to build a mosque. The fact is that what the radicals most fear is our freedom of worship and of expression, even of unpopular ideas. And if you think about it, it's the unpopular ones that need protecting, isn't it?

I saw this question earlier, shortly before I had to leave for work and now I come back to the discussion somewhat nullified by the cancellation of the event. I would like to answer anyway.

The difference is, when someone yells fire in a crowded theater, people are going to get hurt because of the ensuing panic and rush toward the exits - a reasonable and rational action(under the circumstances).

It is (or should be) under any circumstances unacceptable to harm or kill another person because they offended you or your religion. Period. This bullshit where you threaten, beat and kill those who disagree with you is tyranny incarnate and should not be tolerated.

There's a lot of fail in this thread that I wish I could respond to but I don't have the energy to do so. Instead, I think I'll just pick one small issue near and dear to me...

I am continually shocked by how little Europeans value freedom. For example, I'm pretty sure I hate Islam more than anybody on this forum yet few Europeans seem to be as offended by anti-burqa laws as I am. This really troubles me...

Strange Famous, just in case you're not aware of them, there are so many limits to freedom of speech, even in the United States, that it's not even funny. Here are just a couple off the top of my head:

• Shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre
• Copyright
• Obscenity
• Slander and Libel

I'm sure the list could go on and on. However, there is a very firm bound that should never be crossed and that's offense. A government should never be allowed to limit ones freedom of speech because of mere offense! I think it's just disgraceful how many countries in the West have blasphemy laws, some of them even newly enacted!

I'm pretty sure anyone here who recognizes my username knows that I'm a fervent atheist. The things I have to say about religion(s) are very offensive to a great many people. Many of them would like to see me forcibly silenced. I am fortunate enough to, by sheer happenstance of birth, live in a part of the world that allows me the freedom to speak my mind to whomever will listen. I cannot be who I am and call for a censoring of these Christians (and yes, they are Christians) without being a hypocrite. I therefore fully support their right to burn the Qur'an in protest... and I hate Christianity! I'm pretty sure I hate Christianity more than anyone else on this forum...

Strange Famous, and anyone who agrees with his views on freedom of speech, can you justify stifling me because what I have to say is offensive? Is there anything substantive that distinguishes me from Terry Jones?

Finally, please understand that my support for their right to burn a Qur'an is distinct from my support for actually burning one. I think it will be counter-productive to do so...

Brilliant! Thanks for the levity.:thumbsup:

Nice picture, Lucifer. Simple way the economy works: you buy it, they will make more!

But let's not get carried away with how it will affect the economy. The net effect is what we could call the Burnt Koran Fallacy.

No....actually, no. It should be fine because the people doing the burning are doing the buying, right?

Funny you should bring that up. It's a pity that the little boys in this story are not having accidents.

a little recap on the activities of this repellent little man and his repellent little church:

On Faith Panelists Blog: The notorious Pastor Terry Jones - Sally Quinn

This is the price we pay for having freedom of religion and freedom of speech. On occasion, complete assholes will take the opportunity to be complete assholes. I'd still not trade freedom of speech or religion for anything, even a Klondike Bar.

Interesting. I assume they're doing the buying, which would be hurting the book burner's cause more than helping. The book stores and publishers don't care what you do with the book; you buy it, you can do what you want with it. They're just giving them more money to keep churning Korans out.

If the church really wanted to hurt Islam, they would break into Muslim houses and steal the Koran or steal it from book stores. But these people don't do illegal things, only immoral ones.

BAH!

i give no fucks, i'm blind to see why anyone gives a fuck. fuck religion, fuck the stupid bullshit that originated from it, fuck the quran, fuck the bible, and fuck the fucking press.

...i'm pretty fed up with this stupid bullshit

Woah, calm it down over there, bud.

I've thought about what you said many times before, and it sounds like a good idea at first to not give a shit. "If no one gave a shit, wouldn't life be grand?" The fact is, it wouldn't. If we all said what you said there'd be no change or good. Apathy is a cancer and disease. Apathy is possibly the worst state of mind someone can be in. As the Flobots said, "don't let apathy police the populace."

I know you're pissed and the feelings will soon pass. We've all said "fuck this" when we get tired of stupid shit. I was feeling an anti-apathy flow, had to get it out there.

Meh I kind of get that way too Pearl. I'd like to give a fuck more often but holy hell does it get hard sometimes. The burning of the Qurans...I don't know, what are you going to do about it? The sad fact of the matter is that bullshit ignorance is everywhere you look, I haven't been to one stinking corner of this country and not met people just like our friend that pastor. It just permeates every last aspect of our lives and you can't even avoid it if you want to. So what do we have? A bunch of bigots sitting around in a field doing one of the most offensive things I can think of and for what? Because they think its something important that they have to do...there isn't much you can do to change that kind of thinking especially when it comes from some sacred book they've probably (actually I'm sure of it) been misinterpreting for years anyway.

Sometimes I just have to say fuck it, I have a life to live and life is just too damn short to worry about every small minded bigot with an axe to grind. I feel like if people want to waste their lives festering under ignorance and hatred then I say let them and the less people who pay it any mind the better off we'd probably all be. The truth is the older I get the more numb I become to it.

i think this cretin gasbag poses an interesting problem of limits to freedom of speech. the communications environment in which we now operate allows cretin gasbag statements and actions to have repercussions that far outstrip the scale of the cretin gasbags themselves. it's happened that making cretin gasbag noises about burning a koran sparked demonstrations in afghanistan in which people were killed. those noises prompted a warning from interpol about "terrorism"---though you kinda have to wonder in this case who the "terrorist" is. but perhaps if a cretin gasbag is enough of one--and white---such questions do not arise.

cretin gasbags in florida stage allegories of allegorical actions that come to stand in for aspects of ongoing united states policy....the "war on terror" and the racist marketing staged for it under the bush regime and its continuing role in neo-fascist identity politics...the united states can easily be seen as waging an informal war against an entire religion because cretin gasbags can access global communication networks and get their cretin viewpoints out into the world.

are the political consequences of this sort of thing internationally such that limitations on ultra-rightwing speech should be fashioned?
is racism protected speech?
how is this cretin gasbag not arrested for a hate crime? how is this not one?

the question of shouting fire in a crowded theater is not so easy to dismiss. if the interpol warning is taken at all seriously, the cretins in florida were attempting to incite a riot, to incite violence by committing symbolic violence. they endangered others. this endangering is the place where the analogy kicks in.

personally, i would have hoped that jones and his tiny cadre of ultra-rightwing christian zealots would find themselves arrested had they tried to go forward.
i don't see this as a freedom of speech issue. this is incitement. and it is a hate crime.

Why isn't Jones worried that he will be one of the first killed?
or is he?

if that were the case, then I'd buy and burn 100 of them, try to arrest me and its kill or be killed.

DK, your statement confuses me.

What are you saying exactly? That our laws against incitement & hate crimes
shouldn't exist?
Where do you draw the freedom of speech line?

the laws against incitement REQUIRE that a 'reasonable' person would react violently. burning a book, even if it were the last copy known of any volume, should NEVER elicit a violent response from REASONABLE people. Reacting violently to something like that marks you as completely unreasonable, illogical, and irrational.

It's not ME that drew the line of freedom of speech, talk to your supreme court justices who said the same thing about burning an american flag.

'Reasonable' sounds vague & fuzzy.
"Try to arrest me and kill or be killed," is very clear.

I'm short on time. Errands to run,
I'll get back to this later.

so are you saying that you woulda been out there burning with these people, dk?
or is this just another situation in which you imagine yourself going all ruby ridge against the Man?

as it stands legally now, no. I personally don't find the burning something that I would do, however, if society were to follow suit as you believe it to be, and it were considered a hate crime because it offends a certain group, then all stops are gone and it would not be ruby ridge, but north hollywood shootout.

(
 

(wow)

If I've understood dksuddeth in this thread, the answer to both of those questions is emphatically no. He has called the act stupid, & I think even such vehement defense of the Constitution MUST be construed as FOR the Man.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, dk. Quite frankly, I admire your strong conviction.:thumbsup:

kind of re: the thread: I was at the library browsing the koran translations, & there among them was a book called "A God That Hates," by Wafa Sultan, a Syrian woman who slams Islam using much the same blatant generalities as the most ardently prejudiced who traditionally speak it. It's fascinating. But my point is, (tic), I thought it was EXTREMELY INSENSITIVE to have them so intermingled on the shelf.

it simply goes back to the belief of supporting the first amendment. I may not like what you have to say, but just because I may not like it doesn't mean i'm going to let somebody deny you your right to it.

cant we all just be free and hate whatever the fuck we want to?

hate all you want, just don't commit violent or oppressive acts because you hate certain people/groups.

dk. I'm curious what type of acts you would consider to be hate crimes.

I'm also curious as to why the the 'I would' was left out of your earlier statement: "kill or be killed."

for whatever it's worth, i was just asking for clarification. i dont think people are free to be as bigoted and stupid as they want. freedom of speech is not about freedom from being criticized or freedom from being stopped---freedom of speech is about limits on the kind of legal actions the federal government can undertake to stop speech acts. but that doesn't mean that pressure can't be brought to bear to stop an action. this pressure can be direct, blunt violent if need be. and folk like dk couldn't object to it because the state hadn't done it, even if they supported the type of speech/action that was being halted.

but even legally back in the Halcyon Days When the Mighty Founders Strode the earth there were attempts to circumscribe speech (alien & sedition act anyone?).

but here, you've got good old fashioned fascist america speech. as ignorant and vile as it gets. like i said, i don't see this as a speech issue primarily--i see it as incitement to violence. and i am glad that it was called off. had jones gone ahead with it, i would have supported its total suppression. and i would have care little about how it happened. i think the political and ethical damage entailed by creating an image of the united states in the context of which this sort of vile action is ok outweighs problems of free speech.

but i also recognize that the situation is complicated and alot of my position comes more from finding these racist fuckwits to be viscerally offensive. so i would like personally to be part of forcing them to stop. but legally, it's sticky. i'm glad that things happened as they happened.

Yes, it's complicated. I cannot fathom how anyone could not see this pastor's
actions as anything other than incitement.
& I think that's where the pressure came from to 'shush' him.
From many many others who are far far more reasonable.

I'm glad too.

it's not so violent. it hurts no-one, and it's not like we're going to run out of korans anytime soon. burning a book is stupid and accomplish's nothing, we all know this. this is basically "shock rock" of the religious world. they want recognition and they're obtaining it.

i just dont care. this will probably be my last post on this thread.

edit: i still believe in freedom. i think ill burn a koran, a bible, the origin of species, and where the wild things are in a bundle sometime soon.

anything where actual physical harm happens is a hate crime, and take that from someone who thinks it's absolutely ridiculous to have 'hate crimes', because crime is crime.

I simply assumed that when I said "try to arrest me and its kill or be killed." was self explanatory.

I'm glad that the good pastor decided against this action.

I'm also glad to see the 9-11 lights burning brightly in the night sky.

why don't you support the 1st Amendment?

why don't you read?

I read plenty RB, tell us, do you think burning a US flag is protected by the 1st amendment?

back again. (not RB, however)

who gives a fuck. if i feel like burning a flag the fucker will burn. again, this hurts no-one.

good day.

I was wondering about this myself, actually I was curious about burning a bible, but I'll ask it in what I think is a more direct way.

RB, does the reaction of those meant to be offended by the issue that tips the scale in favor of suppression of certain speech; If those offended were more apt to shrug it off than to react violently would you still be in favor of suppression?