Burn a Quran day

[Oliver]

NSFW - Burn a Quran Day Advertising Video

 

[Oliver]

This is quite interesting:

The Original Burn the Quran Day

 

[commandlinegamer]

Wonder if the fact that 11 September coincides with the Eid-al-Fitr festival will have much significance?

 

[Nanny Ogg]

On a purely practical note, this church doesn't have a permit to go ahead with the burning.

City officials denied a burning permit, as book burnings are prohibited under the city's burning ordinance, and the church could face fines.

If anyone here has ever burnt paper, you know that it flies up and can drift upwards, landing on nearby roofs or trees, and set other things alight. It doesn't take much.

On a purely practical matter, if the church accidentally sets anything else on fire, I hope they get charged with arson, not some slap-on-the-wrist fine.

And I'm sure the town Fire personnel have nothing better to do than babysit this event.

 

[noreligion]

He has already explained that to you.

No he hasn't and to be honest nobody here has either and nobody is going to answer because burning a koran is not constitutionally guaranteed free speech.

 

[KingMerv00]

No he hasn't and to be honest nobody here has either and nobody is going to answer...

I answered and you ignored. What is and what is not protected by the Constitution is determined by legal precedent. The Supreme Court has weighed in on similiar expressive acts and said they are constitutionally protected.

...because burning a koran is not constitutionally guaranteed free speech.

Have a legal cite for that?

 

[noreligion]

Because a long line of legal precedents from the Supreme Court has stated that actions can qualify as speech in certain situations. This is supported by my link above. If you want to learn more, I recommend you do some research.

Burning a flag, the symbol of the American government, is an action that is covered by free speech. Burning a koran has nothing whatsoever to do with burning a symbol of the country. I used to think your posts were well thought out but that has ended. Now do you care to tell us what specifically is protected by the constitutional guarantee of free speech.

 

[noreligion]

Because a long line of legal precedents from the Supreme Court has stated that actions can qualify as speech in certain situations. This is supported by my link above. If you want to learn more, I recommend you do some research.

Are you going to explain why burning a koran qualifies as free speech or are you just going to act pseudointellectual?

 

[bokonon]

No he hasn't and to be honest nobody here has either and nobody is going to answer because burning a koran is not constitutionally guaranteed free speech.

Since the Supreme Court has ruled that cross burnings are protected free speech, and flag burnings are protected free speech, it would seem the burden of proof in this case is on you, to show why burning a Quran is not similarly protected.

Is there any statute in any state in the country which prohibits anyone from burning any book he owns and chooses to burn?

 

[KingMerv00]

Burning a flag, the symbol of the American government, is an action that is covered by free speech. Burning a koran has nothing whatsoever to do with burning a symbol of the country. I used to think your posts were well thought out but that has ended. Now do you care to tell us what specifically is protected by the constitutional guarantee of free speech.

Are you going to explain why burning a koran qualifies as free speech or are you just going to act pseudointellectual?

I don't think you understand how constitutional law works.

Tell me, what would prove to you that Koran-burning is covered by free speech? What kind of evidence would you find viable?

 

[noreligion]

I answered and you ignored. What is and what is not protected by the Constitution is determined by legal precedent. The Supreme Court has weighed in on similiar expressive acts and said they are constitutionally protected.



Have a legal cite for that?

This is the last time I am going to ask you to give me a specific reason (not just a claim) as to why burning a koran qualifies as constitutionally guaranteed free speech. Any response other than an explanation (not a claim) and you go on ignore.

 

[noreligion]

I don't think you understand how constitutional law works.

Tell me, what would prove to you that Koran-burning is covered by free speech? What kind of evidence would you find viable?

I couldn't care less what you think I understand or don't. Are you going to answer or shall I put you on ignore?

 

[KingMerv00]

I couldn't care less what you think I understand or don't. Are you going to answer or shall I put you on ignore?

I'm asking you what evidence you would find acceptable in an attempt to answer your question.

 

[noreligion]

I'm asking you what evidence you would find acceptable in an attempt to answer your question.

It's been nice talking to you but it's time to go on ignore. Had you answered a question this wouldn't have happened.

 

[bokonon]

This is the last time I am going to ask you to give me a specific reason (not just a claim) as to why burning a koran qualifies as constitutionally guaranteed free speech.

The Supreme Court, in its unanimous opinion in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, wrote:

It is well understood that the right of free speech is not absolute at all times and under all circumstances. There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which has never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or “fighting” words — those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.

Therefore, burning the Quran, like burning Harry Potter, is protected free speech unless it falls into one of these categories, or unless you can demonstrate that it falls into another "well-defined and narrowly limited" class of speech which does not enjoy such protection.

I won't hold my breath.

 

[Fnord]

All this fuss and bother over a stupid book.

I bought mine yesterday at a used book store for $3. It's going into the firepit at 8:46 a.m. (EST), on Saturday, September 11, 2010. By lunchtime the coals should be low enough to grill some pork chops and pork ribs while the fat drips down into the ashes.

Similar events are planned throughout the U.S.A.

 

[KingMerv00]

It's been nice talking to you but it's time to go on ignore. Had you answered a question this wouldn't have happened.

I'm sorry you don't understand the law. Your loss. You almost learned something.

 

[Nanny Ogg]

Am I the only one who would go to a book burning to snitch one of the books to actually read it and see what the fuss is about?

Just call me Montag.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The people who will exploit this don't want it to be the responsibility of one crazy parson. They want it to be the collective responsibility of the West, so that they can get some kid to strap explosives to himself and blow up something - possibly the wrong kind of mosque. I doubt if there will be a fatwa. There will be riots, and people will die.

Exactly. It doesn't really matter if what he intends to do is lawful in the jurisdiction where he does it (well it affect him, but not the rest of us) and it doesn't matter what radical islamists who already hate the west think of it. What matters is the result among the majority of muslims who aren't crazed islamists; and that result will be to radicalise a whole lot of people and recruit them to the ranks of the crazies.

 

[bokonon]

I think book burning, flag burning, and effigy burning is stupid and childish. It's real-world trolling, done just to incite an emotional reaction, and should simply be ignored by everyone.