I saw this post on Europe@Lemmy.World: https://lemmy.world/post/2387220

I got me in a philosophical mood.

Is it okay to burn a Koran?

On one hand, a Koran, a Bible or anything else “sacred” literature is paper and ink. And burning them is just disposing of said book. Children are taught at young age not to get provocated by provocators. Adults should be able to live with this principle.

On the other hand, burning is not the main reason people get upset when sacred literature is burnt. The whole burning ordeal is (usually) a symbol for hate. Hate should not be tolerated, and therefore it is wrong to burn a sacred books. It is imporant to make hateful actions illegal to prevent hate from spreading. If hate is allowed, then we are possibly facing hate crimes and violent actions towards minorities.

Burning a sacred book is not always about hate. It can also be a symbolical protest. In sweden, a few weeks ago, Iraqi man burned a Koran. According to news I read at the time of said event, the man justified his actions as a protest against Iraqi government. He was kept prisoner in his homecountry and tortured during his imprisonment.

Iraq is a theocracy. Amputations and even death sentence are used as forms of punishment. People are not equal and theistic law is above other laws. The country does not follow UN’s declaration of human rights. These human rights are recognized all over the globe and should be held as standards for all.

If someone burns a sacred book to protest torture, amputations or death sentences, I think it is not morally wrong, but quite the contrary. Burning a book is a victimless crime. Forementioned actions of Iraqi government however are not.

Thoughts from an European atheist.

Im interested to hear your thoughts on this matter and hoping to understand this question from different perspectives.

  • Spzi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The use case which makes sense to me is desensitization.

    These book burnings exist, because some people of a group demand other people, who are not from their group, to follow the rules of that group. One such rule is to not burn that book.

    I think this demand is unjustified. I’m afraid obeying it confirms their position. One way to show the opposite is to break their rules, which do not apply to you, without doing harm to anyone.

    • Utsob Roy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Have you observed if this method of desensitization actually works or not?

      I practically live among them. The only thing ever worked is education. Punching a person repeatedly doesn’t make him punch-resistant. Building fortitude is where we should focus our limited time and energy.

      • Spzi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Have you observed if this method of desensitization actually works or not?

        Very good question. Not in this specific context, and not in transition. However I do notice that people tend to be more outspoken about their perceived rights if they feel this perception is supported by others.

        The only thing ever worked is education. Punching a person repeatedly doesn’t make him punch-resistant.

        You might be right.

        I want to point out that burning a “sacred” book (in this context) is not punching anybody. A punch is something physical, impossible to ignore. You cannot choose not to be punched when someone punches you.

        But becoming upset about a burnt book is a choice. There are many ways to process that information, many ways to react to it internally and externally.

        But yeah, the ability to reflect and possibly reframe probably does require some level of education.