Burn a Quran day

[Puppycow]

PZ Myers' take

Quote:

So I'm looking at this recent episode with Terry Jones — a fellow I don't like at all, and I think he's a fanatical goofball — and I see that the serious problem here isn't Jones at all…it's all the lunatics who are insisting that burning the Koran is a major international catastrophe.

It's just a frackin' book, people.

[Infoexcavator]

Originally Posted by Puppycow

PZ Myers' take

He sounds like an anti-obama tea party racist to me!

[Emperor_Gestahl]

Trolls like this are probably going to start taking a front seat in American political discourse.. We're letting them get their foot in the door here, the result isn't hard to guess. The political equivalent of biting the head off a bat will now make you a star.

[eerok]

Originally Posted by Emperor_Gestahl

Trolls like this are probably going to start taking a front seat in American political discourse.. We're letting them get their foot in the door here, the result isn't hard to guess. The political equivalent of biting the head off a bat will now make you a star.

News is media, media is entertainment, entertainment is a commodity, and drama sells. Welcome to the American political landscape, where every fringe nutbar is guaranteed a national soapbox to froth from. The stupider the better.

[DC]

oh dear, that crazy nutjob is now all over the media. also here.

in another video he talks about bringing back Germany to Jesus.

wasn't it Jesus that teached the nonsense of loving your enemy?

Religions are so extremely laughable.

stupid whorshipping of non existing creatuers and not following their own rules.

[erlando]

Drawing Mohammad to demonstrate free speech is one thing. Burning a Quran just to be a dick is another thing altogether.

Best thing about this is that the islamic extremists will probably forget about the danish cartoons...

Good luck with the death threats and attacks on your life, Mr. Jones.

[westprog]

Originally Posted by Olowkow

I guess it's my reading comprehension again acting up, but I have no earthly idea what that means.

Free speech is a simple enough concept, but sometimes people get confused. However, if you don't think that asking someone to not burn a Koran is breaching his rights to free speech, then you think 9/11 is an inside job. Or something like that.

[westprog]

Originally Posted by Puppycow

PZ Myers' take

Myers has the same attitude as he had previously. This thing has no value to me, therefore it has no value. The only thing that matters is the value that I put on it. People who think differently to me are wrong.

So he's happy to brush aside the consequences of the book burning (one dead so far, more to come - and that's before any Korans have been burned). He's also deliberately trying to characterise the people who are pointing out the consequences as being in some way anti free speech - letting the side down. He's claiming that he's being forced to show respect to things he doesn't respect. That's not true. He, and the crazy Christian, had to go out of their way to find objects sacred to someone else to show their contempt for those people. Korans and wafers weren't being paraded in the street.

It might be "just a book" to Myers. It's clearly not to other people. Some people value a tattered old paperback because it's the only thing they have belonging to their grandfather. Maybe it has a signature from a famous writer. In any case, no person's valuation is more valid than anyone else's.

The fact that Myers is an atheist who despises all religious belief equally, while the pastor is a Christian who just hates Islam, doesn't mean that they aren't guilty of exactly the same arrogance and lack of empathy to people who happen to think differently to them.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by westprog

Myers has the same attitude as he had previously. This thing has no value to me, therefore it has no value. The only thing that matters is the value that I put on it. People who think differently to me are wrong.

So he's happy to brush aside the consequences of the book burning (one dead so far, more to come - and that's before any Korans have been burned). He's also deliberately trying to characterise the people who are pointing out the consequences as being in some way anti free speech - letting the side down. He's claiming that he's being forced to show respect to things he doesn't respect. That's not true. He, and the crazy Christian, had to go out of their way to find objects sacred to someone else to show their contempt for those people. Korans and wafers weren't being paraded in the street.

It might be "just a book" to Myers. It's clearly not to other people. Some people value a tattered old paperback because it's the only thing they have belonging to their grandfather. Maybe it has a signature from a famous writer. In any case, no person's valuation is more valid than anyone else's.

The fact that Myers is an atheist who despises all religious belief equally, while the pastor is a Christian who just hates Islam, doesn't mean that they aren't guilty of exactly the same arrogance and lack of empathy to people who happen to think differently to them.

I have not read this entire thread, but I have followed the incident and read PZ Myers' blog, and you are wrong.

Myers' take is similar or perhaps identical to mine, and his blog is fairly clear on it:

Jones is being an insensitive boob. His insensitive boobery is not wrong on the same level as the Islamic extremist threats in response are wrong. Nor is his boobery wrong on the same level as the Western condemnations of his boobery insofar as those condemnations do not condemn the extremism more.

[Quinn]

I too an with PZ on this one. If his little stunt was treated merely as the childish, attention-whoring outburst that it is, then there would be no risk of it endangering US troops in the Middle East, because no one there would even have heard about it.

In a sane world, "Idiot hick from Florida acts like idiot hick from Florida" would not be an international headline.

[westprog]

Originally Posted by Garrette

I have not read this entire thread, but I have followed the incident and read PZ Myers' blog, and you are wrong.

Myers' take is similar or perhaps identical to mine, and his blog is fairly clear on it:

Jones is being an insensitive boob. His insensitive boobery is not wrong on the same level as the Islamic extremist threats in response are wrong. Nor is his boobery wrong on the same level as the Western condemnations of his boobery insofar as those condemnations do not condemn the extremism more.

I fail to see how Jones can be an insensitive boob and have Myers be sensitive. Jones is reacting to the death of three thousand people. Myers was reacting to a student being shoved. Both reactions are fairly disgusting - but at least Jones had something to get upset about. Myers had to force his indignation in order to get offensive.

[bokonon]

Originally Posted by Emperor_Gestahl

Trolls like this are probably going to start taking a front seat in American political discourse.. We're letting them get their foot in the door here, the result isn't hard to guess. The political equivalent of biting the head off a bat will now make you a star.

I think interest in this sort of stunt will be self-limiting. How much outrage do Americans manage these days over flag burnings in Pakistan?

Originally Posted by erlando

Drawing Mohammad to demonstrate free speech is one thing. Burning a Quran just to be a dick is another thing altogether.

No, I think they're the same thing.

Originally Posted by westprog

The fact that Myers is an atheist who despises all religious belief equally, while the pastor is a Christian who just hates Islam, doesn't mean that they aren't guilty of exactly the same arrogance and lack of empathy to people who happen to think differently to them.

Yes, they're a small-scale version of the Taliban who blasted the Buddhist statues. The Taliban's act was different in kind as well as degree -- they were destroying one-of-a-kind cultural relics rather than mass-produced cultural relics -- but the motive in all cases is to show contempt.

Originally Posted by westprog

So he's happy to brush aside the consequences of the book burning (one dead so far, more to come - and that's before any Korans have been burned).

I think freedom of speech is important enough to endure consequences such as this. It sucks that supporting freedom of speech sometimes means letting asshats have a soapbox, but the asshats on the soapbox aren't the ones killing people. Much as I disapprove of the asshats' stunts, if people die, the responsibility for those deaths lies with the killers.

[KingMerv00]

Originally Posted by westprog

I fail to see how Jones can be an insensitive boob and have Myers be sensitive.

Heh, I've never heard anyone (atheist or not) describe Myers as "sensitive". He isn't.

[Drewbot]

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

What's nutty about being willing to kill or die to preserve your rights?

That's my point.

[Schrodinger's Cat]

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Coverage of Koran Case Stirs Questions on Media Role



They're feeding the troll.

This really is such a good point. Why did the media even give this guy the time of day? He leads a teeny tiny group of people who have (and I say this speaking as someone who lived in Gainesville, Fla for 5 years) zero influence in even the town the live in, nevermind on a broader scale.

It reminds me a bit of the South Park situation. This year, they depicted a bear who they said was Mohammed in a bear suit, the media made a story out of it, and it became a huge issue. Yet a few years ago they actually depicted Mohammed as Mohammed, and no one cared, because the only people who knew it even happened were people who watch South Park as opposed to the whole world.

[Drewbot]

I love the idea that burning a Koran will incite the 'non-radical' muslims.

Someone who decides to kill people, because they burned a book, is a radical.

______________

Why are the conservative talk-show hosts against the reverend Jones burning the book?
Weren't they the same people who said "If you negotiate with terrorists, and give in to their threats, you encourage more threats." Won't the terrorists now say, We will kill people, if you don't let the IMAM build his mosque"?

Shouldn't they be defending Jones' freedom of speech as voraciously as they were defending the citizens speaking out against the mosque's freedom of speech?

I think Sean Hannity is completely hypocritical on this issue.

[Aepervius]

Originally Posted by westprog

And barbecues? Suppose someone was having a barbecue in his back garden, and used torn up papers to light it? Would that cause a public announcement?

Yep which is why it is forbidden to light barbecue with paper, and small lightly compacted briquette are sold for this.

Naturally they don't check your barbecue, but if an accident happen, they will fall like a 10 ton weight on you, and likely you would be found responsible directly.

[Aepervius]

Originally Posted by Piscivore

I agree. To sum up:

Burning a koran = One has a right to, but it's a dick move.

Threatening to burn a koran unless the mosque is moved = Terrorism

Making people believe that a violent reprisals will follow burning of koran = Terrorism

Not burning koran because of fear of reprisals / not building mosque because of threats to burn koran = Spinelessness and letting the terrorists win.

Burning terrorists = Awesome.

A very strong simplification, and an exageration, (I don't think the people warned of violent reprisal in intention to incite terror and not burn the koran, i think they warned that some idiot on which they have no control could do it). Still a nice summary.

[Skeptic]

Quote:

The fact that Myers is an atheist who despises all religious belief equally, while the pastor is a Christian who just hates Islam, doesn't mean that they aren't guilty of exactly the same arrogance and lack of empathy to people who happen to think differently to them.

I have empathy towards those who are insulted by this idiot's Koran burning, although I would advise them to ignore it (since reacting would just make the idiot satisfied). I would have empathy with them if they sent outraged letters to newspapers protesting this act or, for that matter, would have some empathy if they burned the bible in return (although this would certainly make them as low as the idiot pastor). But my empathy stops the moment people threaten to kill other people because of such an act.

[Skeptic]

Originally Posted by Piscivore

I agree. To sum up:

Threatening to burn a koran unless the mosque is moved = Terrorism

No. Threatening to kill someone unless the mosque is moved is terrorism. Threatening to burn the Koran unless the mosque is moved is just being a dick, a bit like the "threat" to open a bar next door. No disagreement with the rest of what you said.

[Moon-Spinner]

Well, if Pastor Jones or the Westboro Baptists don't get enough publicity, there's always THIS GUY

[Craig4]

A lot of believers in the death cult that is Christianity want to see a cataclysmic war with Muslims. They believe the Book of Revelations is not only a true description of the end of the world but want to help it along. His deluded intent may be to inflame the war for the purpose of bringing about this silly "second coming" thingy. He thinks a lot of himself if he believes he's going to start a war that will lead to a battle of annihilation outside Jerusalem. If that is his intent he doesn't strike me as sophisticated enough to have that sort of impact.

[FireGarden]

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2..._fire_vs_s.php

Originally Posted by PZ MYers

And to suggest that some guy burning a book in a remote land will incite more anti-American sentiment is absurd. We've got drones buzzing over Iraq and Afghanistan killing people with a push of a button; we've got an armed force occupying those countries; we have bombed their infrastructure into rubble. We've killed hundreds of thousands of Muslims. And now we're to believe that their love of the West will be suddenly devastated by a video of paper burning on youtube? Get a grip, man.

So I can see where he's coming from. However... There are times when people lose their temper over something trivial while, in fact, it's something else which really bothers them.

So, I think it was important for Obama and Clinton to voice their disapproval. Especially if asked.

I also disagreed with PZ when he desecrated the wafer. There was a thread on it at the time.

Originally Posted by Moon-Spinner

Well, this should come as no surprise to anyone, but the Westboro Baptists have "Picked up the Torch", so to speak...

Westboro Link

Why do I get "Westboro" and "Landover" mixed up? They have hardly any letters in common.

[jayh]

Originally Posted by Towlie

Again, he was asked not to go through with it. They didn't infringe on his right to free speech anymore that I infringed on yours by hinting that you should learn that the phrase "a lot" is two words.

While you are correct, I can only imagine how people here would have reacted had Gates 'asked' Free Inquiry or other publications not to print the cartoons. For that matter the reaction to the the Danish government officials who apologized for the cartoons.

Technically it's not a constitutional violation (though it might be 'chilling effect'), but they simply don't belong here supporting cowtowing to these violent idiots.

I'm completely with PZ on this

[Moon-Spinner]

Also fanning the flames of discontent is THIS EVENT

It looks like it's shaping up to be a hot time tomorrow!

[Marquis de Carabas]

Don't forget Burn LOTR Day.

[Checkmite]

Originally Posted by erlando

Drawing Mohammad to demonstrate free speech is one thing. Burning a Quran just to be a dick is another thing altogether.

Not in a constitutional sense.

[lupus_in_fabula]

I think this deserves another round:

Originally Posted by Drewbot

I love the idea that burning a Koran will incite the 'non-radical' muslims.

Someone who decides to kill people, because they burned a book, is a radical.

I find this to be an extremely important observation. If a moderate Muslim somehow turns into an extremist because an idiot congregation in Florida is burning the Koran, then it's just pathetic (perhaps even culturally pathetic?).

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by westprog

I fail to see how Jones can be an insensitive boob and have Myers be sensitive.

I never said Myers is sensitive, mainly because I don't think he is, nor do I think it is relevant. What else I did not say because--though true--it is irrelevant, is that Jones is more than an insensitive boob. He is an ignorant bigoted narcissist with a past that indicates his motives are far from holy and far closer to self-aggrandizing and self-enriching. It is that part which distinguishes him from Myers. Oh, and the fact that Myers doesn't burn books for disingenuous reasons.

Originally Posted by westprog

Jones is reacting to the death of three thousand people.

1. No. Jones is making another in a series of attempts to garner attention. This one has worked.

2. Even if I am wrong and Jones' motives are pure, the action is still the action of an ass and could predictably have the outcome it has had, an outcome by the by which has done nothing to honor the dead nor make a recurrence less likely.

Originally Posted by westprog

Myers was reacting to a student being shoved.

And in a fashion appropriate to the offense and appropriate to the desired response.

Originally Posted by westprog

Both reactions are fairly disgusting - but at least Jones had something to get upset about. Myers had to force his indignation in order to get offensive.

Nope.

[Emperor_Gestahl]

Originally Posted by bokonon

I think interest in this sort of stunt will be self-limiting. How much outrage do Americans manage these days over flag burnings in Pakistan?

If Quran burnings were as common and ignored here as flag burnings are in Pakistan you'd be right, but much like the anti-mosque frenzy this is unfortunately "big news" and will end up getting people killed.

[Marquis de Carabas]

So we just need more common Quran burnings?

We should change it from "Burn a Quran Day" to "Burn a Quran a Day"!

[westprog]

Originally Posted by bokonon

I think freedom of speech is important enough to endure consequences such as this. It sucks that supporting freedom of speech sometimes means letting asshats have a soapbox, but the asshats on the soapbox aren't the ones killing people. Much as I disapprove of the asshats' stunts, if people die, the responsibility for those deaths lies with the killers.

And as always in these discussions there's a massive difference between "You should not say that" and "You should not be allowed to say that". Freedom of speech includes the right to say "SHUT UP!".

[Skeptic]

Originally Posted by westprog

And as always in these discussions there's a massive difference between "You should not say that" and "You should not be allowed to say that". Freedom of speech includes the right to say "SHUT UP!".

It includes the right to tell someone to shut up. It doesn't include the right to force someone to shut up.

[Almo]

Originally Posted by bobcarp

So you think the burning will cause no repercussions for us? If it was a matter of just offending them, then go ahead, burn baby burn. But if it is going to cause Muslims, both radical and non radical, to seek vengeance by blowing up a building, then wouldn’t it be better to just not do it?

If having our troops on land Islam claims is causing them to blow up buildings, wouldn't it be better to just not do it? Whenever this argument is used, the answer is that "we don't negotiate with terrorists."

[Emperor_Gestahl]

Originally Posted by Marquis de Carabas

So we just need more common Quran burnings?

We should change it from "Burn a Quran Day" to "Burn a Quran a Day"!

It would actually help, the news would lose interest fast.

[Moon-Spinner]

Pastor Jones has become less relevant by this time. The Muslims that are shouting and protesting and threatening violence (as though that's anything new) say the damage is already done, even if Pastor Jones doesn't go through with it.

At this time, there are plenty of other people that are going to have their own Quran Burning ceremonies, some that I've already linked to, and I'm guessing many that haven't made the news yet, but whether or not they get any publicity, I'm sure they will all have videos on Youtube by Sunday.

[westprog]

Originally Posted by Garrette

I never said Myers is sensitive, mainly because I don't think he is, nor do I think it is relevant. What else I did not say because--though true--it is irrelevant, is that Jones is more than an insensitive boob. He is an ignorant bigoted narcissist with a past that indicates his motives are far from holy and far closer to self-aggrandizing and self-enriching. It is that part which distinguishes him from Myers. Oh, and the fact that Myers doesn't burn books for disingenuous reasons.




1. No. Jones is making another in a series of attempts to garner attention. This one has worked.

2. Even if I am wrong and Jones' motives are pure, the action is still the action of an ass and could predictably have the outcome it has had, an outcome by the by which has done nothing to honor the dead nor make a recurrence less likely.


And in a fashion appropriate to the offense and appropriate to the desired response.


Nope.

The motives, whether proclaimed or assumed, are the same for the two of them. They think that the beliefs of other people don't matter, so they feel entitled to upset them to make a point.

Myers claimed that it was the over-reaction that made what he did OK. Jones is relying on a bigger over-reaction (i.e. dead soldiers being shipped home) which according to Myers' logic, makes his actions more justifiable. Myers claimed that it was the death threats that meant he was right all along. If that's the case, then Jones is just as right - more so, because the death threats are real in his case, and will be acted upon.

[westprog]

Originally Posted by Skeptic

It includes the right to tell someone to shut up. It doesn't include the right to force someone to shut up.

I think that's a paraphrase of what I just said.

[Checkmite]

The irony of this situation is almost humorous. Jones calls Muslims a bunch of violent reactionary killers and gets called a hateful bigot for doing so; and yet here people are, hollering for him to not go ahead with his publicity stunt literally because Muslims might kill people over it.

And it gets even better. The ground zero mosque is supposed to be a matter of the right of the landowners to build what they want trumping hurt feelings of the 9/11 families. Yet somehow this pastor's right to free expression should play second fiddle to the hurt feelings it would cause. Then we say 'yeah yeah, freedom of speech yada yada, but it's still wrong because Jones is doing it just to be a dick', forgetting that one argument of the anti-mosque crowd is 'freedom of religion yada yada, but it's still wrong because they're just building it in this spot to be dicks.' Why people in this forum are actively taking sides in this holy-war-by-proxy is beyond me.

[noreligion]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

The irony of this situation is almost humorous. Jones calls Muslims a bunch of violent reactionary killers and gets called a hateful bigot for doing so; and yet here people are, hollering for him to not go ahead with his publicity stunt literally because Muslims might kill people over it.

And it gets even better. The ground zero mosque is supposed to be a matter of the right of the landowners to build what they want trumping hurt feelings of the 9/11 families. Yet somehow this pastor's right to free expression should play second fiddle to the hurt feelings it would cause. Then we say 'yeah yeah, freedom of speech yada yada, but it's still wrong because Jones is doing it just to be a dick', forgetting that one argument of the anti-mosque crowd is 'freedom of religion yada yada, but it's still wrong because they're just building it in this spot to be dicks.' Why people in this forum are actively taking sides in this holy-war-by-proxy is beyond me.

I'm still waiting for those who were screaming free speech to explain how this isn't a breach of peace and possibly an incitement to riot. Seems they were so quick to scream that this is freedom of speech but now they became strangely silent. Wonder why that is?