News Quran Burning Cancelled: Publicity Stunt From The Start?

[Jack21222]

The ethos that prevails with Muslims is the same - rich or poor.

Excuse me, I know a few Muslims. They're middle-class Americans and I've never heard a WORD out of them about any religious outrage. You, like so many others in these threads, are implying that Muslims are a homogeneous group.

There's a reason why most of the outrage comes from poor countries. There's a reason why more Muslim extremists exist in post-war Iraq than there were in pre-war Iraq. There's a reason they arose in poor Afghanistan and not in the wealthy UAE.

Of course there will be outliers in either direction, but there are socio-economic reasons for religious extremism that have little to do with their actual religion.

I call your attention to 1100 CE Europe. The poor oppressed Christians were absolute barbarians, while the rich Muslims were the center of civilization. Both groups were using the same holy texts that they are using today. They haven't changed. What HAS changed is the relative prosperity levels of each group.

 

[Hepth]

Cultural or religious .. same, same .. It stills compels them to act in murderous ways.

You yourself are guilty now of one of the larger problems though; they're NOT the same. Pride-driven violent acts of revenge for "personal" transgressions is CONSIDERABLY MORE a cultural trait than a religious one. Brushing aside trends like this leads to a misunderstanding of the true problems we face, which is a cultural divide rather than a religious one. The problem is that those who currently terrorize do so in the name of their religion as it is much easier to assemble and gain support under that banner than a cultural one.

We suffer the same "problem" here in the US with the Republican/Tea parties using the Christianity banner to try to garner support as "American Pride" doesn't always work here. The goal is to try to convince people to believe your decisions and ideals are the right ones by exhibiting characteristics to make the public feel that they "Belong" to the cause through labels they have a strong connection to. Religion is perfect. Nationality is usually great too, but in this case its a smaller scale.

The REAL PROBLEM is actually not this tactic (it's actually quite useful politically and is really a smart strategy) but rather the public NOT REALIZING its use, which I guess is sort of the whole point of manipulation...

(I'm not ragging on Republicans here, I'm just using their use of rallying to personal labels as an example of a successful strategy)

Every Muslim I've spoken to concerning these conflicts are vehemently against using violence AT ALL. They despise how their religion is portrayed as the motivating factor for terrorist activities. It IS a peaceful religion, just as is Christianity.

If a group started killing all the palm readers/psychics/etc under the banner of Christianity citing Leviticus 20:27
"A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own heads. "
I doubt most Christians would support them nor would they condone the labeling of them as representing Christianity.

People need to stop grouping everyone together with "them"s and "they"s.

 

[Andy]

This reminds me of another thread, "the general public is scientifically illiterate" but i think this thread could be renamed "the scientific community is religiously illiterate" don't want to tar you all with the same brush but i haven't got time (battery power) to quote all of the idiots that seem to think the problem is with islam, the problem is with religious fundamentalists. Simples.

 

[arunma]

This reminds me of another thread, "the general public is scientifically illiterate" but i think this thread could be renamed "the scientific community is religiously illiterate" don't want to tar you all with the same brush but i haven't got time (battery power) to quote all of the idiots that seem to think the problem is with islam, the problem is with religious fundamentalists. Simples.

Well I consider myself to be fairly religiously literate (at least for a scientist), but I'd be interested to hear your comments on my post in the "The U.S. has gone soft" thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2875193&postcount=192

I do believe that there is a fundamental problem with Islam. Now having said that, I should temper it with two other points. First, I don't think that Islam is beyond hope. After all, Christianity used to be pretty violent as well, but had a reformation and largely moved past that. Secondly, I'll fully admit that it's harder to paint people with a broad brush when you actually get to know them. Most Muslims I know seem just as normal as everyone else, and it's difficult to point to your average American Muslim and say that he's a terrorist. Nonetheless, a religion with violent doctrines will have a bulk effect on its population, and I have to say that this effect doesn't look so pretty in the Muslim world right now.

 

[Andy]

What are these violent doctrines that you are talking about? The reason the islamic faith is perceived as being violent is because the media only focus on the lunatic fringe of hate preachers that interpret the quran in a way that suits their own views and believes.

What i really struggle to believe is that some people on this site are soo willing to brandish an entire faith with a stereotype. That is like me saying all americans are fat and stupid, all dutch people smoke drugs and sleep with prostitutes or all black people deal drugs and steal cars. Completely beyond me how some of these people can claim to be intelligent.

 

[Hepth]

What i really struggle to believe is that some people on this site are soo willing to brandish an entire faith with a stereotype. That is like me saying all americans are fat and stupid, all dutch people smoke drugs and sleep with prostitutes or all black people deal drugs and steal cars. Completely beyond me how some of these people can claim to be intelligent.

They only have to be intelligent enough to create an account on an internet forum... I didn't know that was a measure for brilliance in science :)

I feel like most if not all of the more-respected posters/mods/etc aren't doing what you're claiming, so please don't brandish an entire forum with your small experience sample... ;)

 

[Andy]

so please don't brandish an entire forum with your small experience sample... ;)

Been an on and off member of this site for many years and i would never brandish the entire forum like that, i used the word "some" as its an undefinable amount. It could be many or it could only be a few.

 

[WhoWee]

I don't know about many, but I agree that Muslims believe the quran is special in a way that others don't believe their 'holy books' are. Remember, that Muslims believe that every quran contains the literal words of their god... so burning it isn't just symbolic in the way that burning a flag or even a bible or vedic scripture would be.

I don't see that as justification for violence, but that "literal word of god" issue is at the center of a LOT of these issues between other religions and Islam in my opinion.

When it comes down to it, most Christians would be pissed if you burned bibles, but their attitude would generally be, "I can get one in any hotel room". There are also many version of the christian bible, so what's special to one may not be to all. I think this is a pretty complex issue, even at this relatively microscopic level.

Does anyone believe the burning of bibles would ever be a lead story? (yes, I'm referring to "Left Wing Media" behavior).

 

[Andy]

Depends on who was doing the burning, if it was fundamentalist muslims burning the bibles on the grounds that christianity is evil then yes.

 

[baywax]

Yah!

That's cool... it was publicity and a right wing advertisement that brought this idea of burning religious books into the media. All news is good news as far as advertising goes.

But, my Canadian buddies in Afturdistan don't need any more reasons to be blown to ****.

Personally I think the Taliwallabingbangs can build the pipeline all by themselves. If the women and children don't like the conditions for living under a Tallywally rule, they should get immediate refugee status and get the f out of there. Remember it was the Women who stopped the violence in Ireland by refusing to... you know... their men.

 

[OmCheeto]

Beep Beep Beep!

This just in.

Abe, Jesus, and Mo just IM'd me, and said they love you all.

ps. They also said that it was ok to burn the 3 books. A triumvirate of "duh's" went off; "Hello! They're all freakin online! JFGI!"

 

[Proton Soup]

Does anyone believe the burning of bibles would ever be a lead story? (yes, I'm referring to "Left Wing Media" behavior).

i don't know about leads, but it occasionally makes news. in israel, at least.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/orthodox-jewish-youths-burn-new-testaments-in-or-yehuda-1.246153

 

[nismaratwork]

Does anyone believe the burning of bibles would ever be a lead story? (yes, I'm referring to "Left Wing Media" behavior).

See what others have said, and please don't make this a "*.wing" media thread, please.

 

[alt]

You yourself are guilty now of one of the larger problems though; they're NOT the same. Pride-driven violent acts of revenge for "personal" transgressions is CONSIDERABLY MORE a cultural trait than a religious one. Brushing aside trends like this leads to a misunderstanding of the true problems we face, which is a cultural divide rather than a religious one. The problem is that those who currently terrorize do so in the name of their religion as it is much easier to assemble and gain support under that banner than a cultural one.

We suffer the same "problem" here in the US with the Republican/Tea parties using the Christianity banner to try to garner support as "American Pride" doesn't always work here. The goal is to try to convince people to believe your decisions and ideals are the right ones by exhibiting characteristics to make the public feel that they "Belong" to the cause through labels they have a strong connection to. Religion is perfect. Nationality is usually great too, but in this case its a smaller scale.

The REAL PROBLEM is actually not this tactic (it's actually quite useful politically and is really a smart strategy) but rather the public NOT REALIZING its use, which I guess is sort of the whole point of manipulation...

(I'm not ragging on Republicans here, I'm just using their use of rallying to personal labels as an example of a successful strategy)

Every Muslim I've spoken to concerning these conflicts are vehemently against using violence AT ALL. They despise how their religion is portrayed as the motivating factor for terrorist activities. It IS a peaceful religion, just as is Christianity.

If a group started killing all the palm readers/psychics/etc under the banner of Christianity citing Leviticus 20:27
"A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own heads. "
I doubt most Christians would support them nor would they condone the labeling of them as representing Christianity.

People need to stop grouping everyone together with "them"s and "they"s.

I don't disagree with most of what you say here. Please see my following post/s which hopefully, might clarify the extent of my limited views on this matter.

 

[alt]

Not even close in my view. If that's what you believe, it's going to take some HEAVY evidence. In my personal experience, muslims who are well-off and live in a stable environment drink and do other "little sins", with the belief that as long as you die accepting allah, you "win"... kind of like last rights and confession.

Your second stipulation that rich connected arabs organize and launch attacks is sophistry... poor and isolated ones won't have the MEANS! I don't see the ranks of terrorists filled with rich and clever muslims, just a minority that run 'em. In the case of the Taliban, that's not the case at all, because they're backed by Pakistan for strategic reasons. Sorry alt, you can't just reduce this to basics that don't exist.

Sophistry just ain't my thing, Nismar. Ignorance might be, but not sophistry.

I might add that you raised the rich or poor Muslim issue.

You also raised the 'Uganda / chopping people to bits' issue - I'm not sure why. Though it did remind me of a 60 Minutes article I saw a few years ago about canibalism there, which elicited my 'broil and eat them' response. You then said there was no such thing in Uganda. In fact, canibalism has been quite a problem there. So much so, that in 2009, their Parliament pased a bill in relation to it. See;

http://allafrica.com/stories/200904070181.html

And please don't take that as me saying that all Ugandans are canibals.

Anyhow, see my next post which hpoefully, clarifies all I wanted to say on the SUBJECT OF THIS THREAD.

 

[alt]

One way or another, sometimes one gets drawn into debates that go beyond what one intended. That may be the case here with me - and if so, the fault is mine.

I do not dislike Muslims. I have nothing against Muslims. Here is all I wanted to say on the subject of this thread - Quran Burning.

Righly or wrongly, it appears to me that Muslims hold their religion as more sacrosanct than what they feel others of other religions, should be entitled to hold theirs. Now this in itself, is fine so far - every religion may well do this, such being the nature of religion / Gods chosen / the Elect / everyone else is an infidel, etc.

Where I see the imbalance, is the reaction that Muslims feel is justified and that they are entitled to, when their religion is insulted by way of free speech on the world stage, and to some extent, the aquiescence to such an attitude, by others - non Muslims, such as some posters here.

A prime example is the 'piss christ' incident I mentioned in my post #43 in this thread.

The reaction by the Christian world, was indignation, condemnation, etc, but no violent upheaval - no bombings - no murder.

Now just reverse the situation - say a western artist depicted the prophet M, immersed in a jar of urine (let alone merely depicted him).

Just WHAT do you suppose would have been the result throughout the Muslim world ?

I see a huge imbalance here. And I suppose, even here, you might say they are entitled ..

To which I would reply that if they expect to be measured by western standards, and function within the western world, then they should do just that - function within a western world wherein one of the most important aspects of it is freedom of speech - as tawdry and offensive as it might on some occassions, turn out to be.

 

[nismaratwork]

Sophistry just ain't my thing, Nismar. Ignorance might be, but not sophistry.

I might add that you raised the rich or poor Muslim issue.

You also raised the 'Uganda / chopping people to bits' issue - I'm not sure why. Though it did remind me of a 60 Minutes article I saw a few years ago about canibalism there, which elicited my 'broil and eat them' response. You then said there was no such thing in Uganda. In fact, canibalism has been quite a problem there. So much so, that in 2009, their Parliament pased a bill in relation to it. See;

http://allafrica.com/stories/200904070181.html

And please don't take that as me saying that all Ugandans are canibals.

Anyhow, see my next post which hpoefully, clarifies all I wanted to say on the SUBJECT OF THIS THREAD.

OK... maybe I was unclear, the "chopping to bits" is a reference to mutilations and killing by Christian radicals in Uganda, and nothing relating to cannibalism! I'll concede the cannibalism point in terms of it existing, but it's nothing like what I was trying to talk about.

 

[rootX]

One way or another, sometimes one gets drawn into debates that go beyond what one intended. That may be the case here with me - and if so, the fault is mine.

I do not dislike Muslims. I have nothing against Muslims. Here is all I wanted to say on the subject of this thread - Quran Burning.

...
To which I would reply that if they expect to be measured by western standards, and function within the western world, then they should do just that - function within a western world wherein one of the most important aspects of it is freedom of speech - as tawdry and offensive as it might on some occassions, turn out to be.

It has been said many times that comparison between Christian and Muslims is apples and oranges comparison: different regions, different socio-economic conditions. In addition, it has been said many times that this conflict is not about burning Quarans or Bible. Americans interests/involvement in the Middle East is the problem; religions are not. Lastly, it has been pointed out many times that claims such as one you made are not coming from working knowledge of both religions but from ignorance and how media is portraying the Islamic religion/muslims.

 

[nismaratwork]

It has been said many times that comparison between Christian and Muslims is apples and oranges comparison: different regions, different socio-economic conditions. In addition, it has been said many times that this conflict is not about burning Quarans or Bible. Americans interests/involvement in the Middle East is the problem; religions are not. Lastly, it has been pointed out many times that claims such as one you made are not coming from working knowledge of both religions but from ignorance and how media is portraying the Islamic religion/muslims.

Whoa, don't go interjecting facts and objectivity into this emotional issue... you'll ruin the varying levels of prejudice and ignorance!

 

[CheckMate]

As a Muslim, I say Burn the Quran. It's the best way to dispose of it. Seriously, the Quran means Revelation. You can burn a piece of paper, I don't give a damn.

 

[nismaratwork]

As a Muslim, I say Burn the Quran. It's the best way to dispose of it. Seriously, the Quran means Revelation. You can burn a piece of paper, I don't give a damn.

I don't understand how your post is relevant to the issue being discussed.

 

[D H]

I don't understand how your post is relevant to the issue being discussed.

I take it as a voice of reason. I feel the same about people burning the US flag. Burning flags is, after all, the proper way to dispose of old, worn out flags. There is a specific ceremony for doing just that. That said, the ceremony does involve a certain amount of reverence and respect toward the flag. Those people who use the US flag in a different kind of flag burning ceremony certainly do have some feelings of reverence and respect toward the US. (Feelings of irreverence and disrespect, to be specific.)

Those US citizens who burn the flag against standard procedures may have some goofy ideas, but those goofy ideas are fully protected by the Constitution. The Constitution is all about protecting goofy ideas. Some of those goofy ideas turn out to be very good ideas later on. Those that burn the flag outside the US are in a way demonstrating the superiority of our way of thinking and our way of life.

 

[nismaratwork]

I take it as a voice of reason. I feel the same about people burning the US flag. Burning flags is, after all, the proper way to dispose of old, worn out flags. There is a specific ceremony for doing just that. That said, the ceremony does involve a certain amount of reverence and respect toward the flag. Those people who use the US flag in a different kind of flag burning ceremony certainly do have some feelings of reverence and respect toward the US. (Feelings of irreverence and disrespect, to be specific.)

Those US citizens who burn the flag against standard procedures may have some goofy ideas, but those goofy ideas are fully protected by the Constitution. The Constitution is all about protecting goofy ideas. Some of those goofy ideas turn out to be very good ideas later on. Those that burn the flag outside the US are in a way demonstrating the superiority of our way of thinking and our way of life.

Yeah, I agree with you, but I'm not sure that I take CheckMate at his word on this one. There are actual "handling" instructions IN the quran itself, which within Islam is supposed to be the exact word of god. I admit, disposal isn't addressed in it AFAIK, only storage, but this seems a bit cavalier if he's really muslim. I admit, I'd be thrilled if he's being honest, but one guy saying that burning the quran is, "the best way to dispose of it..." has nothing to do with a nutcase in florida burning it as a protest or whatever-the-hell that guy was thinking.

I think you can make an argument that as with ceremonial cremation, a culture could embrace the notion of burning their scriptures instead of dumping them in the trash, but that has no bearing on this attempt to gain publicity by a twit with a bad mustache. I have to say, even then I'm being generous, because the follow-up, "you can burn a piece of paper, I don't give a damn." suggests that burning isn't about the best way to dispose of anything. The whole comment raises my "BS-Ometer", even though it would be kind of thrilling to hear this sentiment echoed in the wider population.

So again, I ask: what relevance does his comment have, except to say that one person claiming to be of a particular faith is apathetic in regards to this issue?

 

[mheslep]

In Loveland, Colorado since September 11 a local art gallery funded by taxpayers has exhibited a http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/10/04/outrage-art-exhibit-depicting-jesus-sex-act-boosts-gallery-visits/".

Here's a brief recap on the immediate and declarative statements and actions not taken by the leadership of the US government to attempt to stop the lithograph exhibit in Loveland. Prior to the exhibit, US Secretary of Defense Gates did not http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20016023-503544.html"the exhibit as "completely contrary to our values."

Also interesting was the http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&...q=Chagoya&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=f0deb6c89471c3f9"I, but instead expressed "surprise" at the flap over the exhibit.

 

[Hepth]

But there's no fear of a violent response, nor is there a huge preexisting tension between artists and Christians; why would you expect great news coverage/national response. If Christians started pouring on death threats, bomb threats; then some extremists of the group actually kill someone/bomb something as Christians vs. art of this form, then yes: I think the news might be more concerned the next time it happens... This really isn't a "I dare you to do something" stunt, as there is no expected response other than local/semi-national news.

Apples and oranges.

Now perhaps, if a group of abortion doctors starting filming abortions and projecting them onto say, a public wall or something similar, inviting people to come watch; I believe there would be national attention and fear of retaliation. Agree?

 

[alt]

But there's no fear of a violent response, nor is there a huge preexisting tension between artists and Christians; why would you expect great news coverage/national response. If Christians started pouring on death threats, bomb threats; then some extremists of the group actually kill someone/bomb something as Christians vs. art of this form, then yes: I think the news might be more concerned the next time it happens... This really isn't a "I dare you to do something" stunt, as there is no expected response other than local/semi-national news.

Apples and oranges.

Now perhaps, if a group of abortion doctors starting filming abortions and projecting them onto say, a public wall or something similar, inviting people to come watch; I believe there would be national attention and fear of retaliation. Agree?

I'll stay out of your last paragraph, though, Yes, I agree with your first.

 

[Proton Soup]

But there's no fear of a violent response, nor is there a huge preexisting tension between artists and Christians; why would you expect great news coverage/national response. If Christians started pouring on death threats, bomb threats; then some extremists of the group actually kill someone/bomb something as Christians vs. art of this form, then yes: I think the news might be more concerned the next time it happens... This really isn't a "I dare you to do something" stunt, as there is no expected response other than local/semi-national news.

Apples and oranges.

Now perhaps, if a group of abortion doctors starting filming abortions and projecting them onto say, a public wall or something similar, inviting people to come watch; I believe there would be national attention and fear of retaliation. Agree?

so what you're saying is that the only thing that matters is public safety. there are no issues here of cultural tolerance, that's just a bunch of appeasement talk from the president et al.

i guess the question i'd have for you is: why ask for more appeasement from the historically appeasing? why not demand more tolerance from the historically violent?

 

[Hepth]

i guess the question i'd have for you is: why ask for more appeasement from the historically appeasing? why not demand more tolerance from the historically violent?

Because its easier? ;) And probably gets more results/less conflict. Its merely practicality. Sure we can ask terrorists to please stop threatening/killing those who offend them, or to not be offended so easily, or we can ask the people who offend them (though they have a right to do so) to please not offend them so much.

You don't leave your laptop on your lawn then get upset when someone steals it, blaming the police when they tell you "Don't be an idiot, lock up your laptop".

 

[Hepth]

so what you're saying is that the only thing that matters is public safety. there are no issues here of cultural tolerance, that's just a bunch of appeasement talk from the president et al.

Ah I see what you're saying here, that I'm claiming the issue is safety rather than respecting another's religion/culture. While I can only guess as to the WH's motives, my opinion would be yes, its a safety issue.

Sure, we should, and do, encourage tolerance of others' viewpoints and beliefs while defending their right to have those beliefs. I am in no way justifying a violent response to an offense; but neither am I sympathetic to those that go out of their way to offend as a demonstration of their rights. Both parties share responsibility if the intent was to offend.

 

[Proton Soup]

Ah I see what you're saying here, that I'm claiming the issue is safety rather than respecting another's religion/culture. While I can only guess as to the WH's motives, my opinion would be yes, its a safety issue.

Sure, we should, and do, encourage tolerance of others' viewpoints and beliefs while defending their right to have those beliefs. I am in no way justifying a violent response to an offense; but neither am I sympathetic to those that go out of their way to offend as a demonstration of their rights. Both parties share responsibility if the intent was to offend.

i guess what i would like to see is a little more integrity. I'm a bit weary of the appeasement, and the dishonesty. i think appeasement trades near-term safety for long-term insecurity.

i'd also disagree that it's simply a safety issue. i think it's more of a foreign relations issue. and oddly enough, i think that Obama (born to a muslim father and educated in muslim schools) is the single best diplomatic tool we have right now. and he couldn't have come along at a better time. I'm a bit baffled that more of the right doesn't get this.

 

[WhoWee]

I wonder if anyone would have a problem with a US Government funded artist burning a Quran - afterall THAT would be "Art" - certainly not a religious statement.

 

[drizzle]

Excuse me, I know a few Muslims. They're middle-class Americans and I've never heard a WORD out of them about any religious outrage. You, like so many others in these threads, are implying that Muslims are a homogeneous group.

There's a reason why most of the outrage comes from poor countries. There's a reason why more Muslim extremists exist in post-war Iraq than there were in pre-war Iraq. There's a reason they arose in poor Afghanistan and not in the wealthy UAE.

Of course there will be outliers in either direction, but there are socio-economic reasons for religious extremism that have little to do with their actual religion.

I call your attention to 1100 CE Europe. The poor oppressed Christians were absolute barbarians, while the rich Muslims were the center of civilization. Both groups were using the same holy texts that they are using today. They haven't changed. What HAS changed is the relative prosperity levels of each group.

Do you know that burning books was one of the contributing factors of the fall of their civilization!

 

[mheslep]

The above statements indicating Christian doctrines are little changed since 1100 CE are grossly wrong. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reformation" [/I] by the scholar B. Lewis.

Also many of the most radical Islamists leading AQ come from wealthy backgrounds: Bin Laden a multimillionaire, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zawahiri" an Egyptian doctor, the 911 hijacker pilots upper or middle class in Europe. Most of the Gitmo detainees picked up in Afghanistan or Iraq were not Afghani or Iraqi, but Arabs from the Middle East (not Palestine either).

 

[JaredJames]

It would appear that despite this guy standing down, some people did plan to regardless:

http://www.godhatesfags.com/fliers/20100910_WBC-to-Burn-the-Koran-Sept-11.pdf

(West Borough Baptist Church)

No one making a fuss of them?

 

[Hepth]

It would appear that despite this guy standing down, some people did plan to regardless:

http://www.godhatesfags.com/fliers/20100910_WBC-to-Burn-the-Koran-Sept-11.pdf

(West Borough Baptist Church)

No one making a fuss of them?

Well if the national/international news isn't reporting it then there's not much threat of widespread retaliation, and therefor no reason to report it.

 

[alt]

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/not-responsible-for-deaths-of-un-workers-koranburning-pastor/770691/

Not responsible for deaths of UN workers: Quran-burning pastor

I tend to agree. These people are just plain mad. No wonder there's such a movement afoot against radical Islam.

 

[Alfi]

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/not-responsible-for-deaths-of-un-workers-koranburning-pastor/770691/

Not responsible for deaths of UN workers: Quran-burning pastor

I tend to agree. These people are just plain mad. No wonder there's such a movement afoot against radical Islam.

these ones ..yes !

 

[alt]

these ones ..yes !

Yes, those ones. Surely you didn't think I meant all Muslim people ?

I resurrected this thread wanting to comment on the matters presently being discussed in the Book Burning thread, prior to seeing it.

But if you look back through this thread, I think I've made my views fairly clear as to which group of people I'm criticizing.

 

[Alfi]

Well if the national/international news isn't reporting it then there's not much threat of widespread retaliation, and therefor no reason to report it.

20/20 hind sight ?

 

[russ_watters]

I realize this is old, but...

I wonder if anyone would have a problem with a US Government funded artist burning a Quran - afterall THAT would be "Art" - certainly not a religious statement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

 

[alt]

I realize this is old, but... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

Yes, I referred to this much earlier inthis thread.

Piss ChristPiss Christ is a 1987 photograph by artist and photographer Andres Serrano. It depicts a small plastic crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist's urine. The piece was a winner of the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art's "Awards in the Visual Arts" competition,[1] which is sponsored in part by the National Endowment for the Arts, a United States Government agency that offers support and funding for artistic projects.

Sponsored by a US government agency no less. For equivalence, they may as well sponsor burning of the Koran.