Dozens arrested at Sweden riots sparked by planned Quran burnings

[313ghazi]

Are you OK with the denial of the Holy Trinity?
That would be Blasphemy in a Christian country.

Why should such Blasphemous behaviour be accepted?

Blasphemy laws would force incarceration of all religious people. All religious literature would have to be banned.
It is best avoided.


So when a Danish guy burns the Quran, it is Swedish islamophobia?

People are free to call Islam a false religion - that is thier right. When people publicly burn the Quran it is intended as an insult of the Muslim community. Insults cause anger and trigger responses.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

People are free to call Islam a false religion - that is thier right. When people publicly burn the Quran it is intended as an insult of the Muslim community. Insults cause anger and trigger responses.

People have the right to demonstrate against those that burn the Quran.
They do not have the right to commit violent acts.

 

[lightning F57]

Section 8 is about theft.

https://lagen.nu/1962:700

My bad chapter 16 section 8

A person who, in a statement or other communication that is disseminated, threatens or expresses contempt for a population group by allusion to race, colour, national or ethnic origin, religious belief, sexual orientation or transgender identity or expression is guilty of agitation against a population group and is sentenced to imprisonment for at most two years or, if the offence is minor, to a fine. If the offence is gross, the person is guilty of gross agitation against a population group and is sentenced to imprisonment for at least six months and at most four years. When assessing whether the offence is gross, particular consideration is given to whether the communication had particularly threatening or offensive content and was disseminated to a large number of people in a way that was liable to attract considerable attention. Act 2018:1744.

 

[Ssan]

So when a Danish guy burns the Quran, it is Swedish islamophobia?

Hate speech basically means inciting violence against a group. It does not include criticizing ideas.
If you write ”Kill the Muslims”, you will be prosecuted.
If you write that ”Islam is a backward religion” you will not be prosecuted.

Okay, and how is holocaust denial any thing more than criticizing a historical idea. When done in a university, one could argue it is purely an academic debate about historical details.

Okay, and how is holocaust denial any thing more than criticizing a historical idea. When done in a university, one could argue it is purely an academic debate about historical details.

Mind you I think holocaust denial is condemnable morally.

 

[lightning F57]

Europe is full of hypocrisy they defend freedom to Express when it suits them and against when it doesnt. Look at Macron, he put a libel case against a french citizen who put a board up about him being Hitler for what he was doing over covid. Sweden is the same politicians appease the far right for votes.

 

[Hakwa Nadro]

So when a Danish guy burns the Quran, it is Swedish islamophobia?

Hate speech basically means inciting violence against a group. It does not include criticizing ideas.
If you write ”Kill the Muslims”, you will be prosecuted.
If you write that ”Islam is a backward religion” you will not be prosecuted.

Don't forget that Danish guy wants to burn the Holy Quran in Sweden and Swedish law did not stop it, I think that qualifies it as Swedish Islamophobia. What really happened is (this is what I think) this guy exploited a loophole in the Swedish Law to get some political mileage. Swedes are generally tolerant people I've heard but maybe I am wrong cos I literally live in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Just a curious question what happens if someone tried to burn the french constitution in France or Swedish constitution in Sweden or the Ramayana in India? What would be the public or government reaction?

 

[Char]

There are two trends in Europe, the rise of the right and the re-Christianization.

Religious conflicts will become the norm in the future.

Neoliberalism has failed, and we must admit that diversity is not easy.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

My bad chapter 16 section 8

A person who, in a statement or other communication that is disseminated, threatens or expresses contempt for a population group by allusion to race, colour, national or ethnic origin, religious belief, sexual orientation or transgender identity or expression is guilty of agitation against a population group and is sentenced to imprisonment for at most two years or, if the offence is minor, to a fine. If the offence is gross, the person is guilty of gross agitation against a population group and is sentenced to imprisonment for at least six months and at most four years. When assessing whether the offence is gross, particular consideration is given to whether the communication had particularly threatening or offensive content and was disseminated to a large number of people in a way that was liable to attract considerable attention. Act 2018:1744.

Burning the Quran is an attack on ideas of Islam, and not on Muslims.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Don't forget that Danish guy wants to burn the Holy Quran in Sweden and Swedish law did not stop it, I think that qualifies it as Swedish Islamophobia. What really happened is (this is what I think) this guy exploited a loophole in the Swedish Law to get some political mileage. Swedes are generally tolerant people I've heard but maybe I am wrong cos I literally live in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Just a curious question what happens if someone tried to burn the french constitution in France or Swedish constitution in Sweden or the Ramayana in India? What would be the public or government reaction?

No, it just shows that Sweden does not restrict attacks on ideas. You can burn the Swedish flag without being punished. Does that mean that Sweden has Suedophobia?
Noone is really think Quran burning is a good idea but certainly supports the right for people to reject any political Ideas in non violent forms.
As I pointed out before, if Blasphemy laws were adopted in Sweden, anyone denying the Holy Trinity could be beheaded.

Okay, and how is holocaust denial any thing more than criticizing a historical idea. When done in a university, one could argue it is purely an academic debate about historical details.


Mind you I think holocaust denial is condemnable morally.

It is not criminal to deny the holocaust in Sweden.
in Germany it is criminal because they rather lock up assholes than to have an endless argument.
This simply means that Freedom of Expression is limited, and it is limited for a good cause.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Europe is full of hypocrisy they defend freedom to Express when it suits them and against when it doesnt. Look at Macron, he put a libel case against a french citizen who put a board up about him being Hitler for what he was doing over covid. Sweden is the same politicians appease the far right for votes.

Your failure to understand does not make Europe hypocritical. The purpose of Freedom of Expression is to allow bad policy to be criticized. Not to allow personal attacks purely to harm people.
In Sweden, you might end up being punished for libel even if you state a truth. This is if you publish something which has no public interest but is harming an individual.

 

[lightning F57]

Burning the Quran is an attack on ideas of Islam, and not on Muslims.

No its inciting violence per this statement.

A person who, in a statement or other communication that is disseminated, threatens or expresses contempt for a population group by allusion to race, colour, national or ethnic origin, religious belief, sexual orientation or transgender identity or expression is guilty of agitation against a population group and is sentenced to imprisonment for at most two years

Your failure to understand does not make Europe hypocritical. The purpose of Freedom of Expression is to allow bad policy to be criticized. Not to allow personal attacks purely to harm people.
In Sweden, you might end up being punished for libel even if you state a truth. This is if you publish something which has no public interest but is harming an individual.

Oh really, so can you deny the holocaust without repercussions? Please the freedom of expression you refer to is a smoke screen . Also that french citizen was expressing himself against what he saw as bad policy from Macron who he compared to Hitler, whether that is right wrong comparison I dont care but again it's the principle you cant Express freely.

Europe has no issue peddling Islamophobia if it brings their political leaders votes. By the way I dont support holocaust denial it's the principle I'm referring to, denying does not incite violence its distasteful and disrespectful.

 

[mulj]

People have the right to demonstrate against those that burn the Quran.
They do not have the right to commit violent acts.

they have when state violate their own laws and allow hate propagation against one religion as sweden did.

Burning the Quran is an attack on ideas of Islam, and not on Muslims.

burning your home is attack on idea of house made by bricks and concrete, not on you.

 

[yuba]

Muslims rioting is exactly what they want they want to brand all Muslims as a violent minority in their country and should not be allowed in,I'm a Sikh but i respect all holy books because they are dear to the people of that faith. I think peaceful protests would have been the way to go because the minority of Muslims who are rioting have fallen into the trap that the people who want to burn the Quran want to show Muslims as a violent minority .

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

No its inciting violence per this statement.

A person who, in a statement or other communication that is disseminated, threatens or expresses contempt for a population group by allusion to race, colour, national or ethnic origin, religious belief, sexual orientation or transgender identity or expression is guilty of agitation against a population group and is sentenced to imprisonment for at most two years


Oh really, so can you deny the holocaust without repercussions? Please the freedom of expression you refer to is a smoke screen . Also that french citizen was expressing himself against what he saw as bad policy from Macron who he compared to Hitler, whether that is right wrong comparison I dont care but again it's the principle you cant Express freely.

Europe has no issue peddling Islamophobia if it brings their political leaders votes. By the way I dont support holocaust denial it's the principle I'm referring to, denying does not incite violence its distasteful and disrespectful.

Burning the Quran is not inciting violence.
There are no laws against denying the holocaust.
That does not mean that there will not be repercussions.
You will simply be shunned by all decent people.

Comparing Macron to Hitler is a definite libel case.

Freedom of Expression is not without limits.
There is a reason to have Freedom of Expression, and the right to try to harm society is not one of them.
The right to criticize politics is however the core of Freedom of Expression.

they have when state violate their own laws and allow hate propagation against one religion as sweden did.



burning your home is attack on idea of house made by bricks and concrete, not on you.

Congratulations on supporting those that work to throw out Muslims from Europe.
Sweden allows criticism against all religions.
It does not allow attacks against people.

Fascists use violence to achieve their goals.

 

[Muhammed45]

Why don't the Swedish goons talk about the biggest hoax of human kind history, the Holocaust lie? It is not freedom of Expression or what?