• gapbetweenus@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Again there is no point in appeasing fundamentalist. They don’t want the finger or the hand, they want the whole state to run by their rules - they are not searching for a compromise. Sure, nobody sane is really in favor for burning books - but what is the point, they won’t be any happier with that and will work on the next thing that is offending their archaic views of the world.

      Full expression of thought is perfectly possible just by speaking, no book burning required for that.

      Where do you draw the line of what is considered acceptable form of expression?

      It’s not that I like, I would say - I even despise people burning books. But in my opinion, everyone has the right to do so - since in the end no direct harm is caused to anyone.

        • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          but all believing Muslims in the world,

          Than all believing Muslims are fundamentalists. But we both know that that’s not the case. Moderate Muslims per definition don’t give shit. Like moderate Christians don’t care if you burn a bible. Or I don’t care if you burn a biography of Darwin. Sure I will think you are a dumb person to avoid. But ultimately it’s up to you, not my business.

          Also where do you draw the line? Homosexuality and modern view of women rights is offensive to conservative Muslims. Therefore, I prefer to draw a line at actual direkt harm to other people. Burning books, dumb and provocative - but so is a good portion of art.