Burning the Koran

[Shazam]

Feudal Europe was feudal.

What you understand as rule of law didn't exist back then.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Feudal Europe was feudal.

What you understand as rule of law didn't exist back then.

Expand, please.

The rule of just law is an idea in political regimes that goes all the way back to Plato. If you mean, civil law as discussed by Locke, then yes, you would be right.

[Shazam]

When was the last time you defended your property against invaders?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Shazam

When was the last time you defended your property against invaders?

That makes absolutely no sense. I might not need to throw on my chainmail, but property rights are still, in effect, backed by the coercive power of the state.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by peter12

That makes absolutely no sense. I might not need to throw on my chainmail, but property rights are still, in effect, backed by the coercive power of the state.

Do you mean now or back then? Although we may complain about the capriciousness of our governments, fact is it's nothing compared the arbitrary whims of a king.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Do you mean now or back then? Although we may complain about the capriciousness of our governments, fact is it's nothing compared the arbitrary whims of a king.

I really don't understand what you are talking about. There were checks and balances upon the will of the monarch. In fact, you could argue that governments have far more control over the everyday public and private lives of citizen now than they ever have.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by peter12

I really don't understand what you are talking about. There were checks and balances upon the will of the monarch. In fact, you could argue that governments have far more control over the everyday public and private lives of citizen now than they ever have.

In feudal times? I realize there were rights charters back then, but classes of people did exist.

You're not seriously trying to assert that people actually had it better back then, are you?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Shazam

In feudal times? I realize there were rights charters back then, but classes of people did exist.

You're not seriously trying to assert that people actually had it better back then, are you?

A) That was my point all along. The rule of law isn't some brand-spanking new modern innovation. Heck, the 10 Commandments and the Hammurabi Code are two examples of publicly known codes of law that applied to everyone.

B) In some ways, they probably did.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I find this situation to be very simular to the ground zero mosque one. Both actions are offensive to most people and both actions are protected by the constitution. In this case the local government refused to issue a permit in hopes presumably to stop it. In the mosque's case the permits were fast tracked.

Asinine.

The ease with which the far right has instigated controversy is appalling. "The President says he is not a Muslim and I take him at his word" has been extremely effective at spreading fear and mistrust (which is absolutely it's intent, Republican leaders all answer that question verbatim).
Photon trounced this same brand of poppycock as soon as the thread started, but it continues unabated.

Torching the Qur'an is being justified by vilifying Islam? Revolting.

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by peter12

A) That was my point all along. The rule of law isn't some brand-spanking new modern innovation. Heck, the 10 Commandments and the Hammurabi Code are two examples of publicly known codes of law that applied to everyone.

B) In some ways, they probably did.

Ok Peter I have to call you on this one. Which ways do you think people were better off in feudal times?

Not looking for a fight just your opinion

[peter12]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

Ok Peter I have to call you on this one. Which ways do you think people were better off in feudal times?

Not looking for a fight just your opinion

Not feudal times or necessarily any times. I just don't believe in the absolute progress of humanity. So certainly people "back then" weren't as miserable as moderns would like to believe. We're pretty miserable now by any standards anyway, rates of anxiety and depression are soaring.

Also, you consider the degree to which autocratic bureaucracies and governors interfere in our daily lives. We are not at all autonomous, much less so than say a Greek citizen living in Athens 2300 years ago.

[SeeBass]

I wonder if there is some legal loophole that could be used to stop the Quran burning.

Maybe in the context of publlic safety or national security. It could be tied up in court for years.
But I would assume that may also cause more harm than good too.

I really hope the White House does not call this guy to get him to stop. I feel that it would be like negotiating with terrorists, you just shouldn't go down that road.

[photon]

I'm against book burnings in general, regardless of the book, but as distasteful as I think the act is I don't think they should be restricted from doing it as long as they comply with laws and such.

[SeeBass]

I certainly wouldn't feel too bad if the retaliation is upon that church.

If he is so carefree about others safety I could care less about his.

[Finny61]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

I wonder if there is some legal loophole that could be used to stop the Quran burning.

Maybe in the context of publlic safety or national security. It could be tied up in court for years.
But I would assume that may also cause more harm than good too.

I really hope the White House does not call this guy to get him to stop. I feel that it would be like negotiating with terrorists, you just shouldn't go down that road.

The only course of action is for those in authoritative positions to denounce the act which is what is happening. Obama, Harper, etc. I think if they didn't say anything then it comes off as silent support which is not the case at all.

[Burninator]

One of the things that upset me last night when I was watching the interviews was what the pastor said in response to the general of military in Afghanistan. The general said it could cause attacks against the troops. The pastor says this:

"We understand the general's concerns, we are taking those into consideration," Jones was quoted saying. "We feel it's maybe the right time for America to stand up. How long are we going to bow down? How long are we going to be controlled by the terrorists, by radical Islam?"

Well that is sure easy to say when you are thousands of miles away. Coward.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Even if Jones fails to follow through, I reckon he'll have spurred on a spate of copycats.

[jayswin]

Man, when i read Peter12's posts, I feel like I'm reading directly from a textbook.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Thor

I hear this a lot when discussing these matters, it usually brings out the racism or intolerance card.

Its just the truth, the way Islam went from a beacon of science, literature, the arts and now is in a dark ages of sorts.

I'm not accusing you of anything of the sort, I'm just trying to understand how you can lump Muslims countries as diverse as Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, UAE, KSA, Iraq, Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey, etc. into a a group you refer to as 'Islam' and ignore their cultures and achievements in business/economic growth, etc and claim the Islamic world is stuck in the dark ages.

Undoubtedly there are far too many examples of backwards thinking in the Islamic world, including some of the countries in this list but the point I've been trying to make is that it is not a homogeneous group as many seem to suggest it is.

Often the argument seems to be that those Muslim countries that are somewhat more progressive or economically successful don't 'count' as being part of Islam, only the backwards nations do.

[algernon]

If this guy follows through with his Koran BBQ, could he be implicit in possible hate crimes committed because of his rally?
Was the Rwandan genocide-inciter convicted of hate crimes for his radio speeches?