Cheap replaceable symbols is one thing, expensive symbols would seem to be going to far. I think the people who are so eager to attack other peoples symbols probably are the same sort of people who are attached to their own symbols. Maybe going after all the symbols might teach a lesson about attacking symbols. I will have to rethink the American flag burning thing that the anti-Vietnam war protesters did when I was a child. I was vaguely on the anti-war protesters side because the war lovers seemed stupid and hateful. But now in hindsight the flag burners also seem stupid and hateful. Flag burning was probably counterproductive. Flag burning had shock value and attracted attention but the war lovers just interpreted it as these ungrateful punk hippie kids hating them and hating America.
The biggest shock would be the burning of the $100 Bill. You are burning GODPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! You always talk much sense nirakar. Glad you are still here.
Burning a qur'an at this point would only anti-thematically underscore the international embarrassment that Muslims bring upon themselves by killing and wounding each another in anti-qur'an burning protests. What qur'an burning would achieve symbolically, the Muslims themselves prove in real life to the entire world. It's like sharks eating each other during a feeding frenzy, and it's very hard to believe that Islam is a peaceful religion when horrible acts like this happen here, during Hajjs, at Ayatollah Khomeini's funeral, honor killings, acid thrown in little girls' faces, etc. I mean, rhetorically, what possessed thousands upon thousands of Muslims to trample 1,426 fellow Muslims to death during Hajj in 1990?
Isn't burning a Koran a quasi-religious ceremony? Does burning the symbol of an idea destroy the idea itself? I would say not.
Would burning a child's comic destroy the idea of a comic. Its anarchy? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Burn the Beano
Whats an expensive symbol? All symbols are of the value assigned to them by the one who values them. If you don't believe that you can own land is there anything symbolic about property rights? If you don't believe in idols do stone sculptures have a value? If its not your country do you care that you are taking down "irreplaceable" historical monuments? The point is, if its symbolism that is the problem or the sanctity assigned to it by the people who revere them, what makes any symbol too sacred to destroy? For example, if we were to destroy the statue of the son of the Jain Tirthankar, what would anyone lose, except the random value attached to a pile of stones by superstition? What if one were to destroy the Statue of Liberty? What would anyone lose that could not be recreated?
Why would we want to? You will have to excuse me Sam. I am not into "crapping" on the sacred sites of others or burning any books. If you are, then yeah, good luck with that. I personally think no one should be allowed to climb it at all. I also think that you have not quite understood what I was saying in my previous post and are attributing things to me that I never said I agreed with.
Burning a Quran and banning a mosque near Ground Zero would be opposites - represent opposed, conflicting, mutually contradictory stances. As would desecrating someone else's sacred ground, church, etc, and burning a book or flag or whatever of one's own. - From one fairly important point of view, anyway.
I'd be interested to know what that point of view could be. As to a "book of one's own", Qurans are never sold, since no one owns the right to sell a scripture. In fact, if you ever want to purchase a Quran, you'll be told not the "price" of it, but the "hadiya" for it. Hadiya being the amount that is given for the effort of publication. Of course, that is another belief much like believing in "sacred" ground and other such conceptual symbols. What is "someone else's" church on public property? What is "someone else's" sacred ground in Australia? Do aboriginal Australians believe in private property? Do secular Australians believe in sacred ground? Isn't it always someone else's symbolism that is meaningless to oneself?
The freedom of expression and action one. The one from which community service is a chosen and voluntary sacrifice (military service, etc), and one's home is one's castle, and expressions of one's opinions are not in themselves violations of others' rights or privileges, and so forth. Fundies in general have a hard time comprehending it, I've noticed. In the US, various publishing houses sell copies of the Quran openly and frequently. Any individual willing to do the work can make and sell one themselves - there is no copyright on the book, it is in the public domain.
And what if you don't believe in all this? What if foreigners come in, invade, occupy and erase all that is sacred to the people living there? For example what if you erase a 1500 year old "sacred" [haha] site to build a Sam's club over it? Whats the price of such "sanctity"? Do you? Does this mean those who "buy" the book, own the rights to the scriptures?
al-Kaaba, in Mecca was a pagan shrine that predated Islam by hundreds of years. Mohammed himself, after his army's conquest of Mecca in 630, destroyed hundreds of idols, proclaiming the truth of his new religion, You mean like in Afghanistan, first you wipe out the Bhuddist and then this? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Muammar Qaddafi, the ruler of Libya, converted 78 synagogues into mosques in the 1970s.[3] In 1975, the Great Synagogue of Oran was confiscated by the Algerian government and similarly transformed Masjid Qubat al-Sakhra, Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! On the Jewish Temple Mount. Umayyad Mosque, was converted from a church dedicated to John the Baptist in 705 Hagia Sophia in Istanbul was a thousand year-old Christian church before being transformed into a mosque following the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453. Great Mosque, or Mezquita, of Cordoba was itself a Visigoth Church that was converted and rebuilt as a mosque following Muslim conquest in 784 http://www.hudson-ny.org/1496/mosques-on-sacred-sites-of-defeated-enemies
Technically speaking, it should say "suggested price" and the one who is suggesting it should not reject any counter offer made.
ahh nuance so impact is dependent on the context we situate the desecration in both time and space and assign the perps a particular identity lets compare "people" burning pics of obama at ground zero with the kkk hanging obama in effigy in the deep south how about some muslims at a temple in india crapping on krishna?
Muslims should not force their reverence for the qur'an on non-Muslims. It's a different situation when non-Muslims go into Islamic countries, and I would certainly respect the laws in customs of any land I live in, but not half way around the world in a totally different country on a totally different continent. What if someone worshiped ants, and they tried to prevent everyone in the world from stepping on ants?
and how about the most egregious example of them all? frikkin sam crapping on the saintly gautama and buddhism in sciforums? off with her bloody head i say! sacrilege!
Then you don't "believe in" the freedom of expression/action etc point of view. You have plenty of company - it's always been a hard sell. Then we have yet another instance of a familiar historical event to occupy chapters 901 and 902 of our records. There are no "rights to the scriptures" in the US - they are in the public domain. The person who bought the book (no quotes - one can actually buy a printed and bound copy of the Quran, in the US) owns the physical object and the copy of the text printed therein.
My qur'an is copyrighted. Published in Riyadh, but printed in the Netherlands. Christian scriptures are copyrighted in the US.
