• Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    When a group of people considers a symbol to be special/beloved, it’s bad when someone else destroys that symbol in a performative way. Very often it comes from a place of hate, and it’s done to try and incite a reaction. This would include actions such as vandalizing pride flags, places of worship, places where a group tends to gather, etc.

    We don’t need any more of any of that.

    This is also different from having good faith discussions about the issues. Having discussions is actually productive, holding burning events does the opposite


    As for the UN side, here are some direct links

    https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147626

    https://unric.org/en/human-rights-council-condemns-the-burning-of-the-quran-as-a-religious-hate-act/

    • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Nope. Might apply for any other book, but not for one directly espousing the most barbaric rules, that a braindead but powerful minority screams for.

      The tolerant must not tolerate the intolerant lest they be swallowed by them.

      It helps if you look at tolerance as a social contract (I will tolerate you as long as you tolerate me) rather than as an unbendable principle (I will tolerate you even to the detriment of others)