• @Atomic@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There is a thing called “incitement against ethic group”

    Grabing a microphone and preaching in public that Muslims are subhuman camel-piss drinkers. Would not be legal, despite it not infringing on someones immediate safety or freedom. It’s incitement against ethnic groups.

    As opposed to preaching that “Islam is a bad religion that promotes gender inequality”, which is fair criticism.

    One is incitement, the other criticism.

    The framework is already there. The proposition would probably put that the burning of religious scripture in public falls under that category. (I don’t actually know if that is the case, but it’s a fair assumption)

    Obviously you can desecrate and provoke in other ways. And I’m sure people will find other ways. And there will be new debates and court cases to decide if it’s incitement against ethnic groups or not.

    I’m personally not 100% sure where I stand if it should be legally OK to burn books in public or not. There are many things we are allowed to do in private, that we are not allowed to do in public. Maybe book burnings outside of embassies is one of those things. Just like we don’t burn flags outside of embassies.

    • @CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Incitement is illegal, yes, because it indirectly infringes on others safety and freedom. By encouraging violence against a group of people, that group is put in danger.

      Luckily, there is a justice system that can apply nuance to each case, so that people can be convicted of inciting violence even though the do not explicitly threaten anyone. A “thinly veiled threat” or implications can be enough.

      My opinion is that we have robust laws in place to prevent threats, incitement of violence, etc. adding blasphemy laws restricts freedom of expression without adding any protection of value.