+Red King Subscriber² Posted February 24, 2017 Subscriber² Share Posted February 24, 2017 Quote Danish man who videoed himself burning the Quran charged with blasphemy Case is first time Danish prosecutors have charged anyone with blasphemy in 46 years Lizzie Dearden | @lizziedearden | Thursday 23 February 2017 09:40 GMT A Danish man who posed a video of himself setting fire to the Quran on Facebook has been charged with blasphemy in the first such prosecution for 46 years. The 42-year-old suspect put the clip, entitled “Consider your neighbour: it stinks when it burns" to a group called “YES TO FREEDOM – NO TO ISLAM” in December 2015. Jan Reckendorff, from the public prosecutor’s office in Viborg, said: “It is the prosecution's view that circumstances involving the burning of holy books such as the Bible and the Quran can in some cases be a violation of the blasphemy clause, which covers public scorn or mockery of religion. “It is our opinion that the circumstances of this case mean it should be prosecuted so the courts now have an opportunity to take a position on the matter.” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/denmark-man-burned-quran-koran-video-blasphemy-facebook-islam-prosecuted-charged-46-years-a7594796.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Ridiculous. Blasphemy laws have NO place in a free society! trag3dy, Brys and Son_Of_Dad 3 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son_Of_Dad Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 I don't think religion has a place in modern society but that's a different story. Brys, Xenon and FloatingFatMan 3 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 29 minutes ago, Son_Of_Dad said: I don't think religion has a place in modern society but that's a different story. Whilst I would agree, I have no problem with people believing in this stuff as long as a) No laws are enacted to favour their beliefs (like this one), and b) They don't try to force it on non-believers. If I want to set fire to a Quran or Bible or Torah, I will, because to me it's just a book full of stories, and there are plenty of other copies. It's no different to setting fire to a Harry Potter book, or a copy of the Readers Digest, or a newspaper. Brys 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compl3x Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 A fairly transparent political move. Isn't Denmark also the country where plenty of satirical cartoons of the Prophet have been drawn? What happened, guys? You used to defend free expression. While I think burning holy books is silly and unnecessarily antagonistic no one should find themselves tangling with the state if they decide to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Yeah, blasphemy is an outdated concept and certainly shouldn't be a legal one. But inciting racial hate, that's where I'd have gone with this tool. Brys 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brys Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Note to self : remember to stop burning bibles when crossing the danish border. Actually I wonder, what falls under "public scorn or mockery of religion" ? If I say that I think the story of noah's ark is biologically ridiculous in public, would I be in trouble ? (assuming I am in denmark) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 1 minute ago, Nefarious Trigger said: Yeah, blasphemy is an outdated concept and certainly shouldn't be a legal one. But inciting racial hate, that's where I'd have gone with this tool. That argument does at least have some merit to it (though how is it racial hate?), unlike the ridiculous one they went with. Brys 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brys Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 1 minute ago, Nefarious Trigger said: Yeah, blasphemy is an outdated concept and certainly shouldn't be a legal one. But inciting racial hate, that's where I'd have gone with this tool. Yes, inciting hate is the bad thing here and the irony is it's probably what they wanted to convey, but that's not what they legally said ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brys Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Hey, what if I burn Mein Kampf in public ? Am I inciting hate against hate ? Now I'm leaving this topic and going back to work before I say something even dumber. The Evil Overlord 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 1 hour ago, FloatingFatMan said: That argument does at least have some merit to it (though how is it racial hate?), unlike the ridiculous one they went with. When faced with "... isn't a race" then the response of "oh, semantics, that's your come back?" is stock. 1 hour ago, brpsycho said: Hey, what if I burn Mein Kampf in public ? Am I inciting hate against hate ? Now I'm leaving this topic and going back to work before I say something even dumber. Nazi Lives Matter Brys 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnelsoninjax Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Yet the Westboro Baptist Church can have a website godhatesfags.com and can go and protest and fallen soldiers funerals and that is covered by the first amendment here in the US, I wonder if they were to burn the Quran what would happen to them? I fully understand that this story is not in the US, but it is just as ridiculous... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahorsepip Veteran Posted February 24, 2017 Veteran Share Posted February 24, 2017 Maybe it's an attempt to get rid of the absurd blasphemy law by presenting the case in front of the court in the hope that it will set a precedent against the blasphemy law for future cases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 ^ I don't think the Dane's are sneaky and conniving enough to think of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts