104

UN overwhelmingly passes anti-Islamophobia resolution (www.dailysabah.com)

submitted 3 months ago by ViXY_DBC@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 26 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] emax_gomax@lemmy.world 63 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Last July, the U.N. adopted a resolution condemning Quran burning, calling attacks on the Muslim holy book "religious hatred." The same month the U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution that deplores all acts of violence against holy books as a violation of international law.

Holy books shouldn't be protected as some sort of sacred existence especially not globally. Religions should be scrutinised at all levels, putting any religious relic on a pedestal and enshrining protections that seem less focused on protecting followers of that religion and more on the idea of it is absurd. What's next you can't call scientology a cult because it hurts people's feelings.

Edit: adjust phrasing.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

Criticism is not the same as public burning rituals.

If someone was burning rainbow flags in public and screaming that they hate gay people that would not advance discourse either.

[-] CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 months ago

The Quran is a symbol of hate and oppression for a lot of people (ex-muslims, some LGBTQ people). It's also true of other religious books, for which I also support public denigration of all kind

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I don't think you're going to convince anyone to sympathize with your point of view by burning their favorite things.

It does not promote harmony. Muslims and Christians etc aren't throwing gay people off roofs in the West. Live and let live.

[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago

Funny that you must specify in the West. Gay people are dying in many places because of religion. But since it doesn't happen here (and even then it happens really), it's all dandy.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -5 points 3 months ago

Actually it doesn't happen in places where fundies regimes haven't been installed because imperialism wanted to overthrow their government.

[+] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago

And the Gay Pride flag is a symbol of hate and perversion for the regressive right, do you think their opinion is equally valid? Because they sure as fuck do.

[-] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Does the pride flag contain texts calling for the murder and/or subjugation of certain groups of people??

[-] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

I know you think that your snarky little quip is some kind of mic drop moment but take a second to realize that I'm not promoting the idea that the Gay Pride flag is a symbol of perversion. The opposite in fact. I fully support the LGBTQ movement in word, actions, and donations.

I'm pointing out that any symbol can be taken out of context and reinterpreted in a less than kind way to dilute the message of that symbol.

I'm trying to give you insight into the mindset of our most vocal opponents, but all of you fucking idiots can do is get snarky.

Sad that none of you can understand this.

[-] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Any symbol can be taken out of context, yes. But in religious books, where it literally commands the murder of certain people, that's pretty damn undeniably clear that it's a bad thing.

There's no required context to understand "if men have sex kill them both", for example. It's just bad.

[-] otter@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Replying to the edit, I think you misunderstand what the UN call was for

It's not saying that we should arbitrarily defend objects globally. It's not saying that the artifacts or texts are above criticism or academic scrutiny.

It's recommending that countries take measures to

prevent and prosecute acts and advocacy of religious hatred that constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence

It's saying that countries need to update their laws to address when someone does an action in order to incite discrimination, hostility, or violence.

It's something you recognize when you see it, and it's about the intent of the person doing the action.

[-] otter@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 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 4 points 3 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)

[-] GiveMemes@jlai.lu 4 points 3 months ago

So then what are your thoughts on burning an American flag?

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

putting one specific one on a pedestal

Maybe read the section you yourself quoted more thoroughly?

U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution that deplores all acts of violence against holy books as a violation of international law.

[-] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world -5 points 3 months ago

When you and others like you say 'religion should be scrutinized on all levels', what you really mean is 'lol look at those silly theist believing in words'.

Classy.

[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 months ago

So many atrocities in the name of religion, but for whatever reason, we can't scrutinize that?

Classy

How many more horror stories of people being killed or tortured in the name of a fiction book must we endure before enough is enough?

[-] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

Does this apply to all religious books? Can I burn a bible?

What about cults? Can I burn Hubbards cult texts?

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution that deplores all acts of violence against holy books as a violation of international law.

[-] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Good to know my copy of The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is now safe. Praise be unto His noodly appendage!

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

rAmen!

[-] CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago

You are NOT allowed to publicly denigrate books calling for murder and genocide

The UN, for some reason

This criticism also applies to other religious books -- the brainworm, religion, doesn't deserve any sort of respect

[-] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world -4 points 3 months ago

Literally a strawman, fucking literally.

[-] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 months ago

I'm sorry, do the books not do that?

[-] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

You are not ready for this conversation, you don't want a conversation at all. Just the opportunity to gloat over how good your own words sound to you.

[-] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Nice ad hominem.

Answer the question.

this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2024

104 points (89.4% liked)

World News

37340 readers

3555 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.