There isn’t. It’s just that if you keep destabilizing the climate your practical right to keep your head and shoulders in the same place keeps deminishing
I honestly don’t understand why you’re being downvoted. Book burning is probably one of the worst steps you can take towards being intolerant without directly harming people. There had to be so many more options that could’ve been taken that would’ve de-escalated the situation in a way that didn’t involve destruction.
I think it’s the fact that true tolerance would allow the burning of any book. Not all copies, not banning it from circulation, but the burning of an individual symbol as a means of expressing an idea is perfectly fine in most Americans’ view. I share that view, I understand the nuance of the situation at hand, I’m aware the quaran is a holy book and that it sends a strong message.
But so does burning the American flag, as a symbol, to show that America’s ideals and values are dead or do not apply for the people doing the burning. American flag burning was done with the intent to express that the symbol of freedom and equality that it was pushed as was not at all representative of the America those people were experiencing. America has a problem with nationalism, so much so they tossed “under god” in a “non-mandatory” (socially reinforced) pledge of allegiance you say every day before school starts all the way until you graduate. You can imagine burning the flag pissed those nationalists off too, but their vitriol and frustration is useless and unwarranted.
If you say the culture of Islam, or the culture of the people who see that book as their most holy symbol and use it to justify violence, is unwelcome in your nation, as an individual, that’s completely fine to me. I don’t love the blanket statement, but I do love that you can express it without fear of retaliation from your government and with the knowledge that you are as safe expressing that belief as you are expressing one more widely agreed upon.
If I disagree with you, I should debate you, i should seek to educate you, or be louder than you with my actions and words. That’s not the way of every place in the world, but it is the way of any civilized people. Any who condone violence in response, even provoked violence, are closer to animals than their fellow man.
I want to agree with you but I can’t. The world can’t run by true tolerance; at least not in this day and age. There are too many beliefs, cultures, and ideas that are being eroded away by people that spout hatred. Why? Just because they can? Just because they have the right?
If anything, the closest we can be is intolerant of the intolerant. The people that burned the books were an “anti-Islam activist group”. This sounds exactly like other hate groups like the proud boys, westboro baptist Church, the KKK, the EFF, Islamic extremists… These aren’t people that are celebrating their free speech. They are people that are practicing legal hostility as a tool to oppress others. I’d say hate speech is a good line to draw when allowing people to have public demonstrations.
Is it freedom of speech to deliberately provoke an entire religion just because it is your “right”?
Yes. That is literally the entire premise: the right to say offensive things. The reason this is important is that everything we say is offensive to someone. If we operated under the principle that we may never offend anyone else, we would all have to be silent, all the time. Free speech is the basis for science and democracy, where saying things which offend people is a requirement. We must always be free to challenge the beliefs and values of others, or we're no better than theocratic dictatorships.
You can’t go into an airport and shout “bomb” or use a bullhorn in a residential area at 3 AM without someone calling the cops on you and being detained. You can verbally harass someone to the point of being abusive or lie about someone to defame them but you can face repercussions for it. There’s a lot of lines that intersect with freedom of speech. Just because I’m drawing one at hate speech doesn’t mean I’m against freedom of speech.
Burning the American flag is a different ordeal. When you invade their country in the name of “freedom” don’t expect love and rose.
Imagine the reverse, Iraq invading the US over fake claims of “chemical weapons” and imposing their political regime and destroying your whole way of life, imposing the Shariah Law (just like the US imposed their view of freedom). Would you still hold the same views? I think not.
Its not like burning the quran is part of everyday life in society. More like they deliberate do it because they know its offensive for muslims, so its an obvious provocation disguised as freedom of expression. Im atheist btw and i despise religion in general, but sad to see reason being downvoted. Sorry i can’t back you up on the comment sections, i cant afford to be judged right now.
When will we begin to criminalize the far-right GOP members who incite violence and do naught but spew threats of violence and legal repercussions with no teeth?
How you answer is the difference between being fascist and not. (Hint: it’s definitely OK to lock up those who actively do something lawbreaking, but not if someone kept the peace and obeyed the law and kept their rhetoric peaceful enough that no one is threatened)
The paradox of tolerance required that Trump and his guilty cohorts be tried for Jan. 6th. The GA case is an extension of those charges investigating that. How this case goes will probably set a nationwide precedent to whether or not additional GOP oversteps could be tried as criminal on any level.
With luck law will land on the right side; and remind everyone that peaceful discourse is much preferable to aggressive actions.
Thank you, but that’s a lot of reading for a simple question.
Statistical analysis was by χ2 test; a p value of less than 0.05 was assumed to correlate with a significant difference in rates of injury.
Oh yes it’s all clear to me now.
I know it used to be like that before air bags and safety belts, because the steering wheel takes some of the blow in frontal collisions. But such dramatic difference I suspected she might have made the collision worse for the passengers on purpose.
Conclusions: Front seat passengers are at increased risk of injury relative to drivers in actual road traffic accidents as recorded in the STAG database. This contradicts crash test data, which suggest drivers are less well protected than front seat passengers in laboratory conditions.
Yes but that could for instance be due to traffic coming from the passenger side that the driver is less likely to see in time. That would be irrelevant to this case.
The p value is effectively the % chance something happened by coincidence, and not because of a real effect. Like flipping a coin and getting the same side several times in a row. P value is an assessment of that likelihood. Less than .05 means a less than 5% chance of that. I don’t know what the other bit is, except it was likely a method of statistical analysis.
It’s a way of saying that the results they found were very unlikely to be due to chance.
Two members of the **Little Rock Nine — the group of nine African American students who desegregated Little Rock Central High School in 1957 **— pushed back against the Arkansas Education Department’s decision.
“I think the attempts to erase history is working for the Republican Party,” said Elizabeth Eckford, a member of the Little Rock Nine in an interview with NBC News. “They have some boogeymen that are really popular with their supporters.”
The deal adds to Biden’s string of successful diplomatic initiatives aimed to reassert U.S. influence in Asia in the face of China’s growing economic, diplomatic and military muscle in the region. They include a historic Camp David summit Friday with Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol — aimed at addressing regional threats from North Korea and China.
The Vietnam agreement coincides with an uptick in tension between Hanoi and Beijing over long-standing territorial disputes in the South China Sea. Vietnam — along with the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei — has long protested Beijing’s claim of authority over parts of the South China Sea that extend 1,200 miles from China’s coastline. Hanoi banned the Barbie movie last month due to a scene that appeared to reference the nine-dash line Beijing says marks its territorial waters. Satellite imagery released this week indicates China is building an airfield on an island that Hanoi says is Vietnamese territory.
Yeah it’s the arse end of the world. It gets quite warm there in the summer though and there are a lot of trees surrounding it so fires aren’t that uncommon. The scale of this one is bad however. My sister’s living there about 15 years and this is her first time being evacuated.
There are no more safe places. Here in Germany, we’re also starting to get major wildfires and we’re completely unprepared. We have a total of zero firefighting planes, mostly using police and military helicopters. Our firefighters are doing training in countries like Greece or Portugal because we have no experience here. And still, most people think it’s just a bad year or bad decade and it will all magically go away very soon.
I wonder why the remaining 5% of residents haven’t evacuated yet. Are they senior citizens that need extra assistance or poor people that can’t afford to go anywhere? Or are they people that think the wildfires aren’t that bad or dislike the big government telling them what to do?
Apparently the government has been quite organised in airlifting folks out but demand was obviously high so the queues were long. They’re not leaving people over money though. My sister lives there and got out by plane about 10 hours ago.
I’d imagine the process is still ongoing though and the support staff on the ground coordinating things will be the last to go.
She didn’t mention anyone deliberately trying to stay behind but I can ask if you’re really curious. She’s currently asleep.
If he's found hiding and refusing to produce classified documents. Go ahead.
If he's on record conspiring to destroy those documents, proving that he has knowledge of everything including that he broke the law. Lock him up even more
If there's a proof of Biden conspiring to overturn election. Go ahead boys.
But I doubt he is stupid enough to keep US secrets for clout, and go on record forcing people to overturn election in Georgia. Even with a severe dementia that he has 😆.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.