There is absolutely no comparison between burning the flag and burning the Koran

[Hugabear]

I heard some teabagger trying to compare the controversy over Pastor Dumfuck's Koran-burning to the controversy over flag-burning. The argument was something like "why are you folks so upset about burning the Koran, but just a few years ago you were defending people who wanted to burn the flag?"

Not sure if anyone else has heard someone try to make that case, but there's absolutely no comparison at all. It's a classic case of comparing apples to oranges. For one, burning the flag is a political statement, not a religious "fuck you". But the biggest distinction here is that nobody is suggesting that we ban Koran-burning. When right-wingers wanted to burn flag-burning, it was an attempt to stifle free speech. That's not happening here. There aren't any politicians (at least not that I'm aware of) trying to pass legislation to outlaw burning Korans, Bibles, or any other books for that matter.

There's a huge difference between condemning an act, and calling for its ban.

[glinda]

1. Brain synapse disfunction. They are unable to make rational comparisons.

I am serious.

[pnwmom]

2. Right. He has the right to free speech, and so do we, in condemning his actions

in terms as strong as we choose.

The right to free speech is not the right to be free of criticism or condemnation by those who disagree.

[Lyric]

3. That's one of those innate and fundamental truths about the authoritarian brain.

They can't just disapprove of something. They seem to think that they're entitled to BAN and/or CRIMINALIZE everything they don't like. Flag-burning, gay marriage, pot, abortion...they can't just have opinions, they have to try and make their opinions into laws, like five-year-olds trying to get in the ultimate "HA! You can't dooooo that, neener neener neener!". Of course, we have left-wing authoritarians too who want to ban everything they don't like. They just aren't quite as blatant about it, and they tend to be a lot rarer, whereas right-wing views and authoritarian thinking tend to go together more often than not.

[Winterblues]

4. There is another difference as well

The flag itself does not represent speech. burning it supposedly does. The Koran however is entirely speech. If you burn it you take away that speech. I do not believe it is constitutional to take away one person's free speech through your use of free speech..It is sort of like me hitting you in the nose and then saying your nose damaged my fist..

[Warren Stupidity]

13. That is silly.

Burning your copy of the koran does not in any way at all take away any other person's access to their koran. There is no koran shortage. Paper and ink are destroyed but the speech recorded in them is abundantly available.

Both flag burning and koran burning are political protests, fully protected by the 1st, and, like apples and oranges, are rather easy to compare and have similar qualities.

[Toucano]

5. They aren't even in the same universe. n/t

[Township75]

6. They are both acts of free speach.

Who doesn't like the message is the only thing that changes. Whether someone is doing it for hate or for a political statement, whether some politician is trying to ban it or not, is irrelevant. It is still free speech.

[VAliberal]

7. I absolutely agree - flag burning, Quran or Bible burning . . .

burning a draft card or a bra or a photograph - it's all free speech; offensive or not.

[mike_c]

8. agreed....

And I would add that both burned objects are equally irrelevant, at least in my opinion. Both are symbols for "things" that cannot be destroyed by individual protest, so burning them is nothing more than symbolic destruction. It's an intellectual act. One can agree with either or not agree with it, but there are no actual consequences for burning them beyond peoples' reaction to symbolism.

This whole debate is ridiculous. Burn Qur'ans, Bibles, flags, money, whatever. None of that makes one whit of difference, IMO. If it helps people release their anger, fine-- but in this case, I suspect it is really meant to CREATE more anger. I still say the act is irrelevant-- the motive might be ugly, but the nasty motive remains even if nothing gets burned.

[Township75]

11. You said it way better than I did.

I am offended by burning a Bible and a Quran and the US Flag, but I know that is because I am religious and American. Tough shit, I have to deal with it. That is the price I pay for not living in a police state shit hole like Russia, China or North Korea.
I get my free speech and religion, but in return i have to tolerate others free speech and religious choices. That is how I see the Quran/Flag burning situation.

[slackmaster]

9. Yes there is.

They are both acts of conflagration.

[valerief]

10. Stuff, just stuff with meaning applied to it, meaning that can change like the weather.

It just doesn't matter.

Tripper: And even if we win, if we win, HAH! Even if we win! Even if we play so far above our heads that our noses bleed for a week to ten days; even if God in Heaven above comes down and points his hand at our side of the field; even if every man woman and child held hands together and prayed for us to win, it just wouldn't matter because all the really good looking girls would still go out with the guys from Mohawk because they've got all the money! It just doesn't matter if we win or we lose. IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER! IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER! IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. Some here are calling it illegal, comparing it to cross burning etc

[Saboburns]

14. Yep, it's a little disappointing to see that

This is a cut and dry Free Speech case, fully protected by the Constitution. A bit disappointing to see progressives try and make it not so.