Iraq expels Swedish ambassador over planned Koran burning
www.reuters.com
Iraq expelled the Swedish ambassador on Thursday in protest at a planned burning of the Koran in Stockholm that had prompted hundreds of protesters to storm and set alight the Swedish embassy in Baghdad.
  • Jack@lemmy.caEnglish
    0·
    1 year ago

    which lists religious belief as a group covered by the law

    If followers of a denomination of the Invisible pink unicorn (bbHhh) are provoked by people wearing pink clothes because one of their holy books says such people should receive the death penalty, does that therefor make wearing pink clothes illegal in Sweden?

    • sarjalim@lemm.eeEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      No, it doesn’t? Laws are interpreted by legal practitioners and judges, and the intentionality of the law is taken into account. One of the main intentions of this particular law is protecting Jews from persecution, and protecting Muslims from the same isn’t a huge stretch. Sure, you could argue that invisible pink unicorn followers are a protected group, but no one would take you seriously in Sweden. You are arguing an extreme interpretation in bad faith.

      • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        0·
        1 year ago

        Yes, but the law you proposed would allow that to happen. That isn’t a straw man, it’s your proposed idea not being very good.

        • sarjalim@lemm.eeEnglish
          1·
          1 year ago

          It’s not my proposed idea, it’s an actual, contemporary Swedish law which has existed since 1948. What is up for debate is how that law is to be interpreted in this instance, what constitutes “creed” (in, perhaps, a better translation of the original Swedish instead of “religious belief”), and what constitutes a “message” and whether burning a Quran is valid criticism of Islam or if doing it at that time and place is a hate crime targeting Muslims. It hasn’t been tried in the Swedish supreme court whether Quran burning in certain contexts like the recent events is illegal under that law or not.

          Technically, sure, you could argue that everything can be a religious belief/creed and any belief is covered under that law. But that is not how the law is interpreted and used in practice. I would consider that a strawman argument then, because it intentionally misrepresents the spirit of that law.

          • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyzEnglish
            0·
            1 year ago

            That makes sense. I guess I don’t really see the point of the law. If a message of hate goes too far, it would already fall other applicable laws against harassment or discrimination. Why does there need to be legislation specifically protecting against hate crimes?

    • prole@beehaw.orgEnglish
      0·
      1 year ago

      If you feign ignorance, and pretend that you don’t know the difference between a belief held by billions of humans, and some corny, uncreative shit you just came up with off the top of your head, does that therefore make you an actual dumbass?

      • maporita@lemmy.mlEnglish
        0·
        1 year ago

        If it were a Bible or a Torah that was burned we wouldn’t be having this conversation now because it wouldn’t have even made the news. There is only one major religion that reacts violently to incidents like this. I think that’s the point OP was making and it’s a valid one.

        • prole@beehaw.orgEnglish
          1·
          1 year ago

          Way to completely miss (or ignore) the point I made.

          But you’re right, Christians have never committed violence in the name of their faith… Lol