Rather because we know we get away with it. Because most Christians don't feel so entitled to expect others to live by their rules, and threaten them with death when they don't.

These provocations make sense as long as the other side takes offense for so little, in such a violent way. It's this encroaching and inacceptable attitude which makes resistance a necessity.

The article sheds no light on what the actual motives of these particular protesters are.

[–] 14specks@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because most Christians don’t feel so entitled to expect others to live by their rules, and threaten them with death when they don’t.

Ok come on, my friend. I know a bible burning won't get you the death penalty, but many many many people have been killed and imprisoned for not living to Christian values, especially in the United States. It's "just a few crazies" or whatever, but it really isn't since these actions happen in an environment of indirect public support.

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

many many many people have been killed and imprisoned for not living to Christian values, especially in the United States.

As an outsider, I may not be aware of what you mean.

If you're hinting at colonization: Yes, definitely. But that is no longer practiced, or is it?

If you had recent or current events in mind: I'm not aware of those, please explain.

[–] 14specks@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I see, I'm gonna make a low-ish effort post, but I'm happy to discuss further if you'd like:

Colonization still happens, but I think it matters that it happened in the past too. I would say that one of the most prominent recent examples would be the American invasion of Iraq. There are many political and economic aspects to the invasion, but one cultural angle is that it was widely supported by religious conservatives due to their opposition to Islam. American leadership was ghoulish in their own way, and to incompetent to actually colonize the country, but many of the literal footsoldiers joined the military to "get back at them for what they did to us", although as we know, none of the 9-11 terrorists were Iraqi.
Another example that springs to mind is the ongoing homophobic and transphobic hate crimes. One specific example would be the Pulse nightclub mass shooting. I would suggest that most American Christians don't support death for being gay, just the same as most American/Western Muslims don't support death for burning the Quran, but in other countries where religion overlaps more with politics, both of these can be considered serious criminial offenses.

I only mean to suggest that both religions have a bit of bloodthirst in them, which doesn't apply to everyone, but is certainly comparable. We can go deeper into the details, I just felt like you were giving Christians a bit of a pass that they don't deserve.

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

That helps to understand where you are coming from, thanks for the explanation. While I see differences, I also see the similarities.

I only mean to suggest that both religions have a bit of bloodthirst in them, which doesn’t apply to everyone, but is certainly comparable. We can go deeper into the details, I just felt like you were giving Christians a bit of a pass that they don’t deserve.

Oh, definitely. Sorry if I gave the impression to have any good opinion about Christianity. I despise it wholeheartedly.

I only, and specifically, meant that the trouble you get for burning scripture is very different in Islam and Christianity. The latter probably has more blood on it's hands overall, but that's a different topic from my point of view. Also the overwhelming majority of both religions are decent, peaceful people.

They can believe what they want and live by their rules if they want. Just as others can disbelieve what they want and disrespect religious rules if they want. These rules have no power outside of their own bubble. It should be opt-in. At least it should be opt-out. But they must be optional.

[–] masquenox@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

and threaten them with death when they don’t.

You mean... except for that entire colonialism thing, huh?

These provocations make sense as long as the other side takes offense for so little

Go burn Bibles in public, then... we'll see how long it takes the christo-fascists to show up at your door. Somehow, I don't think you will.

The article sheds no light on what the actual motives of these particular protesters are.

Don't have to... it's very easy to tell what they are. And it seems plenty of people are willing to run interference for these nazis - as long as they can be aimed at Muslims, of course.

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

that entire colonialism thing

Not entirely sure what you meant with this short remark. I oppose colonialism for the same reason I oppose people who impose their belief on others. Because I support each and everyone's human rights.

Go burn Bibles in public, then… we’ll see how long it takes the christo-fascists to show up at your door. Somehow, I don’t think you will.

Can you point me to any incident in the past where burnt bibles lead to angry mobs, setting buildings on fire or killing people? I'm not aware this exists. If that was a thing, I would fully support burning bibles, although I'm personally not.

willing to run interference for these nazis - as long as they can be aimed at Muslims

I understand your concern but I'm not in that camp, on the contrary. There are more sides to this story. There is a significant overlap between the reasons for me being antifascist and the reasons for opposing imposing beliefs.

You could be right in this case, we don't know.