As it turns out, atheists are idiots too...

[Boingo]

I wasn't sure whether to post this in the religion or politics thread:

A Brisbane-based atheist has risked inflaming political and religious tensions (http://www.news.com.au/national/lawyer-alex-stewart-smokes-pages-from-the-koran-and-bible-and-says-we-should-get-over-book-burning/story-e6frfkvr-1225919970728) by posting a video on YouTube showing him burning pages from both the Koran and the Bible....Lawyer says "Bible smokes better than Koran"

[ratcharmer]

*shrugs* it's a shock-value for attention thing, ignore it and it'll go away

[Daytripper]

Ah yes. Sometimes it may just be needed to smoke up the Bible because no paper is at hand. It happens in wars anyway. The paper is very thin and quite suitable for it in fact.

But, if you obviously have enough paper, don't do it.

[vrt]

I think this should be renamed to "idiots are idiots too".

[Scaredgirl]

I actually agree with the guy when he says:

"Who cares? It's your beliefs that matter. Quite frankly, if you are going to get upset about a book, you're taking life way too seriously."

I find it weird that burning a book, flag, whatever that you own, somehow offends other people. From a Christian standpoint, how does an atheist burning a bible offend you? I would understand if the atheist burned a church or killed a priest, but to burn a book? Why is it a big deal? Keep in mind that for this atheist, Bible or Koran are not holy books, they are just books. To Mr. Alex Stewart, burning these two books is like burning today's newspaper.

I think that not allowing people to do stunts like this would seriously limit personal freedoms. Even though it might not make sense to anyone else, people should still be allowed to do whatever they want without any interference from the government, media or religious institutes, as long as they are not hurting others while doing it. That should be the basic principle of all civilizations.

[ratcharmer]

The reason why some people find burning Bibles/Korans offensive is to them it is not "merely a book".

Let's take an example from Battlestar Galactia. If I'm convinced that person A is a Cylon and you're convinced that they're not, if I use a bomb to blow up person A you're going to be upset with me (the bomb didn't leave remains we can check for robot parts).

Not a perfect example since a person and a Bible/Koran aren't equivalent but hopefully you get the point.

Added to that, Mr. Stewart did what he did for no other reason than to offend people, cause strife and for his own amusement.

As far as personal freedoms go, no one has yet said that he should be arrested or otherwise criminally charged. The response so far has been a few religious leaders saying what basically amounts to "wow, that was really inappropriate" and he got in trouble with his boss.

Okay, so maybe you think getting in trouble with his boss wasn't appropriate? Suppose for a moment that instead of smoking holy books Mr. Stewart had made a video in which he was openly racist or gave a ringing endorsement of Mein Kampf. Would you be comfortable as a student at QUT if he wasn't censured for something like that?

All that being said, I repeat my original post. He did it to cause an uproar and offend people, so by making a big deal out of it you'll just encourage this sort of thing. Turn the other cheek.

[Daytripper]

It is ok if he really wanted to burn the Bible, but why post a video of it?

Probably he was trying to prove something, but it backfired. Though he did prove Christians and Muslims really are not that different.

[Scaredgirl]

The reason why some people find burning Bibles/Korans offensive is to them it is not "merely a book".

But to that atheist, these books were not special. Why should he treat them like they were special books?

Let me ask you this, if I was a member of some weird religion that thought carrots were sacred, am I entitled to be offended when you eat a carrot? It's your carrot and you think it's only food. Why should you give that vegetable any special treatment even though it's the holiests of holy vegetables of my religion?

Let's take an example from Battlestar Galactia. If I'm convinced that person A is a Cylon and you're convinced that they're not, if I use a bomb to blow up person A you're going to be upset with me (the bomb didn't leave remains we can check for robot parts).

Not a perfect example since a person and a Bible/Koran aren't equivalent but hopefully you get the point.

No, I didn't get the point because your example is about murdering people, not destroying man-made inanimate objects like books.

Added to that, Mr. Stewart did what he did for no other reason than to offend people, cause strife and for his own amusement.

His reasons are irrelevant. He should be able to do stunts like that regardless of the reasons because who decides what reasons are legit and what are not? Question: what reason would you have found acceptable? Hatred towards books?

As far as personal freedoms go, no one has yet said that he should be arrested or otherwise criminally charged. The response so far has been a few religious leaders saying what basically amounts to "wow, that was really inappropriate" and he got in trouble with his boss.

Well, his stunt was condemned by numerous people. Clearly there was a kind of social punishment which resulted in him getting in trouble with his boss. And for what? Burning pieces of paper that have no deeper significance to him.

Okay, so maybe you think getting in trouble with his boss wasn't appropriate? Suppose for a moment that instead of smoking holy books Mr. Stewart had made a video in which he was openly racist or gave a ringing endorsement of Mein Kampf. Would you be comfortable as a student at QUT if he wasn't censured for something like that?

I think all forms of censorship is wrong. If someone wants to be openly racist, he/she should be allowed to do that. It's all about freedom of speech. You or I or anyone else shouldn't be in a position to dictate to others what they can and can't talk about, no matter how disgusting it might sound to us. That's the core of true freedom of speech.


I think you and most people completely miss the point this guy was trying to make. He was simply trying to tell us that what he did was burned pieces of paper. That's it. There was no deeper meaning to it and there was no hidden agenda. Problem was that religious people saw it as "omg he's burning a holy book!" and got offended.

When we talk about personal freedoms and freedom of speech, you either have it or you don't. There is no middle ground where you can dictate to other people what acceptable behavior is.

[BluePriest]

I think that not allowing people to do stunts like this would seriously limit personal freedoms. Even though it might not make sense to anyone else, people should still be allowed to do whatever they want without any interference from the government, media or religious institutes, as long as they are not hurting others while doing it. That should be the basic principle of all civilizations.

I think its interesting how topics about things like this always seem to go to the whole concept of freedom. Its not about if you have the right to do it or not. Im fairly certain no one in this forum thinks it should be illegal to burn either of those books. Its about if you are going to be considerate or not. Take the pastor that was going to burn the koran in florida. Hes not considerate of other people at all. He has every right to burn them, but is it considerate? You dont have to agree with people that something is holy, but you should be considerate of those people. Someone may think they are idiotic or oversensitive for believing they are holy, but the person thinking its holy probably thinks you are being idiotic and insensitive.

[ratcharmer]

Okay, let's try this example then: Suppose you're an artist, you put a lot of time effort and meaning into a particular painting, only to find that I then defaced your painting and made a rude joke out of it. You will be upset, even if that painting didn't mean anything to me, you'll still be hurt because it did mean a lot to you.

If you thought carrots were holy and were offended by me eating them I would like to think I would at least have the courtesy not to rub it in your face that I was eating them.

My stance on the matter: he posted a video that was intended to offend religious persons, it offended religious persons. Why is this a big deal and why are we debating it.

Freedom of speech is all well and good, but people should be free to speak back as well. Why is it okay for him to post the video, but not okay for the religious leaders to speak out against it?

The other thing I'm curious about: how does your stance on censorship tie in to your role as forum administrator? (can move this discussion to PMs if that's more appropriate)

[Planplan]

Okay, let's try this example then: Suppose you're an artist, you put a lot of time effort and meaning into a particular painting, only to find that I then defaced your painting and made a rude joke out of it. You will be upset, even if that painting didn't mean anything to me, you'll still be hurt because it did mean a lot to you.

But the "artist" in this case is just a printing machine. If I print an other book and burn it it's ok unless it's religious ? What's the difference ?
The symbolic is different of course, but he used 2 books, not just one, to oppose them. The "X have better smoke than Y" is just a conclusion joke, it's not meaning that X is better or worst than Y. Those books aren't free, this man paid them. Like any other books...

Each time someone try to laugh or be a bit irrespective with religions, it's like the Earth is about to blow up ! It's not important, if you are mulsim, catholic, atheist or something else, you have your own belief, in your mind, not in books.

And if you really want to respect those books because they are religious artifacts, then begin by following the ideas inside, not what a religious chief with values from Middle Ages say. All religious books are full of good principles, but a lot of people are misinterpreting them.

On a side note, I have to admit that I'm a bit uncomfortable with burning books (remind me of the book "Fahrenheit 451")...

[Scaredgirl]

I think its interesting how topics about things like this always seem to go to the whole concept of freedom. Its not about if you have the right to do it or not. Im fairly certain no one in this forum thinks it should be illegal to burn either of those books. Its about if you are going to be considerate or not. Take the pastor that was going to burn the koran in florida. Hes not considerate of other people at all. He has every right to burn them, but is it considerate? You dont have to agree with people that something is holy, but you should be considerate of those people. Someone may think they are idiotic or oversensitive for believing they are holy, but the person thinking its holy probably thinks you are being idiotic and insensitive.

I don't see being considerate as a requirement for having the right to free speech. Like I said, I have no problem with the worst evil racist idiot publicly expressing his/her opinions. I don't think it's the cool thing to do, but I do believe that this person has the right to say it. I don't think the society should dictate what we should talk about.

My stance on the matter: he posted a video that was intended to offend religious persons, it offended religious persons. Why is this a big deal and why are we debating it.

I didn't see this necessarily as trying to offend religious people. Sure it had some shock value, but that's what it sometimes takes to make people think.

To answer your question, this is a big deal because stunts like this offend people and they get emotional. When people get emotional, they buy newspapers and visit websites.

The other thing I'm curious about: how does your stance on censorship tie in to your role as forum administrator? (can move this discussion to PMs if that's more appropriate)

Well, this is off-topic but I can answer briefly.

I live in today's society so I have to live by the rules of today's society. I cannot run around doing stuff that is not socially acceptable, even though I might think it's not a big deal. My job as a forum administrator is to try to make everything run smoothly, not to try to change the world.

Example: We have an anti-rude language policy on this forum and in chat. I personally find the whole concept of rude language just ridiculous (slight change of tone transforms a "good" word into a "bad" one), but because a huge majority of people get offended by this kind of language, I as a forum admin have to try to improve user experience by having rules against rude language. Otherwise people would get fed up and leave the forums for good.

Human civilization is constantly improving. One day we won't have ridiculous concepts like rude language or holy paper. I mean just forget all the symbolism and think of these two things at a basic level. Unfortunately that day is not even close so we are stuck what we have now. But hey, at least it's not the middle ages