The Consequences Of Burning The Koran

If the burning of the American flag which is symbolic to the American nation can be burned why can’t the Koran, which is reading material.

It is true that “Any messages that burning the flag might convey easily can be communicated in other ways.” However, the Constitution says that everyone has ‘Freedom of Expression’ which means that “Each individual is to have the freedom, to develop by his or her own lights, and not by the command of officialdom.” Maybe the burning of the flag was not completely morally correct plus “...is such a powerful form of communication.” but it is still not breaking the law. If the person is not harming anyone, it is his

After a horrible terroristic attack that shocked the whole world on September 11th in the center of New York City, Muslims in the Western world have been constantly fighting against prejudice. After September 11, media interest in Islam increased, where Islam was usually portrayed in a negative way. Before 9/11, many Muslims lived the normal, everyday life. However, the attack has changed lives of many people that belonged to the Muslim community, where they were the victims of guilt. Unfortunately, many Americans were introduced to Islam, after the 9/11 attack, thus even till today, Islam is associated with terrorism. For the past ten years, Muslims felt excluded from the American society by being rifled, attacked, discriminated, checked

Being threatened and killed due to one 's belief is unjust and heartless. It shows somethings in a person. It shows that they are below human beings. It shows that they have no care for others besides those closest to them. It is evil, cruel and all in all just not right at all no matter what scenario people find themselves in. This is something called social injustice, or unfair treatment. An example of this is a situation in which the rights of a person or a group of people are ignored or violated in many ways. One big example of social injustice is the holocaust lead by nazi Germany 's. The nazis were a group against Jewish people and killed them in massive death camps like Auschwitz . People of many ages were brought there. From retired grandpas and grandma to children not even in preschool. The treatment was the same for all. The perspective on the other hand was different. The little kids may not have realized how bad it was compared to the older folk who saw and understood what went on in these type of camps and situations. This type of traumatic experience can change a person and is a terrible thing that history definitely doesn 't want to repeat. In the nonfiction New York bestseller Night by Elie Wiesel, the realistic-fiction novel The Boy in the Striped Pajamas by John Boyne, and the true and inspiring story Run, Boy, Run by Uri Orlev, it is evident that being brought up during times of social injustice can cause

In the article, Greenwald focuses on trying to make an argument for why free speech should be protected, even if that speech it hateful. Greenwald argues this point mainly by showing a collage of examples where hate speech infringed upon the rights of left-wing proponents. Some of these examples include when, in 2015, France convicted 12 activists supporting the "boycott of Israel" by wearing t-shirts reading "Long live Palestine, boycott Israel", while others have been convicted for adorning vegetables with boycott stickers. Some other instances he brings up of conviction for hate speech include a distraught Muslim teenager lashing out on Facebook at the British troops who died in Afghanistan after having killed innocent Afghans, a devout atheist who put up anti-religion fliers "in a religious room of the Liverpool airport", and a liberal partisan who held up a sign reading "get lost, jerk" directed at the former French President, Nicolas Sarkozy. Within these examples the only appeals he tends to make are towards logos with a bit of pathos in some of the wording. Towards

America’s viewpoint on the Muslim group of people was significantly prejudiced by post 9/11. The entire Muslim community was vision negatively as of the events that was taken by Al Qaeda an international terrorist group formed by Osama Bin Laden. Soon, subsequent to the bombing of the twin towers, primary awareness of Muslims habitually originated from labels relating to the Middle East as a whole. According to “Affective Politics after 9/11” Todd Hall proposed that 9/11 was a sensitively prominent event that created an emotional shock wave. He believed the original place of influence were the countless effective reaction of people in the United States who has watched the series of terrorist attacks unfold and causes Americans to view Muslims

How would you like to be profiled. On September 11,2001 2966 Americans were killed. Since then, many people feel Muslims have been targeted and treated unfairly. People believe Muslims did not cause anti Muslim attitudes. My first main idea is about airport security has targeted Muslims since 9/11. My second main idea is about Americans have stereotypes Muslims since 9/11. My third main idea is about The media spreads anti- Muslims ideas.The last main idea is that many americans believe profiling Muslims make them safer. 9/11 caused anti- Muslim profiling from airport security, the media, and the American people.

As a result of the Paris attacks, groups of what can only be presumed as prejudice Canadians set fire to a mosque in Peterborough Ontario. These groups are wrongfully associating all Muslim people with the extreme Islamic group ISIS. The Muslims of Canada have condemned ISIS actions through public verbal demonstrations, helping show non-Muslims that they pose no threat and are not associated with the extremists. These grassroots efforts have been occurring in major Canadian cities found in Ontario such as Toronto, Ottawa, London and more; all in hopes to educate people of the indigenous Islam in Canada, which is based on Canadian beliefs. In Western countries Muslims have the right to believe what belief systems Islam prophesizes in; this right is guaranteed without the fear of ridicule and is free from the assertion of Islamic beliefs other societies

How would you react to someone criticizing your religion? Would you hate them or defend them, in the name of the First Amendment? This is a question people have been pondering after listening to Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s various interviews and speeches. Ayaan is a Somali-born woman who fled to the Netherlands when she was around 23, to escape the marriage her father had arranged for her to her cousin. She is known as a big criticizer of the religion of Islam, and this is largely in part because of her own experiences (which you will learn about later in this paper). Ayaan possesses many qualities that would make people follow a leader: she shows bravery and perseverance in continuing to speak out about her opinions on Islam, even though many people

"Who are you?"(Eggers 206) were the first words that Abdulrahman Zeitoun heard from the police officers that had surrounded him and his friends with their guns drawn as he walked out of 5010 Claiborne that he owned. He had been stopping by the house to use the telephone once a day to call his wife Kathy, who was in Arizona with their four children to escape Hurricane Katrina, a catagory 5 hurricane that had hit New Orleans, the city they lived in. Abdulrahman Zeitoun had stayed home to protect his many properties that he and his family had required in the sixteen years since he had moved to the city. He was a general contractor and owner of Zeitoun Painting Contractors, LLC. He also owned several rental houses around the city and had

I don’t really think that burning the books was a bad thing because those examples from above just go to show that books do mean something now a statement saying it takes away people’s rights is another story but in that case I do think it is wrong. The only thing i think is weird is that in the article they make it seem like such a crime but they are only burning books that can be rewritten and reprinted.

Another example: “Pig’s heads and jars filled with blood were left on a mosque construction site. The same site had already been vandalized a few weeks before.” In the United States, not only that we should let other people express their religion, but we all should also respect their beliefs.

Free speech is usually free most of the time, but when it is used to teach people how to kill others, it’s crossing the line. The first Amendment protects someone's right to say something only within certain limits, so a person may have to suffer consequences for saying something that will harm others. This is true in this case, Paladin Press did have the right to say what they wanted, but they aren't protected to write specific instructions on how to murder and then get away with murder. This book is direct instruction and not just someone speaking their mind. This is a special case that is rendered "unique in the law." This book has no purpose other than to teach murder and how to break the law. If you let this book and its repercussions free of penalty, it will end up violating other rights, in addition to the first Amendment and create catastrophe in its wake. This book is aiding someone, helping them kill three innocent victims and it's against the law to aid and abet a murder. The freedom of speech doesn't protect any action that will harm others. The freedom of speech also doesn't protect someone's right to kill the innocent and without the book there would be three more healthy, happy people alive in the world today. The book "Hit Man" is very dangerous and is likely to cause more murder victims. I urge you to see the book as the threat that it is and to not hide behind

Christianity is one of the largest religions to stand with more than 2.22 billion followers. However, not all Christians share the same stance on issues, whether it be political or moral. An example would be the Westboro Baptist Church; a hate group known for its hostility towards those who do not meet up to their standards, specifically members of the LGBT, Catholics, American soldiers, and Muslims. The church originally received national attention in October, 1998, for picketing the funeral of a man named Matthew Shepard who was beaten and tortured for being gay. Romaine Patterson, a friend of Shepard’s, recalled that she couldn’t take her eyes off of the neon signs that read, “God Hates Fags”, “Matt in Hell”, and “AIDS Cures Fags”. From there, the church had displayed Shepard in their memorial section on their website. The page states that the church does not support the fact he was murdered, but that they picketed in order

The connection between Islam and terrorism was not intensified until the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center that pushed the Islamic faith into the national and international spotlight (Smith, 2013). As Smith (2013) articulated, “Many Americans who had never given Islam a second thought before 9/11 now had to figure out how to make sense of these events and relate to the faith tradition that ostensibly inspired them” (p. 1). One way in which people made sense of these events was through the media channels that influenced their overall opinions by shaping a framework of censored ideas (Yusof, Hassan, Hassan & Osman, 2013). In a survey conducted by Pew Forum (2012), 32% of people reported that their opinions of Muslims were greatly influenced by the media’s portrayal of Islam that depicted violent pictorials and fundamentalist Muslims. Such constant negative depiction is likely to lead to the inevitable—prejudice and hate crime. For instance, in 2002 alone there were approximately 481 hate crimes that were carried out against Muslims (Smith, 2013). Ever since the 9/11 attacks Muslim people have been the target of “suspicion, harassment and discrimination” (Talal, n.d., p. 9).