If you burn a Quran, yes, you should go to jail
To defend actions of this sort on the basis of free speech is to miss the point.
By Dan Hodges Published 14 April 2011 10:34
If you burn a Quran you should go to jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect £100.
Sorry if that sounds a bit intolerant. Brashly illiberal. But these happy arsonists who think it's a giggle to torch a religious text and screw the consequences aren't averse to a bit of brash intolerance themselves.
Actually that's not right. It's not that they're averse to the consequences. They're all too aware of them. Social division and disorder are the ends, a box of matches, jerrycan of petrol and Waterstone's discount card the means.
At the weekend the BNP joined the list of those endorsing this particularly pernicious branch of DIY. The Observer was passed a video showing a "Sion Owens, 40, from south Wales and a candidate for the forthcoming Welsh Assembly elections, soaking the Quran in kerosene and setting fire to it".
The reaction from the Welsh police was swift: "We always adopt an extremely robust approach to allegations of this sort and find this sort of intolerance unacceptable in our society." Owens was arrested, charged and subsequently released, though he was informed that "investigations were continuing and that "almost certainly other proceedings will ensue".
Good. Nicking Nazi pyromaniacs is what I want my police to be doing. It's what we all want our police to be doing, isn't it?
Apparently not. According to Alex Massie in the Spectator, "even goons and other dreadful people have rights and these should include the right to burn books in their garden". And the Tory MEP Daniel Hannan believes that burning the Quran "makes you a dummkopf, not a criminal . . . Some other countries fight false ideas with the force of law. We should fight them with truth."
Actually Daniel, we should fight them with both.
Think of a motive
Those who defend Quran-burning on the basis of free speech miss the point. For a start, it's not free. It requires someone to go out, buy a book, buy petrol (not even cheap at the moment, never mind free), light it, film the whole thing and then distribute the proceedings to whatever little clique they call their friends, or more widely on YouTube or some other "social" medium. This is an overt, conscious action, motivated by malign intent. It is not the product of open, free-spirited discourse, but an aggressive, premeditated provocation.
Nor is it actually speech. It's not opening a dialogue or building an argument. Quite the opposite. It's a deliberate act of destruction; the destruction of a dialogue and argument constructed by others. If you don't like Islam, fine. Write a book about why. Don't burn one.
Those who see the heavy hand of the law as a disproportionate response to this act of bibliophobia are themselves losing perspective.
It's not just the action, it's the consequences. We know what Quran-burning leads to. In the past couple of weeks it has resulted in innocent people being murdered and maimed. It's increased the threat to British and western troops serving overseas. It's boosted the Taliban and other terrorist organisations.
If our laws do not exist to prevent people from deliberately engaging in actions and activity that incite others to murder, propagate international terrorism and lay the seeds of civil disorder, what are they for?
We have laws to protect a book's copyright. We have laws to protect the intellectual rights of the person who wrote and published it. But we shouldn't have laws to prevent that book being treated in a manner that leads to half a dozen people being decapitated?
Hannan writes that anyone who burned a Quran would argue that they are "not to blame for any bloody consequences and, in a sense, this is true: any retaliation will be entirely the responsibility of its perpetrators". But the law does not hold to account solely those who perpetrate the final criminal act. That's why it's not just illegal to use a firearm, or drugs, but also illegal to supply them.
Brag all about it
There are always difficulties in drawing a line between rights and responsibilities, but Quran-burning seems a good place to start.
There's an old saying that free speech doesn't extend to running into a theatre and shouting, "Fire!"
Personally, I think it depends on context. I haven't got a problem with someone doing that, so long as there's no one else in there, or it's a production by Tim Rice.
It's the same principle. If you have a desperate urge to put the Quran, or any other book, to the flame, and you do so in genuine privacy, then I suppose there's nothing I or anyone else can do about it, because we won't be any the wiser.
But if you brag about it, or taunt others with it, or use it as a weapon to prosecute your war of intolerance and prejudice, don't be surprised if you suddenly find a few members of Her Majesty's Constabulary on your doorstep.
You know the game that you're playing. Please spare us the crocodile tears when you lose.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists





















266 comments
Es gibt Basismodelle, die auf jeden Schnick-Schnack verzichten - und dann gibt es den HD 448 von Sennheiser. monster beats pro wehwwogedbzh
I don't agree with the burning of any religious text but why should the Koran be given special protection? I suppose it was okay for the military to burn the Holy Bible in Afghanistan but not, of course, the Koran. If we burn the Koran the Muslims go on a killing spree and if we had not burned those Bibles in Afghanistan they would have done likewise. It is still protected expression under the First Amendment unless you want to be ruled by Sharia Law. I think it is better to understand this so-called holy book to reveal its errors and it has plenty. Over the centuries I wonder how many churches and Bibles the tolerant Muslims have burnt? A lot!! See what is happening to non-Muslims around the world such as the Coptic Christians in Egypt, Buddhist in Thailand, Palestinian Christans and the list can go on and on. This does not make all Muslims evil of course and many are tolerant but their intolerance begs such reaction fron the Infidels.
Inside YouTube video embed code you can also specify parameters according to your desire like width, height or even border colors.
The minute i see you've a new post i typically rush over here, despite the fact that i haven't posted a comment to say thanks til now, i adore your posts. Thanks!
Dan,
Are you daft. How can you possibly determine a person's intent? Why can't a person burn a religious book, because they don't like the religion or what it stands for? I'm wondering if you intended to cause a violent response by writing this crap. What should your punishment be?
@Julia: OK you would burn it. But what happens if it is Dan on that island with no kindling. Will it be OK for him to burn it?
@Bob: bit of distinction there, but I suspect if you did it on american soil, the result would be much the same (the flag burning).
I'd be interested to see if anyone gets banged up for torching a copy of the new testament - consistency anyone?
@TC: Are you sure you're an atheist?
I have to concur though, as another proponent of the 'worm food' hypothesis.
Petey,
"Take a step back, Dan".
From far right extremists?
No thanks.
I'll confront them if it's all the same to you.
Good article Dan.
All those who are saying they don’t see what the big deal is about burning the Qur'an ( or any religious book for that matter)
What about if someone was to burn the English Flag or the Union Jack, would that not be seen as inciting and would we not want some action to be taken against the offenders.
I for one will be very much offended if someone was to burn our flag, and I understand why Muslims will be offended by someone burning their religious book.
People dont like things they hold dear to them to be vandalised/burnt etc.
I dont think anyone has a right to offend others. Otherwise were does it stop. Yes we can disagree but there is no need to offend.
Why imprison people for childish attention seeking/provocative gestures?
Have a word with them, and enlighten/preach (ooooh maybe not) people to believe what they want, and to remember that no silly childish burning symbolic gestures will dent their faith- if they're a rational human being obviously.
@mitchy -Think so yeah, the alternatives look indoctrinating :(
Dan please answer this question. Why is political-fascism hard fought against, but religious-fascism is appeased and pampered by many of the political-left?
Dan - when it comes to Islam, I back the right to burn the Koran AS LONG AS Islamic majority countries routinely:
-oppress, forcibly convert or murder Christians and other religious or secular minorities (which they do)
-deny any human rights at all to most women, disabled people, lesbians and gays (which they do)
-implement the extremes of sharia law, including jihad, beheadings, apostasy laws and blasphemy laws (which they do!)
Dan - you are a dusgrace, getting so worked up about a "holy" book being burned whilst in 2011 the lives of literally millions of people across the world are daily made a living nightmare by the followers of that book!
Grow up! Or join Hezbollah?
PG You are stranded on a desert island with lots of wood but no kindling except your photos of your wife and kids. if you lit the fire you live if you don't you die of the cold. Do you burn your photos?
Burning, say, "The Turner Diaries", or "Watership Down"for that matter will neither make the world safer from fascism, nor would it advance the cause of human liberty one inch.
i doubt very much that burning fascist books would have stopped say, Timothy McVeigh or the bomber of The Admiral Duncan.
1 - it would be very difficult to differentiate purely malicious intent from 'making a point' as a poster points out above. Having said that, I don't disagree with what the author of the article has said and that investigations should be followed through and charges should be brought. What charges could these be, though?
2 - The other point that has been made is that religious texts shouldn't be protected simply because they're religious. My own view is that the people who take offence should be the ones pressing charges and taking action against these book-burners. In the case of the Qur'an, it would be Muslims - if it were 1984 being burned, then it'd be the George Orwell Fan Club or, possibly, Secker and Warburg (yes, I did just look the publisher of 1984 up on Wikipedia). The state should only intervene to provide funding for legal aid if the group that is offended by the public and malicious destruction of a revered text has very little private funding to pursue the appropriate action.
Mr. Divine-
the point is we are not stranded on a desert- we live in society were we have repsonibility, so i dont we have to speculate about what might need to be done in an 1 in a million chance situation- rather we are talking about the norm, the real world!
@Luddite It isn't religious fascism, it's just offensive. Can't you accept that some things are offensive and should be banned? And one of them (the offensive things) is banning the public burning of the Koran.
Why are you getting your knickers in a twist about a little ban?
Do you really need to burn the Koran?
No.
Well don't be so offensive and burn it.
mitchy: burn after three-four days of drying.
@ Gautam.
No need for me to prosecute, I like 1984, If someone doesn't and they decide to burn it. Then that's their perogative.
I'm more offended when people use religious figures to justify their utterly repulsice bigotry to be honest.
It might be a one in a million but some people do win lottery.
OK lets say you're smoking a joint. It is badly rolled so that bits keep coming off the end. That can happen, yes? One of these bits drop and lands on an open page of the Koran, and burns a big hole. You could say it is an accident but you are partly neligent because you're the one who has rolled it badly and left your stuff untidy.
What do you think should be the punishment PG? You've got to admit it happens so it is quite realistic.
Repulsive*
Legal prohibition of Koran-burning on the grounds that some Muslims are violent loons who will take offence and kill people? No thanks - I can imagine how the BNP would campaign on that one.
Besides, if offending murderers is now to be illegal, shouldn't we start by prosecuting the "dancing slags" whose reckless pursuit of a night out put so many Londoners' lives in danger a few years ago?
I don't get it, is burning books illegal? Yes it's repugnant and idiotic, obnoxious and obtuse, but I don't see why any book should be held as sacred and a criminal offence to destroy.
The receipt is unimportant Dan, the book is only paper. It's when you start burning people, and that's actually why we should always confront medievalist barbarism, never pamper to it!!
Lets not forget that these same Islamists who are always claiming victim status for all there ills, they have murdered in cold blood innocent people not even connected with this burning, they just happens to be foreign nationals.
Its like we have become de-sensitized to Islamic violence, like we come to expect it. The same is true in Israel where the Fogel family are brutally slaughtered in there beds and the BBC and NS say nothing of it, its like they deserved it.
Its really tragic as we have worked so hard to be free and to question unreservedly beliefs and scriptures in yet with Islam there is a different set of rules and the threat of real violence and being called a bigot hangs over anyone who should dare highlight the terrible acts committed in the name of the 'religion of peace' what a joke.
There is something wrong when there is true evil in the world and its showing it face and you get people like Dan saying, dont burn the Devils book as it will offend followers of this terrible Ideology.
Mr. Divine: Some Muslims find homosexuality "just offensive". Some are offended by education for girls. Are you going to ban those too?
I started a stopwatch when the decapitations in Mazar-i Sharif took place, to see how long it would take for journalists to obfuscate the issue of extremists murdering unaffiliated, innocent people with the argument that burning the Qur'an somehow "leads to" crimes such as this.
On the sound basis that the extremists did not have to decapitate those UN employees, why should this issue focus upon anyone other than them? How does burning a book compare in any way to such horrific actions?
There's a plaque in the square in Berlin where they burnt the books, written in the 1820s.
'Those who burn books will one day burn people'.
I think it's quite an important statement.
Great article.
'A former soldier has been sentenced to 70 days in prison for setting fire to a copy of Muslim holy book the Koran in the centre of Carlisle.
'Andrew Ryan had previously admitted religiously aggravated harassment and theft of a Koran from a library.'
Happy now, Hodges, you pathetic excuse for a man?
Which is worse -- destroying one Qur'an, or destroying many Christians?
The now infamous Koran burning by Florida pastor Terry Jones has created hysteria in the Muslim world. In Afghanistan alone, some twenty people, including U.N. workers, have been killed and beheaded to screams of "Allahu Akbar!" Western leaders around the globe—including Obama and members of Congress—have unequivocally condemned Jones' actions (without bothering to point out that freedom of expression is a prized American liberty). Many are even blaming the deaths in Afghanistan directly on Jones; Bill O'Reilley says he has "blood on his hands."
Yet, as Western leaders rush to profess their abhorrence at what one American did to one inanimate book, let's take a quick look at what many Muslims are doing to many living and breathing Christians around the Islamic world—to virtually no media coverage or Western condemnation:
Afghanistan: A Muslim convert to Christianity was seized and, according to sharia's apostasy laws, awaits execution.
Bangladesh: A Christian man was arrested for distributing Bibles near Muslims. Since Wednesday, thousands of Muslims have been rioting, injuring dozens—not because of Jones, but in protestation of women's rights.
Egypt: A Muslim mob burned down another Coptic church and dozens of Christian homes; when Christians protested, the military opened fire on them while crying "Allahu Akbar," killing nine. Another mob cut a Christian man's ear off "according to sharia."
Ethiopia: Muslims went on a rampage burning down nearly 70 churches, killing at least one Christian, and dislocating as many as 10,000. Christians living in Muslim majority regions are being warned to either convert to Islam, abandon their homes, or die.
Malaysia: Authorities detained and desecrated thousands of Bibles.
Pakistan: Two Christians were shot to death as they exited church; a Christian serving life in prison for "blasphemy" died in his cell under suspicions of murder.
Saudi Arabia: An Eritrean Christian has been arrested for sharing his faith with Muslims and is facing the death penalty; other missionaries continue to languish in Saudi prisons.
Somalia and Sudan: Christian girls—including a mother of four—were recently abducted, raped, and killed for embracing Christianity.
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/9394/koran-christian-persecution
Mr Devine what is the Koran? It's probably the most plagiarised books in history. Out of all the three desert dogmas Mohammedanism is the latecomer, one could argue that because it's a relatively new religion one should excuse it's exsesses and it's fanaticism. One shouldn't, and Dan still waiting your reply.
Interesting in the coverage of this it appears that the British Koran burners may face legal action, whilst in the USA - even though everyone from the President down condemns their actions - it is clear they have the right to do this.
The First Ammendment guarantees freedom of speech and - yes - this includes burning the American flag.
Whatever happened to "this nation will not negotiate with terrorists"?
Dan, correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like you're saying that, as soon as sufficient nutjobs take a dislike to something, we should ban it. After all, said arseholes might decide to retaliate if we don't.
Wasn't that one of the arguments presented against gay rights and interracial marriages, that it would rile the population? The Ku Klux Klan certainly reacted unpleasantly enough - should we have kept miscegenation illegal until they changed their minds?
I wouldn't burn a Quran, in the same way that I wouldn't date another guy. But I'll defend to the death other people's right to do it.
The precedent we set by banning such an act is infinitely scarier than the particular group of looney-tunes who decide to take offence at it.
to everybody in England: you are all racists
Alex,
No, I'm saying if someone commits an act with the specific intention of provoking a violent response that act should itself be banned.
Mixed race couples in the south tended to get married because they loved each other, not because they wanted to provoke a lynching.
Dan
Patrick Hayes,
"It is an updated, perhaps slightly more PC version of the same patronising assumptions that were exposed in the Lady Chatterley Trial".
So Sion Owens is the new DH Lawrence?
You're having a laugh, right?
That's interesting... apparently if you post under one name on this website, it associates that name with your email address forevermore.
The incredibly pretentious-looking "MA (Cantab)" on my last comment (and possibly this comment) shouldn't have been there. I added it for another comment thread, where it was actually relevant. Please ignore.
we can see there are a lot of people they are trying to disturb the peace of the world, but they cant do this, because every one is mature perfectly .....Alhamduliallah, Muslim are managed, and no one can destrory the Quran Nauzbillah,, because Allah have taken its responsibility on his own to reserve it... and more ,, there a lot of Muslims MashALLH THEY HAVE saved Quran in their chest, than how can one person do this???never possible.. it is just they are trying to disturb the peace in the world..
On 10th May 1933, the Nazis burned books in Berlin.
Maybe we should organise a flashmob reading across the UK on 10th May this year to protest the Qu'ran burnings.
Great article.
@Lobotomy: No I wont ban education for girls and homosexuality ..why do you ask?
"No, I'm saying if someone commits an act with the specific intention of provoking a violent response that act should itself be banned."
a) How on earth do you demonstrate that that was the intention? Can you describe a situation where someone could burn a Quran *without* being vulnerable to accusations of this sort of provocation?
b) I am quite sure that the KKK would have accused many mixed-race couples of doing it just to get a reaction. Certainly this was the case with gay couples who were accused of flaunting their wickedness and trying to destroy the Christian family. Ever tried listening to American radio?
c) To generalise the above points... I can understand arresting people for provoking violence against another ethnic/cultural group. But arresting people for provoking violence against their *own* group seems like one hell of a slippery slope. Is that just me?
d) Kudos for responding to comments :)
My thoughts are here
http://patosgood.wordpress.com/2011/04/14/legitimating-terror/
Luddite; What is the Koran? The Koran is a symbol of faith and high respect. Why do you need to abuse this symbol of other people? You don't. It doesn't matter if the religion is 'new' or 'old', what matters is that it is valuable for some people. That's what matters.
Luddite you don't understand or respect the value of religion for other people.
gerry I think you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. Islamic society isn't as bad as you make out.
Tom,
Yes I saw your piece.
You seem to regard those who frequent gay clubs as the moral equivalent of book burning neo-Nazis.
Interesting analogy.
I'm not a great fan of Koran burning. If you want to show what a vile and stupid book the Koran is, you don't set fire to it. You open it.
But the argument set out above for banning Koran burning is ridiculous. If a group of Nazis pledged to go on a murderous rampage should anyone dare to burn a copy of Mein Kampf, should we then outlaw the burning of Mein Kampf?
According to Hodges logic, yes we should.
Urk. My point there was that offence is subjective, and so shouldn't be the basis of lawmaking.
Eh? Wheres my post gone?
All I wanted to ask Dan, was whether its ok to use a page of the Koran to skin up with, as the New Testament's good for this. Would this be a punishable offence in the eyes of Muslims?
mitchy; when you come to cannabis smokers meeting whatever you do don't disrespect another person's wares. Always say it's shit hot even though it is piss poor.
Dan Hodges supports the Grassers at the Observer and the prosecution of a private act,which only became public when the grassers grassed him up.
Dan Hodges friend of grassers and the wet fart left.Hasen and his trendy 'no beard' Islamism is working