lukzak

Getting addicted to drugs isn't exactly an insurmountable barrier

Damn Texas. Sometimes you do manage to do something right.

They can be arrested or just refused entry if they are known to be connected to extremist groups. They should be screened as any other person traveling to Denmark.

If we let them, especially external actors, influence our domestic policy, then they win. Look at what happened to the USA after 9/11. The terrorists won and it's proof that terrorism works. Not only do the people capitulate to the terrorists, but bad domestic actors use it as a means to push some other (anti freedom) agenda.

The alternative is just laying down and letting medeival assholes decide domestic policies of the secular world. Don't let terrorism win.

The burners are not causing problems. They're exposing a sickness that these individual people have in their minds. A healthy person doesn't try to hurt someone just because they're offended.

These sick people who would hurt someone for burning a book are the same sort that would throw acid on a woman for some bullshit medieval family honor, for example.

Better to incite them and get them arrested and perhaps even deported before they're allowed to hurt anyone. It shows you won't tolerate it in your society.

Hell, it may even encourage more moderate Muslims to move to that country if they know that the society doesn't tolerate the actions of the small, insane minority. The Muslims that believe in liberal ideals like freedom of expression are exactly the type of immigrants that make a society stronger and we should encourage them.

All this law will do is allow that unhinged mental illness to rest, in secret, before coming out in some other toxic way.

I'm not saying that the book burners are being entirely altruistic here. I wouldn't be surprised if they honestly hated all Muslims. But it is their right to express it without hurting anyone. This feels more like a "broken clock is right twice a day" sort of situation.

How about we strive for a society where people can burn their own property without having to worry about violence?

The islamists that react violently are only proving the point of the people burning the books. Tbh if you try to hurt someone for just burning SOMETHING THEY OWN, maybe you don't deserve to live in a first world country.

In this case, couldn't an artist simply not disclose that they used AI for things like script writing or character creation? It would be on the public to figure it out, wouldn't it? It's not necessary to prove that you didn't use AI in creating the works, is it?

Burning books doesn't cause any physical harm to anyone. Someone that would hurt other people for burning books doesn't deserve to live in a first world society. Whether it be the Bible, Quran, Torah, whatever. It doesn't even matter if they're baiting people into violence. They're just proving that these individuals have those insane violent tendencies inside of them.

You keep putting yourself into the position where you GO somewhere. Sure, don't go to Israel if you're a Nazi.

Don't go to Alabama at all.

Don't go to Portland as a supporter of fascism if you don't want to be labeled as a fascist.

Don't go to a 1st world country if you want to cut off people's heads for burning books. Don't go to places if you don't support the principles they've carved out there. It's not that hard.

I know it's just an anecdote, but I've know quite a few Muslim women that prefer to wear it. I've also met many who don't like to wear them. Is it really fair to ban it for the ones that actually choose to wear it?

Women choosing to dress conservatively isn't exactly something foreign to Italians. Let's not forget that nuns also wear very similar clothing and cover their hair. That's not so different from a hijab.

Wow, that's pretty crazy to think that so many people can't/won't get a bank account. Are these people undocumented immigrants with no identification? Is this the same part of the population that is targeted by the ID laws for voting?

How are those people getting money? Is it really possible in the USA to just be paid with an envelope of cash? Or is it under the table work? Or if they are poor, is there any kind of benefit/welfare from the government? Don't they need a bank account to receive those funds?

I'm just asking because in my country, I was able to open a bank account for free. I've had it for a year and I've never even deposited any money into it. But I have a debit card for that account. It seems impossible to me to have no access to a bank account. Even if you're homeless, you're still able to use your town hall as a contact address for official things.

For sure, I agree it should be used only in cases where we're absolutely sure that they did it. For example, mass shooters that are taken into custody mid-shooting and there is an absolutely undeniable chain of custody to ensure that the wrong person isn't getting killed.

That doesn't seem possible, at least in my country. The fact that we have executed people that turned out to be incocent later makes my stomach turn.

I don't have a problem with the state killing people in principle. I just have a problem with the state killing the incorrect people (actual, guilty people that don't deserve to live).

Is this actually an unpopular opinion? For sure horrible like all things in war, but I understand that the alternative was an invasion with a hell of a lot more casualties.

Should the USA have invaded Japan instead?