England Arrests 15-Year-Old Girl For Allegedly Burning Koran

England has continued its move toward comprehensive blasphemy prosecution with the arrest of a 15-year-old girl for inciting religious hatred by allegedly burning a copy of the Koran (Qur’an) — and showing the act on Facebook. I have written in columns and blog entries (here and here and here) about this dangerous trend in the West as citizens are arrested for blasphemy laws.

So citizens are protected in burning books ranging from Das Capital to The Federalist Papers. However, if the book is a religious text, they can be criminally charged?

Under British law, an adult can face up to seven years in prison, a fine or both.

Such laws not only deny free speech but they allow countries to define what they consider an insult to religion — particularly majoritarian faiths. I remain astonished by the lack of outcry in the West over its adoption of blasphemy prosecutions.

Source: Daily Mail

Jonathan Turley

36 thoughts on “England Arrests 15-Year-Old Girl For Allegedly Burning Koran”

  1. Hi Buddha,

    A special thank-you, I still very much enjoy reading your posts and it is guilty pleasure of mine when I witness a significant smack-down. Well done, as always!


    “…the simple fact that there’s a reason why government choose to appease Muslim and only Muslims.”

    The simple fact (as previously pointed out by others) is that you are blinded by your own hatred and loathing … I guess you don’t mind so much systemic government appeasement to the corporations, the wealthy, the scientifically challenged and most glaringly the Homophobes; just to name a few.

    Just curious, do you still suffer from your “crush” on Chris Christie, he doesn’t “crush” just anyone you know!

  2. jonolan,

    And does this same level of “loathing” attach to others as well, i.e., those whom you classify as “domestic enemies” on your web site? Just wondering…

  3. Awwwww. Poor you.

    Well, since this is a secular government under the Constitution, it is proper to attack any and all religions that try to assert their influence over it. Believe whatever you want, but keep it out of law and policy. Because the 1st Amendment says so. If you got a problem with that, that would make you an enemy of the Constitution by the very fact you advance a religiously based agenda of genocide. The last time I heard hateful ranting like you’ve demonstrated today, it was in German.

    As to where you’ve lived? I kinda doubt it. So far I have yet to see evidence in your posts that your life experience is nearly that broad. You pop in occasionally, spew some form of hatred and pout with all the dark malice your lil’ goth Crow icon can muster. Small exposure breeds small minds and there is nothing more small minded that advocating theocratic genocide.

  4. anon nurse,

    “Is it “Godly” to loathe, or feel a complete lack of empathy for another human being, just because he or she is a Muslim?”

    I’m not Christian, so won’t speak for them, but it’s certainly Godly within my faith to loath one’s enemies until such time as they have earned my hatred.

    I referenced the Godlessness of Turley because he consistently attacks any and all religions on this blog. He’s not just one of the Godless; he’s a rabid anti-theist, as are many of the regular suspects here aside from myself.


    Wrong again! I lived for years among Muslims in their countries. You should have realized that, since it takes a great deal of exposure to something or someone to reach my level of loathing for them.

    As for destructive – I would hope I outmatched them. We’re not going to win this war by being less committed to it then they are – and I certainly don’t want to have to fight twice or more due to foolishly showing unwarranted mercy.

  5. jonolan,

    I’m not the one blinded by zealous hatred. Based on your statements, you clearly don’t know any Muslims. They come in all flavors, from the live and let live progressive types to the insane blow up shit type.

    Oddly enough, so do Christians.

    The problem isn’t either religion, but when people use either religion to justify murder of “the other” (no matter whom that other might be at the time). In advocating the elimination of all Muslims like they were sewer rats, you are engaged in a behavior every bit as destructive as any Muslim fundie.

    Fundamentalism is a form of mental illness, no matter what tradition it claims to fall under. Religious texts are not absolute truths nor are they verifiable. This is why the realm of the real – governance – should always be secular and based on logic, ethics and science – all systems with built-in verification and validation mechanisms.

    But you stick with unreasoned hatred. It looks good on you.

  6. jonolan –

    You said, “I no more hate a Muslim than hate a rabid sewer rat or the AIDS virus. That doesn’t stop me from advocating the elimination of any of them for the sake of the Public Health.”

    Muslims are human beings. They aren’t rabid sewer rats — and they aren’t viruses. And “they” aren’t a “public health” problem, as you state. But I’ll revise what I asked earlier.

    – Is it “Godly” to loathe, or feel a complete lack of empathy for another human being, just because he or she is a Muslim? (You referenced the “Godlessness” of our host.)

    – Furthermore, I can’t even imagine how awful it must be to be filled with such loathing, and/or have a complete lack any empathy/feeling for others — any others.

  7. buddha,

    You, like so many, willfully turn a blind eye to the simple fact that there’s a reason why government choose to appease Muslim and only Muslims.

    It is because there are NOT extremist Muslims, or rather that what we would consider extreme is commonplace among them. If anything else were true, we wouldn’t see the near-constant appeasement of them – or Obama’s and Gen. Petreus’ fear-filled remarks of a few months ago.

    anon nurse,

    That would be loathing, not hatred. Muslims aren’t worthy of the respect that is inherently part of hatred. I no more hate a Muslim than hate a rabid sewer rat or the AIDS virus. That doesn’t stop me from advocating the elimination of any of them for the sake of the Public Health.

  8. Kaz,

    Maybe in the UK, but isn’t Poland prosecuting someone for desecrating the bible? I believe it is discussed in one of Prof. Turley’s links.

    Also, in regards to bending over backwards to appease a particular religious group, I do not believe that this is really unique to Islam. It is just that respect for various Christians and Jews is so mainstream in the contemporary west that it is essentially unconscious. This was not always the case of course. There was plenty of discrimination against Catholics and Jews in the past, and I would imagine that once this discrimination was recognized as something bad there were probably plenty of examples of people “bending over backwards” to not offend them prior to its becoming mainstream.

    Do some reading on “Christian privilege” or think about the so-called “War on Christmas” and realize that there are plenty of people who demand or expect that Christianity receive special treatment as well. Just because it is unconscious and/or largely invisible does not mean it does not exist.

    In closing, I would add that Islam is still a highly unpopular religious minority in Europe, as evidenced by recent elections in Holland and Switzerland. Given Europe’s historical treatment of unpopular religious minorities, I am not too surprised to see measures taken (unwise though these measure may be) to try to bar overt acts directed against them.

  9. Jonolan,

    You wrote: “AS (sic) usual, Turley’s Godlessness and anti-theist derangement…”

    – Is hatred “Godly?”

    And you then said, “This is because ONLY the filthy, subhuman followers of their Pedophile Prophet…”, followed by a reference to the “…vermin of Islam…”

    – I can’t even imagine how awful it must be to be filled with such hatred.

  10. Oops, just read what I wrote. I didn’t mean that Islam is insane (well, no more than any other religion) but the way that we bend over backwards to appease this particular religious group is insane.

  11. While I do thnk that Jonolan is sounding a little hysterical, I do agree that if the girl had burned any other religious text she would have gotten away with it.
    For some reason we’re too busy trying to appease followers of Islam to realise that it’s insane.
    Personally, I would say that as long as she hadn’t nicked the Koran it was hers to do with as she sees fit.
    I don’t think this will teach her to respect people with differing beliefs, it’ll just teach her not to post stuff like that on the internet. When will these kids learn that if you’re going to do something you shouldn’t, you shouldn’t collect evidence that can be used against you?

  12. jonolan,

    Therein lies your problem. You let your hatred is Islam translate to a hatred of all Muslims. Not all Muslims are destruction bent fanatics any more than all Christians are destruction bent fanatics – but some are. Muslims deserve no more special treatment under the law than Christians do, be it from either the protection or the prosecution angle and you’d realize this if you properly understood the ideas behind the 1st Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

    Or you can continue to be the simple hate-filled, logically bereft creature we’ve all come to expect from your posts.

    Either way.

  13. Outrage!

    I’m not sure what else to do, since I don’t live in the UK. But I am indeed outraged.

  14. buddha,

    Hardly misplaced – Those politicians would either get their minds right or side with the Muslims. Any who choose the latter, along with their kin, can rightfully be burnt along with the Muslims. The same holds true for anyone else who sides with the enemy.


    Come back to reality, or leave off the useless, legalistic spinning of non-facts.

    You should be aware by this point in your life that enforcement is the soul of the law. Irrespective of what has been codified, what is truth is what is enforced.

    Can you cite me cases where UK citizens have been arrested for burning a Bible, Torah, Bhagavad Gītā, Sri Guru Granth Sahib, or other holy tome other than the Qur’an?

  15. jonolan:

    The UK’s “Hatred Against Persons on Religious Grounds” law makes no distinction between religions and, to that extent, is religiously neutral. I have read the law and it attempts to protect religions from threats of violence and intimidation by those intending to stir up “religious hatred.” The term “Religious hated” is defined to protect followers of religions and those who follow no religion from hatred based on their beliefs. Laudable goals in the abstract but difficult to define in application.

    It does not apply to words spoken inside a dwelling and heard by occupants therein but it does apply to threats made in private settings as well as public settings. There is even a provision which protects expression:

    “29J Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system.”

    It tries to walk the line between free speech and preserving order in a pluralistic society. I just don’t think it does a particularly good job in practice.

    Here’s the law:


  16. Burning Muslims?

    My but your aggression is misplaced, jonolan.

    The “necessary work” would entail burning politicians who try to strip away civil rights in the name of theocratic capitulation to zealots.

    And jonolan?

    I am only saying this because I care – there are a lot of decaffeinated brands on the market today that are just as tasty as the real thing.

  17. Robert A. Heinlein, speaking as his fictional character Lazarus Long, wrote:

    “Of all the strange “crimes” that human beings have legislated out of nothing, “blasphemy”is the most amazing — with “obscenity” and “indecent exposure” fighting it out for second and third place.”

    He also wrote:

    “One man’s theology is another man’s belly laugh.”

  18. Happily, that won’t happen. We’ll stop burning just Qur’ans and start the necessary work of burning Muslims before that happens.

  19. AS usual, Turley’s Godlessness and anti-theist derangement have blinded him to the actual facts of the matter at hand.

    The girl wasn’t arrested for burning a religious text; she was arrested for burning a Qur’an. She could have burned a Bible, a Torah, or any other religious work without reprimand or reprisal. Only the destruction of the Qur’an will get a person charged with a crime.

    This is solely a Muslim problem, not a religious problem. The courts in the UK don’t care about “inciting religious hatred” except when and where Muslims are involved.

    This is because ONLY the filthy, subhuman followers of their Pedophile Prophet regularly and consistently respond to perceived insults with rabid violence.

    Sadly the governments in the West are unwilling to address the real problem, preferring to attack their own peoples instead in the vain hope of appeasing the vermin of Islam.

Comments are closed.