Burning Quran — Right to Burn

This site presents media and argument around lawful symbolic expression in secular societies. It is about the legal principle that people are free to publicly destroy their own property, including books, without threatening or harming anyone.

View media Read why

Note: No harassment or violence toward any person is supported here. This is principle-focused commentary.

Media

A Quran is burned by an activist from the small right-wing group, Danish Activists.

July 28, 2023 in Copenhagen, Denmark, Ole Jensen (Getty Images)

credit @LiberalTearCreator

Keep videos click-to-play (no autoplay)

Downloaded from YouTube

Why this exists

In a secular and free society, the state does not enforce religious sanctity. People hold many beliefs, and those beliefs can be criticized, rejected, or symbolically opposed without targeting individuals.

Public destruction of one’s own property—such as paper or books—can be a form of symbolic speech. Some expression is provocative; a free society protects expression precisely because it is not limited to what is polite.

This page exists to document and discuss that principle: freedom of expression includes the freedom to offend, while still rejecting harassment, threats, or violence toward anyone.

Core principles

Ideas can be opposed

Beliefs and symbols are not immune from criticism or symbolic rejection.

People are not targets

This site does not endorse hostility, harassment, or violence toward any person or group.

Lawful expression

Expression should remain within legal boundaries: no threats, no incitement, no stalking or doxxing.

Equal rules

A consistent standard: freedom applies even when the message is unpopular or offensive.

Disclaimer

This site is for commentary and documentation of symbolic expression.
No calls for harassment, threats, or violence are permitted or encouraged.
Do not trespass, endanger others, or violate local laws. Jurisdictions differ.

FAQ

Is this site anti-Muslim?

No. The focus is on a legal and political principle—freedom of expression—while explicitly rejecting hostility toward people. If you add content, keep it principle-focused and avoid targeting individuals or groups.

Why use this specific example?

Because it is controversial and tests whether societies apply free-expression rules consistently, including when expression is offensive.

Is this legal?

In many secular democratic societies, freedom of expression protects not only popular or polite speech but also expression that may offend, shock, or challenge deeply held beliefs. Courts in several countries recognize that symbolic acts — including the public destruction of one’s own property — can constitute a form of political or philosophical expression. The principle behind this protection is that laws in a secular society do not grant special immunity to ideas, books, or symbols from criticism or rejection. Freedom of expression exists precisely to allow disagreement, dissent, and symbolic protest without fear of punishment, provided that no violence, threats, or harassment against individuals occurs.

Can I contact you?

Add an email address in the footer below.