Reply #4: Respectfully, it's really not the same.

[Matariki]

It would only be the same if people who were offended by the word 'fire' did violence to their fellow theater-goers and you wanted to hold the person who yelled the word responsible for other's actions. The 'yelling fire in a theater' example refers specifically to causing panic that makes people run for the exit and potentially trample their fellow theater-goers. Panic and anger over being offended are two different animals.

That sort of reasoning can't go anywhere good. It will lead to censorship based on the reactions things cause in other people. A slippery slope. I thought that Danish cartoon and Piss Christ were disrespectful too, but wouldn't want to see either censored.

As stupid and hateful as burning books is - it doesn't justify or create responsibility for an equally stupid response.

If the man was going to his neighborhood mosque and burning something there it would be another story, but this really is a first amendment issue. He deserves to be criticized and shunned, and he *really* should be ignored by the media, but he's not breaking the law. Only common decency.