So I can understand that the military doesn’t want to increase tension, but here’s my question: The Iraqis we’re fighting with can’t tell the difference between the torch carrying Floridians and the troops that have been protecting them? Isn’t that a little odd since they expect us to not associate them with the insurgent bomb-toting Iraqi Islamists (by usage, implying a difference between an Islamist and a Muslim)?
Afghan protesters chanted “death to America…”
Really? So the actions of a small sect of people justify wishing death on the entire nation?! So does that mean that do or don’t want to be associated with the radical Islamist bombers? I’m confused.
I believe the idea for an organized quran burning on 9/11 is exactly as good an idea as building a mosque at ground zero. And in this country, I think each party has the “right” to do it, thus becoming a in interweb terms, a ridiculous troll.
Subscribe / RSS
Three interesting reactions:
John @ Powerline troubled by the military weighing in on free speech.
J.E. Deyer questioning if it’s a Christian thing to do.
And Howard Portnoy thinking along the same lines as Z.
Good articles…
Â
I feel I should comment on the second article because I very much agree with his main points. The need to burn a quran to make a point is just as nutty as the idea that it can never be burned because burning it deals 2d10+3 blasphemy damage to Mohammed. And that his followers have to protect him by rioting and killing people that were not in any way responsible for blasphemy.
Â
The J.E. Deyer article links to this list of 10 reasons why they want to burn a koran. Strangely, I do agree with these 10 points, but I think holding a book-roast is just engaging in a blasphemy pissing contest.
Â
Where could they have gotten mixed up? In the Old Testament, it was ordered that Jews should burn symbols of the gods of decadence that were common at the time such as the Asheroth poles which were associated with sexual conquest (sometimes forcible). I would hope that if all Islam were that radical, we would burn plenty of books. But Christians on the other hand, are given guidelines to speak truth in love, but avoid conflict and “useless arguing which creates division.” Opposite to some of the actions of so-called Christians of the past (e.g. crusades, forced “conversion” of Native Americans), scripture tells us that salvation can’t be forced. It’s a personal choice, and we as humans are not even responsible for whether or not it happens. A Christ follower is responsible for speaking the truth (in humble way) as he/she understands it, but not to judge what happens to truth after it leaves their mouth. If nobody listens, there is no mandate to burn anything or even to start buying television ads (shudder). Have you seen those creepy “and I’m a Mormon” ads? Yikes.
More:
Michelle Malkin’s take: Don’t Burn the Koran, Read it. (Includes a must-see video)
Drew M at Ace of Spades who makes some of the same points as Z, but also has bonus points, including this:
As this story continues to develop, the pastor is now wavering after meeting with a Floridian Muslim community leader.
And so the spotlight is once again pulled toward ground zero and the mosque building plan thereon. It only gets funnier as political leaders insist that the mosque has every right to be built, but when it comes to burning korans, the focus is on whether or not it’s a good idea to piss people off.
Is anyone else getting massive religious prejudice undertones from this? So Muslims are so petty that we can never afford to exercise our rights if it upsets them? Islam is so fragile and vindictive that we have to be sure we step between the eggshells, being certain to not even glance at the eggshells?
And if there’s anyone still in the camp that believes the anti-ground-zero-mosque crowd is being childish, let me propose this…
Let’s say the IRA brutally fire-bombs thousands of Muslims in Southern France where many Muslims have immigrated. Now, a Catholic church that doesn’t support, but also doesn’t strongly denounce the IRA wants to build a huge new cathedral nearby.
Really imagine that.
Can we please draw a line between sensitivity toward the victims of murder and socially offensive slander? Burning a koran is slanderous, but does it warrant riots that will cause more death?
How much more of this overreaction and childish demands before Islamic leaders lose all credibility and are finally unable to hold the whole world hostage?
Bonus reference: I’m reminded that one person even got away with murder when there was fear that idiots would riot as they had before. Just like with terrorists, one can’t give in to the threat of riot, because violent idiots will find any excuse they can to create mayhem.