The conflict between freedom of speech and religious sensitivity has been again touched off by the burning of a Koran by a virtually unknown pastor, at an unknown church with only a few dozen adherents in central Florida. The result has been two beheadings and a death toll of over 20 as Afghans rioted and murdered in Mazar i-Sharif.
I certainly agree that it is disrespectful and unproductive to burn Korans despite my disagreements with many aspects of the Islamic religion. However, I also strongly believe that if a free citizen like Terry Jones has every right to burn the Koran or any other book or symbol he so desires. Of course, he's required to comply with various fire code regulations as the bureaucrats must be appeased to some degree.
I find it especially troubling that the "moderate" GOP Senator from South Carolina, Lindsay Graham, has indicated he believes that such speech should be regulated. It is controversial speech, inflammatory speech, and passionate speech that is precisely what needs to be protected most and is the reason that the United States has the first amendment, that Canada has Section 2 of the Charter of Rights, and that other free nations have similar protections of both speech and religious practice.
It is even more worrying that Terry Jones, this nobody pastor in Gainesville, FL, has elicited such violent behavior around the world. Are Afghans really that troubled by one man's burning of a book on the other side of the world? I don't think most devoted Christians would give two hoots about a Bible being burned in Kabul, Peshawar, or Rihad. The fact is, the ideas and principles contained in the Bible are not threatened by a single person burning a copy. Terry Jones has exposed some Muslims for being the very thing he predicted: prone to violence in devotion to their religion. Perhaps a rural tribesman in northern Afghanistan may not have realized this, but certainly Hamid Karzai should realize that he's only helping to Jones' one-man crusade by inflating the incident beyond rational proportion.
Mark Steyn comments in the Corner:
Those rioters who beheaded, attacked, and slew UN workers in northern Afghanistan only provided Jones, and his followers, ammunition and evidence to back up their theories about Islam. And while I sympathize with Gen. Patreaus, especially considering a good friend of mind is fighting in Afghanistan with the Canadian forces right now, that such controversial actions endanger our troops overseas, certainly we should not be appeasing our enemies and sacrificing our values and principles in the vain hope that our enemies will lay off and back down since we're playing nice.
Seeing that Christians are subject to execution if the convert from Islam in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere throughout the Islamic world, it seems that the "tolerance" deficit is decidedly in the Middle East and Islamic world, not in the West. Similarly, while thousands of mosques exist in the West, Christianity and missionaries are essentially banned and made illegal throughout the Middle East. A British man who happens to be gay faces possible execution by our so-called ally, Saudi Arabia. Why? Well, a gay Saudi prince murdered his lover in England, he was arrested and the story became public. King Saud and family are upset that the Saudi prince's orientation became public knowledge and, as a result, they're now having a show-trial for a Brit foreigner:
"Religious cops lured Stephen Comiskey, 36, into an ambush by sending him texts posing as a friend of his.
They beat him up, flung him in a cell and told him he faced charges of homosexuality - a capital offence under the Muslim kingdom's Sharia law."
The West needs to stop apologizing for its culture, for its history, and for its liberal-democratic values. If we want to do a cultural comparison with Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and other "allies" in the Middle East, it becomes painfully clear who is tolerant, open, organized, less corrupt, merciful, humanitarian, and generous.
Simply put: Free speech trumps Afghan sensibilities. If you don't like it, grow a thicker skin or enjoy Taliban rule.
I certainly agree that it is disrespectful and unproductive to burn Korans despite my disagreements with many aspects of the Islamic religion. However, I also strongly believe that if a free citizen like Terry Jones has every right to burn the Koran or any other book or symbol he so desires. Of course, he's required to comply with various fire code regulations as the bureaucrats must be appeased to some degree.
I find it especially troubling that the "moderate" GOP Senator from South Carolina, Lindsay Graham, has indicated he believes that such speech should be regulated. It is controversial speech, inflammatory speech, and passionate speech that is precisely what needs to be protected most and is the reason that the United States has the first amendment, that Canada has Section 2 of the Charter of Rights, and that other free nations have similar protections of both speech and religious practice.
It is even more worrying that Terry Jones, this nobody pastor in Gainesville, FL, has elicited such violent behavior around the world. Are Afghans really that troubled by one man's burning of a book on the other side of the world? I don't think most devoted Christians would give two hoots about a Bible being burned in Kabul, Peshawar, or Rihad. The fact is, the ideas and principles contained in the Bible are not threatened by a single person burning a copy. Terry Jones has exposed some Muslims for being the very thing he predicted: prone to violence in devotion to their religion. Perhaps a rural tribesman in northern Afghanistan may not have realized this, but certainly Hamid Karzai should realize that he's only helping to Jones' one-man crusade by inflating the incident beyond rational proportion.
Mark Steyn comments in the Corner:
In the absence of cultural confidence overseas, we are expending blood and treasure building an Afghanistan fit only for pederasts, tribal heroin cartels, and the blood-soaked savages of Mazar e-Sharif. In the absence of cultural confidence at home, we are sending the message that the bedrock principles of free, pluralist societies will bend and crumble in a vain race to keep up with the ever touchier sensitivities of the perpetually aggrieved. Claire Berlinski has it right: The real “racists” here are not this no-name pastor and his minimal flock but Reid, Graham, and the Times — for they assume that a significant proportion of Muslims are not responsible human beings but animals no more capable of rational behavior than the tiger who mauled Siegfried’s Roy. If that is true, certain consequences follow therefrom. The abandonment of the First Amendment is not one of them.
Those rioters who beheaded, attacked, and slew UN workers in northern Afghanistan only provided Jones, and his followers, ammunition and evidence to back up their theories about Islam. And while I sympathize with Gen. Patreaus, especially considering a good friend of mind is fighting in Afghanistan with the Canadian forces right now, that such controversial actions endanger our troops overseas, certainly we should not be appeasing our enemies and sacrificing our values and principles in the vain hope that our enemies will lay off and back down since we're playing nice.
Seeing that Christians are subject to execution if the convert from Islam in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere throughout the Islamic world, it seems that the "tolerance" deficit is decidedly in the Middle East and Islamic world, not in the West. Similarly, while thousands of mosques exist in the West, Christianity and missionaries are essentially banned and made illegal throughout the Middle East. A British man who happens to be gay faces possible execution by our so-called ally, Saudi Arabia. Why? Well, a gay Saudi prince murdered his lover in England, he was arrested and the story became public. King Saud and family are upset that the Saudi prince's orientation became public knowledge and, as a result, they're now having a show-trial for a Brit foreigner:
"Religious cops lured Stephen Comiskey, 36, into an ambush by sending him texts posing as a friend of his.
They beat him up, flung him in a cell and told him he faced charges of homosexuality - a capital offence under the Muslim kingdom's Sharia law."
The West needs to stop apologizing for its culture, for its history, and for its liberal-democratic values. If we want to do a cultural comparison with Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and other "allies" in the Middle East, it becomes painfully clear who is tolerant, open, organized, less corrupt, merciful, humanitarian, and generous.
Simply put: Free speech trumps Afghan sensibilities. If you don't like it, grow a thicker skin or enjoy Taliban rule.
3 comments:
Back in the real world nobody with half a brain thinks burning the Koran "caused" any violence. As a matter of fact how is this different than before it was burned?
Yeah, but we have a bigger problem closer to home. DeathStar 2011 a.k.a. Liberal Red Book:
http://burpnrun.blogspot.com/2011/04/deathstar-2011-liberal-red-book-fantasy.html
as this become the great news for the whole world.. one every TV and internet channel,, it was going on,,, but if we see that,, it wont look something Good,, its a religious duty of every one not try to insult some other religion.. and every body knows this well....BURNING Quran dosent means that it will finish..or the book or Quran will end from this world,, its a bit low thinking,, because no one can destroy it,, God have taken its responsibility on his own.. ever body sees that,, from long 14,00 years,, it never changed,, and will be never change...
Quran learning
Post a Comment