The New York Times is reporting the story of Terry Jones’ plan to commemorate the 9/11 attacks by burning 50 Qur’ans. While I find his actions repulsive, and needlessly offensive to me and every other Muslim, irrespective of our political views, I must say that he nonetheless has every right to burn his own property or that which is voluntarily donated to him. In a similar manner, a property owner may build a mosque on his own property. Perhaps all people can eventually learn to either ignore such actions, or use them as springboards for conversation rather than conflict.
A Pastor’s Provocative Attack on Islam
By
Robert Wicks
/ August 26, 2010
About The Author
Robert Wicks
I am an IT professional in Atlanta, GA. I tend to concentrate on the police state and intellectual property. The police state is especially a threat to me as a minority, as state enforcers are always threats to minorities. Intellectual property is a false property right, and one of the most horrible abuses in the history of the United States, chattel slavery, was also rooted in a false property right.
Related Posts
Can There Be Folly In the Justification of Self-Defense?
By
Wilton Alston
/ April 1, 2010
Here’s to hoping that libertarian purity, and the obvious right everyone has to arm himself with any weapon he chooses…
The Cost of Blasphemy Against America the Idol
By
Brutus
/ April 4, 2010
Fourteen years ago, former NBA basketball player Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf set off a firestorm of controversy by refusing to stand for…
Rob,
It is also interesting to note the Pastor’s self-admitted ignorance of Islam and the Qur’an:
I think this kind of ignorance is not uncommon, and is probably widespread, among the opponents of the “Ground Zero Mosque.”
You are very probably right on that. However by the same token so, probably, are Libertarians and Leftists.
What I can never comprehend is why people wish to defend a belief system that not only is so intrinsically un libertarian and, regarding art, leftists as well.
Why is Quar’ an burning or defilement wrong yet doing the same to a Bible ok or morally courageous. Why is having an image of Jesus in human urine art; yet a cartoon picture of Muhammed on a T-shirt is a racist and/or a bad act?
I don’t remember any recommendation for “I love Israel” stickers
I’ve listened to it being said that 911 happened not because of Islamic Jihad but because of American armed presence on Muslim land. This pov is so absurd on so many levels.
1) Did America force itself onto those patches of land? Were Arab governments forced by the US? No and No.
2) Were property owners forced off by state fiat or at the point of an American gun? No.
3) When Bin Laden made his speeches on this, do you honestly think he would be naive and stupid enough to say let’s go kill the infidels until they accept Islam? No, like all cunning leaders he tailored his message to his audiences non-Muslim and Muslim, Arab and Western etc.
OK rant over.
Oops that’ll teach me to check and double check before posting! Forget the “I love Israel” stickers I was beginning to rant off topic.
Nothing is ever forgotten on teh internetz. 😉
Leftie,
I think it depends on which version of Islam you’re talking about and in which culture it is embedded. Muslims in the Middle East (Arabs) are different from Muslims in India and from Muslims in the United States.
Maybe you missed it, but Robert mentioned in the post above that he is a Muslim. And Rob is as hardcore a libertarian as they come. I’ve studied Islam a bit myself, though I’m no expert. I’m sure Rob knows a great deal more than I do about it. I’m an atheist myself, but my in-laws are Muslim. They’re not libertarians, to be sure, but then neither are most people. I don’t think you can point to Islam as being the main reason they are not libertarians. They are good peaceful people, however, who do not hate America, much less for its freedoms and values and whatnot.
Well, I don’t think you’ll find Rob or myself defending, much less praising, the burning of Bibles, except the former on libertarian grounds if the person is burning their own property. I don’t want to speak for Robert, but he would probably agree with me that many Muslims are overly sensitive about insults to their religion and Muhammad. I’m no fan of modern “art” and I don’t think he is either.
I don’t know what you’re talking about here. Sorry.
It’s not absurd. It’s very true that American foreign policy is the main motivator for most Islamist terrorists. I don’t think many hate the United States enough just for its “values” and “freedoms” to risk their lives, much less commit suicide attacks, over it. It is also true that a certain perverted conception of Islamic Jihad is involved in the ideological, dare I say, brainwashing of terrorists. Peaceful Muslims have denounced terrorists and terrorism as contrary to true Islam.
What? The answer, I think, is Yes and Yes. But I’m not sure precisely what you’re talking about here. Were Arab governments forced by the US…to do what? Did the United States government force itself onto Muslim (not just Arab) lands? Yes. Definitely. And so did the Soviet Union and other Western governments, like Great Britain, before it. The US has military bases all over the world and has had a very interventionist foreign policy for decades, heck, for over a century, even its entire existence if you want to count the expansion from the original colonies out west, the slaughtering of Native Americans, the war with Mexico, and the Civil War.
Are you serious? Tens of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan alone since the War on Terror began. That’s killed, not just forced off their property. Including children, man. Children.
But this just proves my point. So what if a small handful of terrorists are driven more by perverted religious reasons or hatred of American freedoms and values? Assuming they really do have devout, if misguided, religious reasons for their terrorism, which is quite an assumption to make for all of them — even assuming this, that they have to tailor their message to focus on US foreign policy in order to drum up and motivate most of their recruits is very telling, don’t you think?
See this TLS article by Grigg on how the US government has to entrap, and even organize and lead, homegrown Islamist terrorist groups, bankrolling them, motivating them with the evils of US foreign policy, and even “educating” them in their own religion.
Isn’t ritual burning getting old hat? I mean, isn’t burning-for-desecration so “yesterday”? So last century? So last millennium?
You’d think that those who are into symbolic acts of hatred would think up something new. If it’s a book you want to desecrate, why not tear out the pages and use it, say, in place of toilet paper?
I wouldn’t do this with The Koran or The Bible. But maybe if folks started “recycling” the paper of a Keynes or Samuelson text, in this manner, rather than the books’ benighted ideas, we’d finally get somewhere. I know there are quite a few State of the Union addresses I wouldn’t mind desecrating.
Entrepreneurial opportunity: Print presidential addresses on toilet paper. Turn the “Tea Party” into a “T-Tissue Party.” And make a buck, besides.
Hah! Or the T.P. Party. HT Beavis & Butthead.
Penn and Teller recommend offering courses where you get verbally abused so that you can build thicker skin and ignore the actions of the needlessly provocative.