Burning the (Qur'an, Quran, Kuran, Koran, Qur’ān, Coran or al-Qur’ān)

Ok, I try and follow American news while away, if only to see how this part of the world sees Americans. Right now, they are not impressed.

There are two major issues (in my mind, anyway) with this Florida pastor burning the Koran (which is how I will spell it, barring typos, for this post).

First, from a Christian perspective, I question how Christ's love is shown through this act, which seems to provide both provocation to the Muslim world, and maximum shock value for an enraptured international audience. I also see a weird irony in a church called "Dove World Outreach Center" inciting violence and protests. I mean seriously, "OUTREACH"? You mean like a punch? Because this is certainly not a helping-hand type outreach...

Secondly, I am a bit conflicted by his rights to do so - which I support - while observing the left-leaning types that are objecting and vilifying this pastor. Weren't these "Freedom of Speech" supporters the same ones who were pro-flag burning just a few years ago? So, it is OK to burn a symbol of a country, but not a symbol of a religion? Or am I missing some subtlety in the argument?

Where does our President land on this debate? I mean, a few short days ago, President Obama was supporting the "Ground Zero" mosque by defending the right of private citizens to build a mosque on private land. Then should I not expect the leader of our country to support the Constitution's First Amendment, and come out strongly supporting the pastor's Koran Bonfire? I mean, a few days later he could back peddle, and say he wasn't judging the WISDOM of the bonfire, but just supporting his RIGHT to do it. Of course, a few days later he could extricate himself from the discussion, and say it is a local matter - turning himself into a States-Rights supporter in the process.

I guess what I have reasoned through in my head is "Freedom is Messy". While he has the right to protest by provocation, that does not give those offended the right to retaliate by violence, or at least to have no consequences to their violence. When some anti-American protester would burn a flag, the witnesses did not have a right to stomp and kick him. If they chose to do so, they would be punished, charged with assault, and jailed. Now whether it was worth it would be up to the attacker.

So I won't be surprised to see bible burning in Muslim countries in protest. What I would be shocked to see, though, would be reporters, politicians, and regular people discussing the bible burning in the foreign country. Americans have always had the really important debates out in public, and this is one that needs to be talked through. What concerns me is the response. Could we see more suicidal terrorists on American soil? How, exactly, do you punish that?

Personally, I'd like to see the protest called off for this year. Not permanently, but just a delay. We need to have the debate. Let's have it, in time for the 10th anniversary of the Muslim Extremists attack on the US. Fear of retaliation should not be the reason for giving it up - that would make the Constitution a weak document, when intimidation can restrict Rights - but I'd like to see a discussion about the wisdom of the protest. Is there a better way to express outrage with Terrorists without angering the billions of non-terrorist Muslims?

The pastor may still burn the Koran, though.

That is his right.