Should muslims call their reactions into question when they deal with those who don't believe like them.

No. But it is fair to condemn that one Christian (in a place of power and trust, let me add) because he is a fool.

And the fool in question should have been well aware that would happen making him monstrously stupid and full of himself. What does he say about it now I wonder. I doubt he takes any responsibility for the repercussions.

Someone is condemning all Christians? Who?

Yeah, I guess, but so does the Pastor.

No more than any other random group that has a set of beliefs others might not share.

@jaytkay , there were violent protests against christians in Afghanistan and Pakistan.How can the The president can go as far as declaring that burning the koran will put lives at risk abroad.So whne visiting a muslim country,should leave if there is some idiot burning the koran on tv?

This is either a completely naive, or utterly ironic question.

(1) Of course they should.
(2) You ask this because, I hope, because Christians seem to not to care what they say about Muslims – and judge them by the actions of a minority of extremists, far, far, FAR more frequently.

@iamthemob ,what do you mean by “the US seems to happen far,far,far…?”

@noly Mosque at Ground Zero?

@noly – I edited my answer but your question is still valid.

In the U.S., Islam is often judged by the actions of extremists, whereas Christianity asks that the actions of extreme Christian be seen as done by those who are “not really Christian.”

NOTE – the above is a generalization, but it seems a fair one. We are talking about the general state of affairs here.

@dverhey ,i think it was a great idea to show the muslim world how much the US is an inclusive country and is not at war with islam.Furthermore there are many muslim american who cant be ignored and need to feel at home.

The mosque was not a bad idea, but it was seen as insensitive by almost everyone. I’m glad that the Muslim community was willing to show that they’re not the suicide-bombing cave-dwellers that our media makes them out to be, and frankly I wish we had been more accepting of the idea.

Perhaps I am not understanding this thread. Are US citizens not free to burn any book they want to burn? Including the Bible and the Koran?

@plethora ,i think they should be free to burn any book,that ‘s why i believe that some muslims must face the fact that there are a lot of troubling element in the way they deal with those situations.

@noly

True to a degree. However, the purpose of government and law in the U.S. ideally has been considered to be the pursuit or protection of individual rights. When you compare that to unstable, theocratic and oppressive governments in nations used to one potential colonial invasion force or another…well, the conditions and potential for violence and hatred without opposition are more likely by far where you are raised to trust the God/State and privilege it before anything, and that any unlike you are the enemy.

@noly I agree. But the way I saw it play out was based more in anger and fear than any sort of acceptance or freedom of religion.

But what do you mean by Muslims in America that “can’t be ignored”?

But i argue that governement officials are more pragmatic than their fellow citizen because the actual state of affair in international politics has no place for fanatics.How can Pakistani president blame America for the ceation of al qaida because in his parliament instead of addressing a real concer like bin laden living near one of the most prestigious military school?

I think it’s unfair for american muslim to see such a debate in their own country.Christians can build churches,so let muslims build mosques.i think it’s bad to give them this impression that americans have a problem with islam whereas the real problem is extremism.

again with fairness… what’s the deal with you and fairness? it would be easier for us if you could elaborate in more precise terms.

@noly There are precious few churches in muslim lands. Muslims are allowed to litter the landscape in the US with their mosques, but Christians are not allowed to do so in Muslims countries.

Got it…..we should be very careful about the international actions of Muslims if a US citizen burns a Koran IN the US. Well, that seems equitable.

@quarkquarkquark , i know some muslims who feel like the entire world is against them and their religion.And they can stand any criticism of islam.This question is meant to be ridiclous.Just how ridiculous these things happen in some muslim land and are not condemned by muslim leaders in those countries.

@plethora ,but in america ,people have right and shouldnt be discriminated because they are muslim eventhough christians are not tolerated in muslim lands.

@noly You think?

Well, he does have a point. When racism against Muslims occurs publicly in the U.S., we have an awareness that such bigotry is aberrant—or at least the erroneous presumption that it is so. In many Muslim countries, that intolerance is the norm. That’s not shocking so much as the fact that the rest of the world has come to accept it—and to kowtow to fundamentalists who conflagrate at the slightest whiff of heresy.

America, in fact, is the exception. We are the departure from the norm. Say what you will about the real, measurable success of these values, but we are the one country with an unbroken claim to tolerance. It seems that whether that claim is fulfilled is ideologically irrelevant; that is, it’s important that tolerance is important to us.

That Jones dude is not a real christian. He only thinks he follows the right path.
He’s just an indoctrinated fundamentalist.

Most of us are praying for him to find his real path.

Freedom of religion will never be true because there will always be extremists [ at any side of the fence ]

”...those who don’t believe like them…?” So burning the sacred scriptures of other religions is a Christian “belief” and therefore should be tolerated? Where do you get that?????

And no, it is no more fair to condemn all Christians because one of them i a fool than it is to condemn all Muslims because a very small, tiny percentage of them are radicals and an even a smaller percentage of them are radicals. Nor is it fair, as you imply in your question, to assume that “Muslims” as in all of them should get bent out of shape. The Muslims who engage in violent protest and riots, where there may have been people killed also represent small and distinct percentage of Muslims and should be held as representative of all Muslims. There are well over a billion Muslims in the world and the ones you see on T.V. are only a very few of them.

Obviously not, but the protests in Afghanistan were in the context of a Muslim country which is occupied by large numbers of non Muslim troops. Burning the Koran is clearly going to be seen as provocative.

Nor is it fair to assume that all Muslims are potentially terrorists.

I think people who violently protest over the burning of a book are savages.

But it’s dumb, callous, and probably immoral to deliberately provoke such savages into a murderous rage, resulting in actual human deaths, just to make a point about free speech.

The Koran-burning “Christian” and the Muslims he enrages are on the same team.

We don’t have an East vs West problem. The problem is Dark-Ages thinkers vs normal people.

“The Koran-burning “Christian” and the Muslims he enrages are on the same team.

We don’t have an East vs West problem. The problem is Dark-Ages thinkers vs normal people.”

Well said. I could not agree with this more. I may, in fact, copy and paste it wherever I can in these discussions.

I don’t agree with that.

It’s one thing to deface a religious text. I could care less if someone does this. I’ve done it myself because I think religious texts tend to be abhorrent.

It’s another thing to deface a religious text because you think your own, rival religious text is better. This strikes me as pretty stupid.

It’s an entirely different thing to react to the defacement of a religious text by murdering, or threatening to murder, people. That is beyond the pale and should not be equivocated with Christians simply being obnoxious.

@Qingu – was the statement that the acts were the same thing, or done by people who were essentially on the same team?

It’s unfair to characterize the Christians here as being “simply…obnoxious” because it is expected that they be well aware of the conflict, especially oversees. A message of hate is a message of hate, and when you direct that message at a group, they may or may not react in a way you think is reasonable. But it’s almost certain that you’ll see response in kind at least…and most likely you’ll also see escalation.

If you call someone a dick in a bar, and that person punches you in the face, one of you is guilty of a graver act of violence, but you’re both on the team of creating a violent and impulsive environment.

I guess my problem is that that’s a pretty big “team” you’re talking about. Anyone with a tribal mentality would be part of that team; that’s probably most of the world’s population.

@Qingu – I agree that it’s a pretty big team, but I don’t think it’s THAT big. There’s a difference between disagreement and disagreement at all costs.

Reacting with violence to the burning of the Koran is just that… but so is burning the Koran, or the Bible, etc. It’s a message that really loses it’s communicative effect for most.

In the end, though, it’s important to realize HOW big the team is…because most likely at one time or another we’re being a part of it without knowing.

I don’t know. I still think the line between burning a book and using violence is a pretty big and important line.

@Qingu – but now you’re back on the distinction between the two acts, not whether they’re related – directly, in fact.

Jones burned the Koran knowing full well – being specifically warned, in fact – that the situation was so volatile that such a public thing might enrage people overseas and put the lives of our soldiers in danger. I am not saying that such a thing should mean that free speech should be limited – but what I am saying is that if you know that what you’re saying or doing very well might cause the deaths of innocent people, if you do it anyway without regard and it does happen, the line you’re talking about is thinner than what you seem to think it is.

There are many other things that he could have done to express his opinion, and it could have been as communicative – in fact moreso. That he stubbornly refused to consider human life doesn’t make him responsible, but it does make him more than obnoxious.

Okay, I’ll agree to that.

My point is that one of these acts (burning a Quran) should be allowable in a free society, and another one (killing people because they burned a Quran or are part of the same civilization that did so) should not be. But I certainly agree that Jones’ act was immoral.

@Qingu – Absolutely. Speech should be strongly protected. Violence should not. But, with all the anti-Islam rhetoric, we now more than ever need to see how we’re a part of the problem, and perhaps are the reason why it keeps on escalating.

Should Muslims call their reactions into question when they deal with those who don’t believe like them?

Answer: Of course!

In fact progressive Muslims do this and have done so for a very long time. Progressive Muslims are embarrassed about the reactions to the Danish cartoons for example. The problem is that progressive Muslims are not very well organized. In Germany for example all large Muslim organizations range from conservative to ultra-conservative to being unconstitutional. Prominent liberal Muslims like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lale_Akguen have been trying for many years to get liberal Muslims organized. It’s not happening. There are many reasons and one is that most liberal Muslims don’t want to become a target. It’s dangerous to openly disagree with ultra-conservative Muslims.

In Western countries ultra-conservative Muslims don’t understand the fact that even non-religious people consider certain beliefs to be ‘sacred’. Freedom of speech and freedom of thought are sacred. Violating these principles results in outrage. And rightly so.

For ultra-conservative believers blasphemy is considered a violation of something very sacred.

That’s the root cause of the clash we’re seeing. Two incompatible views.

So what we need is conservative Muslims learning to feel comfortable with disagreement. With dissent. With pluralism. With the principle live and let live. And only liberal Muslims have the power and means to convince them.

Of course this applies to conservative Christians too.