Well … let’s think about this a bit. There are two facets to this soldier’s actions: 1) his position as a representative of the US military and the United States in general and 2) his position as an American acting on his own. You’re focusing, correctly, on facet numero uno.

As a representative of our government ostensibly trying to foster peace in Iraq (let’s not argue this point for the sake of this discussion), shooting the Koran is counter productive. The links you provided clearly illustrate the incendiary results of trivializing or attacking the Muslim faith or any of the representatives thereof (the Koran, Mohammad, etc.). The military should rightly punish this soldier for subverting the American agenda in Iraq.

However, you miss the second facet. Let’s put aside, for the purposes of arguing, that this man is a soldier. Let’s, instead, pretend that he is a man in Kentucky (an arbitrarily chosen location). You’re citation of the Danish cartoons (since they were not associated with a government or a concerted peace-making effort) indicate that you posit that attacking the Koran (or Mohammad) in any context is wrong. This assertion is patently false.

The Koran is a book. Mohammad is the (inflated) memory of a man. The Bible is a book. All of these things can be shot, burned, desecrated, made fun of, depicted in cartoons, etcetera, etcetera. The Koran does not deserve special treatment because some Muslims decide to start burning and looting when another person shoots one with a gun. There is no special status such that it is acceptable for cartoonists to fear for their lives for publishing caricatures of Mohammad.

A cartoon does not harm a person. Destroying a book does not destroy a person. We need to keep hold of those things that really matter to our country and our way of life. One of those things, a very important thing, is our freedom of expression. Shoot the Koran, tear apart a Bible, burn an American flag.

You are correct in pointing out that I completely ignored his right as a U.S. citizen to do whatever the hell he wants to a Qur’an. My concern was more focused on the response this could generate in the Muslim world (in particular Iraq), since it has been shown that Muslims will blatantly disregard human life and throw large-scale temper-tantrums when people offend them. If he was just a guy anywhere in the U.S., it wouldn’t matter the least bit, but in this case, he was using (I am completely assuming here - correct me if I am wrong) a gun owned by the U.S. government, firing bullets owned by the government, on a firing range (all criticism of international law aside) built on property of the U.S. government. And, he was acting in his capacity as a government employee. That was more my point, but thank you for correcting my omission and pointing out that he does have the right to do this as a U.S. citizen.

However, I do not at all mean to suggest that attacking the Qur’an or Muhammad is inherently wrong. As I see it, it really only becomes wrong when you know it will lead to violent backlashes among the people you are trying to pacify (I’m with you in not arguing this point right now). While I am in favor of respecting people’s religious beliefs, I am more strongly in favor of our freedom of speech, which is why I made it a point to make sure our former message board had a copy of the Muhammad cartoons here:

http://forum.scotchandpolitics.com/viewtopic.php?id=326

Just for the sake of free speech, I’ll even post the link to the cartoon here:

http://www.uriasposten.net/pics/JP-011005-Muhammed-Westerga.jpg

The problem I see with this is that he did it when he knew it would clearly piss off Iraqis, and he is charged with the mission of un-pissing off Iraqis.

That said, I do want to say that, as I understand it, the Qur’an, which - when looking at religions side by side - is not on the same level as the Bible. The Qur’an serves a much more signigicant role in Islam than the Bible does is Christianity (or Judaism, I think?), in that Muslims see the Qur’an as written by the hand of Allah, meaning that it came directly from Allah, which makes it more like Jesus Himself than the Bible, which was written by humans - albeit humans who were divinely inspired (arguments aside on this for now). With that in mind, as I understand it, shooting the Qur’an would be to Muslims what shooting Jesus would be to Christians.

While as a Christian, I look to the Bible for guidance and see it as the word of God, and I treat my copies of the Bible with the utmost respect, the physical book itself is just paper and cardboard. It’s material. It just happens to have the word of God printed on it. I would find it terribly disrespectful to my faith if someone shot or ripped apart a Bible, but it’s just material. On the other hand, that’s not nearly on the same level as how I would feel if Jesus came to earth and someone shot Him just to be a dick about my faith. As I understand it, the same goes for Muslims and the Qur’an. So, while I think it’s incredibly stupid for Muslims to riot when people offend their faith (note: see my letter to the muslim world on that message board post about the cartoons), I can understand where the anger comes from.

I like how each of these responses were longer than the actual post.

Nice job guys.

To be inflammatory I’m going to state that, as a Pastafarian, bowls of spaghetti are sacred to me. So don’t eat any more spaghetti, ESPECIALLY with meatballs. Or I will riot in the street, with a giant spork.

Someone should create a cartoon depicting Muhammad wearing a turban of spaghetti and slurping up the end of it.*

*Hint… hint… artists in the group…

I think this should be our new mascot.

amazing. just….amazing.

Congratulations, Jason. You have won the Internet. We can all log off now, its over.