Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Defiant act

April 8, 2011

Advertisement

To the editor:

We have heard about the burning of the Quran by a Rev. Jones in Florida. I must report that he did nothing that Muslims don’t do with a Quran that is old, worn out, incomplete and useless. In his act of burning it, he has made himself old, worn out, incomplete and useless. A true man of God, regardless of the faith he practices, would never destroy a book revered by another religion. A real man of God would have self respect and fear of God.

I don’t believe that Rev. Jones understands what that means. He knew that his foolish action meant that a few hundred people would die; some of his own faith. As a Muslim, I am not angered or astonished by his actions. Instead, I am weary of the constant bashing of Muslims and fear of Islam. Yes, we know there are those who have hijacked it and have committed terrible and despicable crimes against others. We hate that, too. But all of us, like millions of other Americans, want to live in peace and harmony with our neighbors and are good citizens in this land of the free.

We totally and unequivocally disparage the actions of those terrorists who have stolen our religion. But Rev. Jones, in his ignorance, has burned our holy book as a show of defiance. Like all actions we make, it is God who shall judge on what is right and what is wrong. It promised that in the book he burned.

Comments

Gandalf 3 years ago

continued

"In the 19th century, many Muslim countries came under the control or influence of Western colonial powers. As a result, Western-style laws, courts, and punishments began to appear within the Sharia. Some countries like Turkey totally abandoned the Sharia and adopted new law codes based on European systems...Modern legislation along with Muslim legal scholars who are attempting to relate the will of Allah to the 20th century have reopened the door to interpreting the Sharia. This has happened even in highly traditional Saudi Arabia, where Islam began....Since 1980, some countries with fundamentalist Islamic regimes like Iran have attempted to reverse the trend of westernization and return to the classic Sharia." 4

Within Sharia law, there are a group of "Haram" offenses which carry severe punishments. These include pre-marital sexual intercourse, sex by divorced persons, post-marital sex, adultery, false accusation of unlawful intercourse, drinking alcohol, theft, and highway robbery. Haram sexual offenses can carry a sentence of stoning to death or severe flogging. An eyewitness account of Soraya M, a woman executed by stoning, can be read on an anti-Iranian web site. Caution: do not read this if you have a weak stomach; it is quite graphic. 5

Sharia law has been adopted in various forms by many countries, ranging from a strict interpretation in Saudi Arabia and northern states of Nigeria, to a relatively liberal interpretation in much of Malaysia. 1

Sharia law is intended to be only applicable to Muslims. Christians and other non-Muslims are supposed to be exempt from the provisions of the law; this is a provision that is not universally followed..

http://www.religioustolerance.org/islsharia.htm

0

Gandalf 3 years ago

Sharia law: founders and schools: Perhaps the two greatest original founders of Sharia law were Malik ibn Anas and Ibn al-Shaf'i. Anas established the Maliki school of jurisprudence. Al-Shaf'i was one of Anas' students; he disagreed with his teacher about the reliability of the hadith. He felt that it was necessary to trace each hadith from the time of Muhammad through its chain of devout Muslims. This concern led to Islamic scholars considering "... which hadith were true and which were not." Needless to say this led to conflicts among scholars as to the proper application of Sharia law.

Ibn al-Shafi'i promoted the use of additional sources for Shari'a law:

The technique of "... reasoning by analogy in order to develop new laws from existing laws." As the culture evolves, new types of problems emerge that need to be dealt with. Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) used to prevent the development of a severely defective human embryo is one example. The technique of accepting the consensus of a Muslim community. The reasoning is that Allah would not allow an entire community to be in error on a basic Islamic principle.

There are four main schools of Sharia law:

Hanbali: This is the most conservative school of Shari'a. It is used in Saudi Arabia and some states in Northern Nigeria. Hanifi: This is the most liberal school, and is relatively open to modern ideas. Maliki: This is based on the practices of the people of Medina during Muhammad's lifetime. Shafi'i: This is a conservative school that emphasizes on the opinions of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad.

What applies within one school of Sharia law does not necessarily apply in the other schools. For example, the Maliki Law School accepts evidence of pregnancy as proof that an unmarried woman has either committed adultery or been raped. The other schools "... do not recognize evidence of pregnancy as proof of Zina [Adultery]." 3

Sponsored link:

Recent history: The Constitutional Rights Foundation notes that:

.

0

Abdu Omar 3 years ago

Well Sharia is all about the Quran and not a bit about the Bible.So tpo judge Sharia, I would think you should know about the Quran. Where did you get those statistics? 4 or 5 parts don't agree and then talking about which version. There is only one version of the Quran. There are many translations into foreign languages but only ONE Quran, unlike the Bible. All Muslim read the same one.

Any way thanks for the discussions. I hope there are more without burning anything.

0

verity 3 years ago

I'm not that familiar with the Quran, but I have studied the Bible fairly extensively and I would not want American Law to be based on it.

Gotta have that polycotton. Don't want to iron my shirts.

0

Abdu Omar 3 years ago

Again, how do you know, Gandolf, that you oppose Sharia law? Have you seen it in action and know what difference there is between it and American Law? 99% of American law agrees with Sharia. How can you detest it if your laws are commensurate with Sharia? It gives us rules on how to deal with thieves, murderers, fraudulent rules or leaders, etc. We Americans have almost the same. There are differences in the requirements of religion, but most Americans are not Muslim. There are many things in life that we don't know about and if we did, we might agree with it. Ask me questions,

0

verity 3 years ago

Just to be clear, as a member of the human race, I denounce all acts of terrorism by any person for any reason.

That should pretty much cover it.

0

verity 3 years ago

Sigh.

Mr. Omar has denounced Muslim terrorism. He has denounced the hijacking of his religion. Is there something else you want him to do?

So far, no Muslim army has invaded the United States. Could be we've pissed off some people in the middle east. You know, invading countries, killing innocent people, things like that. I consider those things acts of terrorism. I consider the drumbeat of militancy in some American churches to be wrong and I denounce it.

0

Gandalf 3 years ago

verity and tomatogrower

I agree with you. Could jones burn the quaran? Of course its protected by the 1st amendment. Should jones burn the quaran? Of couse not. It was a stupid act by a stupid man. People like jones and phelps are not represenatative of America's religious beliefs any more that the extremists are representative of most muslims.

However there is a difference in scale. How many American's actually condone what jones did? 1%? Less? I don't know but probably only a few thousand at most. How many muslims approve, condone or at least think that the terrorist's like al quaida or taliban can be justified? According to polls a minimum of 13%. That runs into the 100's of millions. Quite a difference. I listed the links previously for my sources.

As far as why jones did burn the quaran, it was originally in protest of the cordoba house in NY. Does that make Faisal Abdul Rauf responsible for the riots this month? Lets face it we could go on for days discussing which came 1st, the chicken or the egg. President Obama went on record for the muslims constitutional right to build but backpedaled on whether they should. Jones is covered by the same rights.

Vertigo wants to try to claim that jones actions could be considered fighting words. The fighting word doctrine pretty much went out the window with duelling. I doubt anyone will ever see that prosecuted in court.

I am no fan of the muslim culture (I'm pretty fond of our own) but they have the right to practice their religion just as anyone does. However that right stops with the secular aspects of sharia law. In my opinion that is not covered under the 1st amendment and has no place in the US

0

verity 3 years ago

I haven't read every post, so maybe somebody has already said this.

The "but they did so-and-so" sounds like a bunch of pre-schoolers. We should be living by our own moral and ethical standards, not using what someone else does to excuse what we do. We should be better than that. We should not lower ourselves to someone else's level. Then they have won---they are controlling us.

The good Rev. Jones purposely stirred up violence. I do not know what his motives were---that's not really the issue. The issue is that he knew what he was doing and he was willing to sacrifice the lives of people who he did not know---play god, so to speak.

You can argue until your face turns purple about whether Muslims are more violent than Christians or vice versa. That is not the point. The letter writer has done what many have required all Muslims do to prove that they don't support terrorism---he has ". . . totally and unequivocally disparage[d] the actions of those terrorists who have stolen our religion." What more do you want?

0

Abdu Omar 3 years ago

I agree, Killing anyone is a crime. But think about how that happened. Al Queda, your enemy and mine, built that up to sound like all Americans agreed with Jones and that they cheered as he burned it. This is the kind of war we are fighting. These terrorists will do anything to make us look bad and in the meantime, ALL Muslims look bad. Don't you get it?

0

Gandalf 3 years ago

Yep if someone insults me I have every right to go out and kill anyone I want. Wonder where I should start?

Grow up, jones is an idiot' and so are the muslims that went on a killing spree.

0

Abdu Omar 3 years ago

Right, but in this case, several people died as a result of Jones' actions and that is clearly, in my opinion, fighting words. Those people who were incited to action are victims of their own making, but the people who died, and I mean the Americans, were victims of both the killers and of Jones provocation. Hence, Jones is guility of something to do with murder. These kinds of actions killed those people as if Jones pulled the trigger himself.

What do you think????

0

Gandalf 3 years ago

Post-Chaplinsky from Wikipedia

The court has continued to uphold the doctrine but also steadily narrowed the grounds on which fighting words are held to apply. In Street v. New York (1969),[2] the court overturned a statute prohibiting flag-burning and verbally abusing the flag, holding that mere offensiveness does not qualify as "fighting words". In similar manner, in Cohen v. California (1971), Cohen's wearing a jacket that said "__ the draft" did not constitute uttering fighting words since there had been no "personally abusive epithets"; the Court held the phrase to be protected speech. In later decisions — Gooding v. Wilson (1972) and Lewis v. New Orleans (1974) — the Court invalidated convictions of individuals who cursed police officers, finding that the ordinances in question were unconstitutionally overbroad.

In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the Court reversed the conviction of a Ku Klux Klan leader accused of advocating violence against racial minorities and the national government, holding that government cannot constitutionally prohibit advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.

In R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992), the Court overturned a statute prohibiting cross burning on the grounds that the specific statute was content-based, and even worse, viewpoint-based, i.e., that the statute limited its proscription only to race, religion, creed, etc. The Court, however, made it repeatedly clear that the City could have pursued "any number" of other avenues, and reaffirmed the notion that "fighting words" could be properly regulated by municipal or state governments.

In Snyder v. Phelps (2011), dissenting Justice Samuel Alito likened the protests of the Westboro Baptist Church members to fighting words and of a personal character, and thus not protected speech. The majority disagreed and stated that the protester's speech was not personal but public, and that local laws which can shield funeral attendees from protesters are adequate for protecting those in times of emotional distress.

0

tomatogrower 3 years ago

This guy and several posters on this forum are great recruiters to radical Islam. They just prove the stereotype of Christian Americans, which the radicals promote are true. This jerk knew exactly what would happen. I hope tax payers aren't having to pick up the tab for protecting him. His congregation should pay for his bodyguards. He is free to do and say what he wants, but he knew full well what would happen, and is loving every minute of it. Why doesn't he just do his job and minister to his congregation?

0

jafs 3 years ago

People should really look up the "fighting words" doctrine that vertigo has mentioned several times.

It's quite interesting.

Basically, as I understand it, it says that speech that by it's very utterance inflicts injury or tends to provoke an immediate breach of the peace is not protected by the 1st amendment.

0

Abdu Omar 3 years ago

On Sept 11, 2001, Millions upon millions of Muslims cowered in their homes praying and pleading to God to not make those who perpetrated those heinous crimes to be Muslims. I was certainly one of them and a few weeks later I was dismissed from my job because I am. I hope you can believe me when I say that I knew nothing about the plan or participated in its execution. I was in Lawrence, Kansas on that morning glued to the TV like millions of other Americans. I have travelled to Pakistan, Afghanistan in 1991, to Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Bahrain, Saudi, Tunisia,, Palestine, Israel and greatly around America and attended the Mosque every friday and I have never met a terrorist or any person who said to me, " Hi, I am a terrorist", in private or public. Sorry, but hundred of mosques and not one terrorist. They must be small in numbers and very secretive. Don't you think? So how can you blame them all?

0

Gandalf 3 years ago

I would be happy to go over! But I don't think the military will take retiree's. And I am doing something. I'm not letting apologists like you try to hide the facts under sweetness abd light.

The muslim religion and customs are dangerous and it gets worse as the percentage of muslims increase in any country.

0

Roland Gunslinger 3 years ago

You seem pretty intent on stopping these muslim extremists. Yet what are you doing about it personally, besides arguing it over the internet?

I tell you what. Email me at jesse.crittenden@iraq.centcom.mil and I'll hook you up with a recruiter where you can sign up for the military and join me over here in Iraq in actually doing something about them.

0

Gandalf 3 years ago

Support for suicide bombing and other forms or violence that target civilians has also declined in recent years. Among the Muslim publics surveyed, Pakistanis now express the strongest rejection to this kind of violence -- 87% say such acts are never justified. In 2002, just months after the September 11 attacks, one-third in Pakistan said suicide bombing was often or sometimes justified in order to defend Islam, while 43% said it was rarely or never justified.

In Lebanon, the percentage of Muslims that say suicide bombing is often or sometimes justified has plummeted to 38% from 74% in 2002. Still, support for this kind of violence against civilians among Muslims in Lebanon is one of the highest among the publics surveyed. Lebanese Shias are about twice as likely as Sunnis to endorse suicide bombing (51% vs. 25%).

Source the above link

0

Roland Gunslinger 3 years ago

Gandalf-

Earlier you stated that this was a private burning. Explain to me then, if it was private, did Terry Jones live broadcast the burning over the internet and then add Arabic subtitles to the video? Think maybe it was to purposely incite others? Or do you think a large portion of his 30 member congregation only speaks Arabic?

0

tange 3 years ago

Religious extremists everywhere—Christian, Muslim, SpaghettiMonstrous—may God strike them all... ALIVE... again, and again... into the world of increasing ignorance and intolerance which they actively foster.

Ah... men.

0

Abdu Omar 3 years ago

Jhawkins and :LETS, do you think the Muslim religion came from Muslims. If you took the time to read the book Jones burned, you would see that it is all about God and what God wants of us. Muhammad was illiterate and was given the Quran by an angel in the way of telling him to memorize it and then have scribes write it down. Every single word was done that way and sometimes in front of witnesses. The Quran talks about justice and freedom, the right way to act and the best way to pray to God Himself. He talks about giving part of what is earned to those who are poor, the wayfarer, the widow, the orphan. He tells us that there is a day when we all will be judged and that if we do rightiousness, believe in God and the last day, we will not have fear nor shall we grieve. This is what Islam is all about, not killing and retribution upon tyrants and despots. But then, read it yourself and see what you think. Then let's discuss it.

0

Gandalf 3 years ago

I find it amazing how many people oppose free speech when they disagree with it. I think Jones is a snake but that dosen't change or limit his freedom.

0

letsgiterdone 3 years ago

It's time for the reasonable Muslim to take the bull by the horns and get control of their Muslim religeon.

0

jhawkinsf 3 years ago

What Islam needs is a good Reformation.

0

autie 3 years ago

All of the above arguements are meaningless when weighed against the simple fact that Jones did it to piss off some other people, knowing full well how some would react. The blood of every person killed or injured as a result of his folly will be on his hands. That's the bottom line because autie said so.

0

thiscametomind 3 years ago

I agree with your well written thought. To me it is an "of course" article. The stuff that allows people with different brain wirings, backgrounds, life history to live in close proximity and inhabit without trampling.

It is a sadness that there are those who need to be restrained from damaging, verbally or physically, others because of a different thought pattern that brings them to a different conclusion. Now there, if ever, is a need for a diety to step up and put a stop to something.... such abuse of one to another, rather than diety driving one to the abuse of another.

Reason will not make sense to those who are broken and can not hear. Statistically when we look close into the lives of people of extreme actions and reactions we will find damaged persons, either biologically or more often the damage is the result from other humans.

Still, we need the voices of reason and good sense, like yours, to be out there... and be as loud as the voices of the damaged. Thank you.

0

letsgiterdone 3 years ago

I am unhappy with the people who think that freedom of expression and of speech are OK for somethings and not OK for others. Get a grip....the world can be an ugly place.

0

Flap Doodle 3 years ago

Come on out of the 14th Century, Afghan dudes.

0

seriouscat 3 years ago

To the LTE writer: back when the 'ground zero mosque" issue was front page, I argued against the NYC Imam's decision to build it. I jumped on the anti-Islam bandwagon because quite frankly, the stuff going in the Islamic states of the world scares the bejesus out of me. The fact that people riot and kill others over a cartoon or a book burning scares me. I later realized how ignorant I was being and I made an effort to learn more about Islam and what Muslims believe in.

I want to sincerely apologize for my own anti-Muslim rhetoric on that occasion. What he wants to do, and what you are doing by writing in, is the right thing to do to bring about healing and understanding between Muslims and non-Muslims. Dialogue and interaction CAN change things.

0

Liberty_One 3 years ago

I don't understand the anger and hatred towards Muslims that we have in America. The Muslim people I know are some of the kindest and most respectful people I have met. It's just befuddling and saddening and I don't understand why people think it's somehow OK to say such hateful things about Muslims. When did being so prejudiced and hateful become publicly acceptable?

0

Brock Masters 3 years ago

Omar, I agree with some of what you wrote and disagree with other parts.

I disagree that his actions caused the death of anyone. He expressed an opinion, albeit poorly and inappropriately, but the deaths were not caused by his speech, but by those that reacted to it like animals.

I suggest that you get used to the bashing Muslims and the fear of Islam as it is not going to stop until Muslims in the name of Islam stop terrorizing the world. Muslims, not all Muslims, but some Muslims are indeed our enemy and the reason they want to kill us is in part due to the fact that they believe that their religion demands it. So, what do you expect from people - that they will be silent and pretend that Muslims are not trying to kill us.

I do agree and understand that it is not all Muslims and that there are many good people who practice Islam. The religion is not evil, only those that bastardize it are evil and it happens with Christianity too.

I suggest you continue speaking out against the radical Muslims and their heinous acts of violence so America knows that there is another Muslim voice that doesn't condone what some radical Muslims are doing.

0

Gandalf 3 years ago

Hey Omar, would a true man of faith riot and kill because someone burned a quaran? How about the bibles that are burned in Saudia Arabia? Should christian's riot and kill muslims in the U.S. in retaliation?

Sorry bub, I"m not real fond of burning books, flags or draft cards but it is protected free speech in the U.S. That is something that is missing in muslim countries.

P.S Sharia law will never be valid in America!

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.