Riots Claim 20 Lives

According to the Telegraph rioting continues in Afghanistan over the burning of the Qur'an by a "fundamentalist cleric" in Florida. (Seriously, where does that phrase come from to describe the Reverend Crackpot Terry Jones? He is neither a cleric nor connected at all to the fundamentals of Scripture.)

Responses are scattered. Some senators are of the opinion that we have too many freedoms in this country, and perhaps, since we're at war, we ought to limit the freedom of speech. There is silence from the Muslim world, as seems to be always the case when radical Islam goes crazy and kills people. President Obama condemned the burning as an act of "extreme intolerance and bigotry." The pastor in Florida has precious little support from the Christian realm, and he knows it. He considers himself a radical Christian. Unlike Islam, Christians are denouncing his act of foolishness. Doug Wilson is concerned that while lawmakers are attacking our freedom of speech, no one seems to be denouncing the rioters. Meanwhile, Terry Jones has assured the media outlets that he's not responsible for those riots. "We are devastated by that information," he said. "We don't feel responsible for that." Who is? "The radical element of Islam takes that as an excuse to promote their violent activities." Ah, I see. Any excuse in a storm. Is that it? Thankfully, Jones has no plans to burn any more Qur'ans. Of course, he said he wasn't going to burn any in the first place (after saying he would), so I have to wonder how reliable this pastor is.

A lot there, and not all of it, in my view, is sane. The rioting in Afghanistan is horrendous. It was not simply a response to an act of stupidity. It was fomented by imams who took more than a week to get it started. (Jones put the Qur'an on trial and burned it March 20th, and the riots took place April 1st.) Time enough to let intelligent people get over the nonsense if they were going to get over it, but that didn't happen. The rioters and their goads deserve condemnation. The response of government with things like "too much freedom", "limit free speech" is really off. How does this work? When things get ugly, we remove freedoms? We suspend the Bill of Rights when we don't like the consequences? Nor does the president's "extreme intolerance and bigotry" get it either. This assumes equal footing. The Qur'an and the Bible and whatever other "sacred Scriptures" you'd care to point at are all of equal value, worthy of acceptance, and this can only be denied if you are a bigot. That's not right. But neither is Jones to be exonerated. His act of stupidity has resulted in death for innocent people in harm's way. That's criminal.

I would oppose removing freedom because the consequences are tough. On the other hand, everyone knows that your freedom of speech is limited. We already know, for instance, that free speech doesn't apply if there is a "clear and present danger". If you shouted "Fire!" in a crowded theater, you would be guilty of the death and damages. How is this different in the case of the Florida pastor? He was warned that his actions would cause this result. He was notified of the clear and present danger. He chose to go ahead with it. "Freedom of Speech" and "Freedom of Religion" aside, his acts constitute, in my view, criminal behavior. I can't see how it is anything less than negligent homicide. Criminally negligent homicide is in play when a person manifests extreme indifference to human life. Terry Jones did just this. So, why are there not criminal charges pending?

It seems easy in this country to get stuck on one side. The president wants to be sure we're tolerant of Islam without any reference to truth. That is, "equally protected" means "equally valid". Wrong. Tolerance -- the genuine kind were we allow that with which we disagree -- is needed, but it isn't bigotry to disagree. Jones's freedoms may have allowed the events, but limiting freedom because he abused it isn't the answer. Fear of Islam can be a real, even rational thing -- just ask Salman Rushdie -- but saying nothing about it is wrong. And allowing criminal behavior in the name of "free speech" (or even classifying him as a "fundamentalist cleric" or a "Christian") is just as wrong. It seems like there are lots of things to be said here. But condemning the violence and prosecuting the criminal behavior doesn't appear to be on the agenda anywhere.