Freedom is an iconic symbol of the USA. It is cemented into the mindset of the population, regardless of whether or not this freedom actually exists. I am guessing that this is the reason why there is such controversy over Terry Jones' now defunct plan to burn the Qu'ran on the anniversary of the September the 11th terrorist attack. After all, is it not the right of an American citizen to say whatever they want, do whatever they want and express whatever they feel?
If you want to create an anti-Islamic protest on the anniversary of a terrorist attack well that is the right of a free citizen, despite how astonishingly insensitive it is to both individual victims that have suffered and religions that have been blamed and suffered. It is very important to note the position of the United States government at this point. At no stage was the reverend threatened with arrest or censor for his actions. He would have been within his legal rights to burn the Qu'ran.
He would not, however, have been within his rights as a human being had he carried out his plan. The law may say it is alright to burn a sacred text, but why would you? Sarah Palin has likened the issue to that of the Islamic prayer centre that is due to be installed in New York city. I wonder how she could possibly have missed the very basic difference between these two acts. The building of a prayer centre is designed to foster understanding and repair bridges, the burning of the Qu'ran is an act of antagonism. One is constructive, the other is deeply destructive.
There is a difference between law and morality. The truly ignorant are those who choose to do everything they can within the law and claim that they are acting morally.
-The English Student
No comments:
Post a Comment