Church 'praying' about plan to burn Quran, pastor says after warning

[kpete]

Source: MSNBC


Church 'praying' about plan to burn Quran, pastor says after warning
Gen. Petraeus said protest 'could endanger troops'


MIAMI — A church planning to burn copies of the Quran on Sept. 11 is 'definitely praying' about the controversial demonstration, its pastor said after Gen. David Petraeus warned it would put in danger the lives of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan.

In an interview on CNN, Terry Jones, of the Dove World Outreach Church in Gainesville, Fla., appeared to suggest church members might decide not to go ahead with the controversial demonstration.

Jones, author of a book called "Islam is of The Devil," told CNN's "American Morning" show that the burning was designed to send a message to radical Islam.

But when he was asked about the views of Petraeus, the U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Jones said: "We are actually very, very concerned of course; we are taking the general's words serious. We are continuing to pray about the action on September 11. But we don't know, how long do we back down?"

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39032043/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

[qb]

1. Since theirs is a vengeful, kick-ass god, I'm sure he'll give them the go-ahead.

:sarcasm:

[louis-t]

2. Wanna bet 'God' tells them to go ahead?

They don't care how many die, as long as they score points with the crazies.

[dogfacedboy]

74. Ummm, I think that's spelled "Gawd"...

[mike r]

3. He's going to grant the Koran a reprieve

The pastor is praying hard to his checkbook.

[Evasporque]

4. Just open the 9/11 Worship Hall of Freedom already...

9/11 has become more influential than Jesus to Christians.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. If they go ahead with the Koran Burning, they are responsible for the deaths of countless

American soldiers.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[handmade34]

16. the church would be culpable

Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)

[superconnected]

18. Pretty LAME. If I go kill someone because someone in another country burns a bible, I expect to

be held accountable.

If you don't see the problem with your logic then I think this conversation has to be over. I won't consider you fit to hold it.

[handmade34]

23. ok

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

75. Ding dong, the troll is DEAD.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=155720

[Bragi]

21. Agreed.

[superconnected]

38. No the people who kill the soldiers are responsible. Burning a book and expecting to be blamed for

death of others is wrong. Radicals killing people need to be blamed, not book burners.

[no_hypocrisy]

40. Beg to differ. This is akin to instigating a riot.

The mob does the damage and the person who created the rabble is held responsible to some extent.

[superconnected]

43. In another country? Come on, burning books is not against the law in this country and shouldn't be

blamed for inciting riots in other countries. The rioters should. I mean if it's that bad to burn a book for Muslims, then I don't think we need another mosque. However, I'm assuming that it's a select few who find it intolerable and they're not in this country, and it really strikes me as WRONG to cater to that. Let our constitution stand. I'm not bending my right to burn any book because of some Muslim has a religious problem that means he wants to kill people, and worst of all he's not even in this country. And no, I've never burned a book before, but if I do, I know I'll be starting with THAT ONE, and I'll throw the bible on next if anyone argues that it's prejudice. It's called, sick of catering to magical thinking.

[no_hypocrisy]

44. You can have legitimate and constitutional acts in the small picture.

But in the big picture, they aren't as protected. Example of shouting "Fire!" when there isn't any in a theater. Nearly every right can be qualified and regulated depending on the circumstances.

[superconnected]

45. So what? Shouting fire in america is to blame for someone killing someone 10,000 miles away?

Bull SH-T. Why even start to cater to that?

Why is it hard to realize that the problem is the radical person KILLING someone over something so stupid. I'm not walking on glass to stop people from killing people in other countries. It's not going to happen. I don't think anybody should be expected to. At this point that nutty church can burn away imo because the right of free speech is more important than how poorly we use it. Bring out the radicals and show us what they're really like. I'm waiting for the Muslim people of America to speak out against this threatened killing - and waiting and waiting. I hope they do because I know Christians certainly spoke out about the book burning.

[no_hypocrisy]

49. Just saying the harm is real to the soldiers and predictable.

And there is a nexus.

[superconnected]

51. Oh come on - putting up peace symbols has been touted as harm to our soldiers.

[no_hypocrisy]

53. By whom?

[superconnected]

54. You don't remember a right wing talking point in 2004 was that the liberals were causing us to

lose the war in Iraq and causing danger to our troops by being against the war? They were literally saying that liberals with peace signs on their homes needed to be lined up and shot for being anti-American. Seriously, our country went that kind of crazy for months.

[no_hypocrisy]

55. Now THAT is a true vacation from logic. Peace = murder of soldiers.

We've agreed.

[Salander]

52. Isn't it obvious that Terry Jones is an Al Qaida operative.

[AlbertCat]

6. Keep a-prayin'

Because praying is a useless, but passive activity that gets no results. It's better when these types don't actually act, but pray. When they act, they do stupid shit like burning Korans!

[elleng]

7. Well isn't that nice. . . .

:sarcasm:

all together now . . .

[BeFree]

8. Well, Pastor

What Would Jesus Do?

[OrangeGrapes]

9. The Holy Wars

They're still going, aren't they?

[superconnected]

11. Yes, and the military industrial complex loves them.

[mimitabby]

12. god speaks through me

you idiots, book burning doesn't work. . .

[handmade34]

24. thank you for translating

:)

[Bragi]

13. So do I understand this right?

So according to Petraeus, the safety of the troops requires that no-one in America ever burns a Koran? Great. So the troops will be safe if everyone refrains from doing anything that might offend ultra-sensitive Muslims anywhere.

Really? I don't much like how this is shaping up. If the safety of the troops depends on everyone with dark thoughts about Islam to self-censor themselves, lest they offend someone, then I see problems down the road here in terms of building enduring security.

At the risk of sounding harsh, maybe what's needed is to send a message to the Muslim world, something along the lines of: "We will not restrict our right to free speech as an accommodation to Islam. If some idiot wants to insult your religion, they have a right to do so, and that is what we represent, and the values we are fighting for."

[superconnected]

14. +1000

[JuniperLea]

17. Way to condone bigotry... eom

[Bragi]

25. What bigotry?

How is it bigotry to tell people that they have no legal protection in a liberal democracy against having their religion insulted?

I would consider it to be education.

[JuniperLea]

32. You're kidding, right?

You don't see the bigotry? Really? That's fucked up... seriously and heinously fucked the hell up.

[Bragi]

35. Yeah, I'm kidding

I totally agree with you that insulting someone's religion is bigotry, and that we should self-censor ourselves so that no religious person is ever exposed to insult.

Oh wait, no I don't believe that at all, I believe that the right to free speech is paramount, and trumps anyone's religious sensitivities.

[JuniperLea]

37. Religious wars are the stupidest, most heinous killer known to man...

And you are all for exacerbating the hate. Nice...

If someone is insulted when there is no intent, that's one thing... but to smear shit in the face of an entire religion because one extreme faction of said religion is evil... that is about as stupid as it gets. There is no good reason for this. None.

[Bragi]

41. Of course there is "no good reason"

As one who is unenthusiastic about religion, I couldn't agree with you more that religious wars are heinous. I'd take it step further by saying that I find religion itself to be heinous.

However, I still support the right of anyone to practice whatever religion they want, and the right of anyone to insult any religion they wish to insult.

[JuniperLea]

63. I hardly think "practicing" any religion...

Includes spiteful, hateful actions with the sole intent of pissing people off.

How very Christlike... :sarcasm:

[jberryhill]

30. You can yell "N----R" in Harlem if you want to

Tell you what... You go running around Harlem yelling "n----r", and we'll find someone to pass out leaflets explaining your rights.

Yes, they have a right to burn Korans. They are doing it for the purpose of intentionally pissing people off, and they are getting the reaction they want.

It's simply deliberate provocation.

[wordpix]

60. the issue is incitement - You don't yell fire in a crowded theater because it's dangerous

These wacko fundies could not care less who gets killed as a consequence their hate-filled actions.

[Thor_MN]

62. I think you could probably burn a Quran in the privacy of your own home and not have an effect

If, however, you blow yourself all over the national and international news announcing that you are deliberately perform an act of sacrilege because you believe that some people are too extreme, that's another story (and hypocritical, to boot)

[JuniperLea]

15. If you know your action will cause death, it's called murder...

I'm pretty sure God said not to kill... as I recall, it's one of his top ten no-no's.

Edited to say... no, I'm pretty sure it's premeditated murder.

[Bragi]

20. So who is the murderer?

Is the murderer here a moronic group in Florida who is being asked to self-censor themselves allegedly to keep the troops safe, or the people responsible for sending troops to kill and be killed in a pointless war?

I think god needs to know your intention here.

[JuniperLea]

31. God knows all, right? No one needs to clue her in... that's absurd.

And what goes on between God and any individual is their own business, no one else's.

I ask all people who say they are going to engage in hateful acts to self-censor. I see nothing wrong with taking a pacifist stance in this... nor in most issues, really.

I don't much care for a war general's idea of what we the people should do; however, we all have the right to call someone out on their hate.

What would these asshats do if I started a bonfire of Bibles?

[Rebubula]

34. Answer

What would these asshats do if I started a bonfire of Bibles

Whatever they do is their responsibility and theirs only.

Yes - burning Korans is a hateful and ignorant act. Yes - Killing people is a hateful and ignorant act. Yes - one has nothing to do with the other when it comes to logic response.

If you can lay blame on this stupid church for acts of violence committed 15,000 miles away (in an area that is already famous for beheading infidels and believers alike, stoning women for being raped, cutting off the noses and ears of teenagers, honor killings etc) then you can blame RockStar games when young men decide to find out what it is like to shoot people at random.

[Turborama]

39. I think a more apt question would be...

...what would be the reaction if someone burnt all the original copies of the Constitution?

Those are the two dogmas that are being argued here, the Qu'ran and the Constitution.

In fact, let's throw in burning all copies of the declaration of independence too, for good measure. What would be the reaction to that?

[Bragi]

42. That's an easy one

Burning the extant copies of any important historical document would be an act of vandalism.

Far as I know, the clowns in Florida were not intending to track down the original copy of the Koran for burning.

[Turborama]

47. Those are the two dogmas that are being argued here, the Qu'ran and the Constitution.

The Bible is a bit of a red herring in this particular discussion, that's the point I was making.

Anyway, to Muslims every copy of the Qu'ran has the same sanctity as the original. You see, unlike the bible, it hasn't been altered since it was written (apparently) and they believe it is literally the word of "god" channelled through Mohammed.

I abhor dogma in any shape or form and am neither religious nor a blind patriot. I am attempting to look at this through an objective lens.

My personal attitudes towards either side is a whole other argument which I'll willingly go into in the right context.

[Bragi]

48. My point in response would be this

You note that the Koran is deemed by Muslims to be a sacred object. I understand that. I also understand that any attack on the Koran, or disrespect shown it, by non-believers is deemed by Muslims to be intolerable, and cause for jihad.

If this is so, and I believe that it is, then the point is this: America cannot assure the Mulsim world that its holy book will not be insulted since freedom of speech is inconsistent with guaranteeing protection of the Koran.

This being so, the Muslim world needs to understand that Americans will not and cannot limit their freedom of speech to protect the Koran from potential insult.

It is their choice what to make of this.

[whosinpower]

56. Why not add hoo-ah at the end of your rant

When someone makes a statement that is anti-semitic, he/she suffers greatly - because their anti-semitic statements cause harm - regardless of "freedom of speech." If the statement incites violence - then the statement should be villified. If the church planned to burn the Star of David symbol - the outcry would be enormous - and this is as it should be! It, along with burning the Quran is symbolic of hate and intolerance and should be condemned for what it is. That you would hide the inflection behind Freedom of Speech rights is abhorrent.

The statement in this case - is a physical book burning. It should be villified as it will feed radical islam, and has the potential to incite violence. What the muslim world will understand by this action is NOTHING even close to the message that you try to foist here - "that the book burning is a celebration of America's Freedom of Speech rights." And you know this very well.

That radical islam exists is no illusion. That they are repressive, violent and anti-democratic is no illusion. But burning their holy book - as a symbol of rejection, only inflames them and further marginalizes the moderate muslims. It endangers non-beleivers who are trying to do some good in a region that is rife with religious bigotry. It endangers moderate muslims who work with the non-beleivers for a better society.

Rejecting this symbolic act does not mean radical islam wins in that America is frightented to insult Islam. It means that America respects, and honours lives more than insults. It means that they value the lives of moderate muslims and non-believers who are working to make the area better more than a petty insult whose only purpose is to inflame radicals.

I would never try to "protect" a petty insult whose only purpose is to inflame radicals under the auspices of Freedom of Speech. I condemn it most vociferously. Not because I am afraid of radical Islam. I condemn it because it casually disregards the lives of innocents - all for the sake of the right to make an insult.

If the church trully wants to make a statement about radical repressive Islam - they would stop funding radical repressive regimes by no longer buying gasoline. They would stop listening and supporting Fox news.

[Bragi]

61. You wrote as follows:

You wrote: When someone makes a statement that is anti-semitic...
SNIP

Seems to me that all you did in this opening paragraph was to describe a series of odious beliefs and then claim that I was somehow associated with any of them, or using freedom of speech to somehow justify them. I am totally at a loss to understand how you arrived at that conclusion. Feel free to explain.

You then wrote: The statement in this case - is a physical book burning. It should be villified as it will feed radical islam, and has the potential to incite violence. What the muslim world will understand by this action is NOTHING even close to the message that you try to foist here - "that the book burning is a celebration of America's Freedom of Speech rights." And you know this very well.

Wait a minute, show me where I have "foisted" anything on anyone? And I've not called the bookburning a celebration of anything. If I did, I would call it a celebration of stupidity and loathsome racism. It is also an exercise in free speech that must be defended as such.

My actual argument is not complicated. It is this: neither you, nor I, nor Petraeus, nor Obama, nor anyone else, can actually stop anyone in America from publicly burning a sacred text of their choosing, if they choose to do so.

Since this is so, do you really think that in a polarized country like America, one with relatively high rates of extreme religious piosity, one that has (probably) millions of clinically unhinged zealots, that someone, someday, is not going to publicly burn a Koran? Of course this will happen, if not this Saturday, then some other day.

And what then? Will Muslims around the world then be justified in issuing threats and fatwas, in mounting rampages, in attacking embassies, in harming non-believers, especially American non-believers, to retaliate for insults against Islam? I don't think so, and I'll bet you don't either.

For me, I think we need to think and talk about this, not to hide from it. We need to isolate the loonies, and to condemn and disassociate ourselves from their views, but we also have to make sure Muslims know that we also acknowledge the right of the loonies to free speech, that we will do nothing to prevent them from exercising their right to free speech, and we will defend them if they are prevented from, or threatened with harm for, exercising their right to free speech.

That is what I think. More below

You then wrote: That radical islam exists is no illusion. That they are repressive, violent and anti-democratic is no illusion. But burning their holy book - as a symbol of rejection, only inflames them and further marginalizes the moderate muslims. It endangers non-beleivers who are trying to do some good in a region that is rife with religious bigotry. It endangers moderate muslims who work with the non-beleivers for a better society.

Agreed. Koran burning does all those things, which is why I'm not advocating it. But I believe it WILL happen anyway -- someday, sometime in America. When it does, Muslims need to understand that this is what free speech entails in America, and that America will not back down from protecting free speech to save them or their holy book from offense.

You then wrote: Rejecting this symbolic act does not mean radical islam wins in that America is frightented to insult Islam. It means that America respects, and honours lives more than insults. It means that they value the lives of moderate muslims and non-believers who are working to make the area better more than a petty insult whose only purpose is to inflame radicals.

I would never try to "protect" a petty insult whose only purpose is to inflame radicals under the auspices of Freedom of Speech. I condemn it most vociferously.

You might not want to "protect" speech that involves a petty insult "whose only purpose is to inflame radicals" but I believe that the U.S. constitution does. Me, I'll side with the constitution here, and hope that the Muslim world learns soon that freedom of speech means people can invoke petty insults aimed at the Koran or any other religious text. And most important, if some moron chooses to act in this manner, they need to know it doesn't mean jack shit to most Americans, so take your tantrums and threats elsewhere.

You conclude: Not because I am afraid of radical Islam. I condemn it because it casually disregards the lives of innocents - all for the sake of the right to make an insult.

I hope it doesn't surprise you to learn that I'm also concerned about "the innocents". That's why I think we need to level with, and teach, the Muslim world that free speech in America means the Koran cannot be protected from insult, and America is not prepared to change that.

While we should express our abhorrence of any such insult, we should not pretend that this is something we can or will stop from happening forever into the future. It will happen, and we can't/won't stop it from happening. If Muslims can't accommodate this, then they have a problem.

- B

[whosinpower]

66. There are limits to freedom of Speech

Nor does supporting and expressing those limits be conditional or controversial because it is the Quran, and because it is Islam.

you wrote - And most important, if some moron chooses to act in this manner, they need to know it doesn't mean jack shit to most Americans, so take your tantrums and threats elsewhere.

Terry Jones - the minister is not directing his insult to most Americans.

But I will give you this - Freedom of Speech does allow for a serious condemnation - which he is on the receiving end. And THAT, we can hope is what the "muslim world" will see. If, he somehow manages to go through with his protest, then how he is treated will be what they see.

Freedom of Speech is one of the things that makes America what it is. I understand your passion in protecting it. But it has limits. So - the question is - "Does shutting down his protest infringe on his freedom of Speech rights?" I am not a constitutional lawyer, so do not have that answer.

You suggest that shutting down his protest would be seen as "protecting the Quran", or if America cannot "protect the Quran", it is because you have this freedom of speech thing and you will not give that up. Intersting choice of language. I would posit that it is not about protecting the Quran. It is about reaffirming American societal values of religious tolerance. A book burning is a classic symbolic act of intolerance. Although - Jones claims his outreach is a church....

Up here in Canada we have Hate crimes laws and I recall one incident that prosecuted an individual who made anti-semitic statements, taught school and instructed students that the Holocaust was a grand ploy. He even tested them on it. He defended himself with freedom of Speech, and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court. He was found guilty of Hate Crimes. It remains extremely difficult to prosecute someone under these laws - but it has happened.

[Phil The Cat]

65. You just insulted Islam

By calling God a "her"!

I'm afraid if any Islamists read that, are moved to Jihad because of it, and kill someone, then YOU are guilty of murder!

See how this works?

[whosinpower]

67. troll around much? nt

[Phil The Cat]

72. Just pointing out the reality

No matter who you are, what you believe, what you say, SOMEBODY will take offence!

Cold reality - there are radical Islamists (as well as radical Christians) who would be very upset by someone saying God is a woman! Just as they are upset that someone would defile their sacred texts!

I am not supporting the Koran burning, but I fully support the RIGHT to burn it as a form of free speech! Just as I support the right to burn a flag or a Bible!

Exercising the right to free speech does not make one a murderer!

But just out of curiosity: How far DO we have to go in sacrificing our rights to pander to extremists? For many, they will not be happy until the world is under Sharia! "La la la happy happy we love EVERYBODY" does not change the simple fact that there are individuals ready and willing to kill us because of their superstitions!

[whosinpower]

73. You have it backwards - no surprisse I guess

If Jones decides to not burn the Korans - you see this as somehow "sacrificing his right to free speech".

OMYF=CKINGGOD! So - every single f*king time I did not burn that cross - I was not exercising my right to free speech - I must've been PANDERING to that Church. Well f*k me backwards and call me Mary. I had better get right on that because if I certainly do not want to SACRIFICE MY RIGHTS.

And if I choose not to burn that flag hanging on my house - I must be f*king pandering and losing my civil rights to the nation in which I live.

[Adsos Letter]

19. Well, if a person is known by the company they keep...

it appears that DWOC has an affinity for the Westboro Baptist style of hate:

"At the entrance to Trinity United off of Northwest 53rd Avenue, the Westboro group also was joined by about 30 members of the Dove World Outreach Center, said Gainesville police monitoring the protest. Many were wearing the shirt with the words “Islam is of the Devil,” the same words on a sign that members had posted outside their church in July of 2009."
Source: "Westboro Church visit draws counter protesters" By Lise Fisher, Staff writer LINK: http://www.gainesville.com/article/20100418/articles/100419422?p=2&tc=pg

So, it may be small wonder that they were inclined to disregard initial warnings about the danger to US troops caused by their nazi-style bookburning.

Their official site waffles on the affiliation with Westboro, but ends by embracing it, all the same:
"In Support of Westboro Baptist" By Fran Ingram, LINK: http://www.doveworld.org/blog/in-support-of-westboro-baptist

[superconnected]

26. hahahahah this is getting crazier and crazier.

:popcorn:

[Turborama]

29. Koran Burning Pastor & Wife Are "Money Launderers Using Muslims As Red Herrings"

In case you missed it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9080253

[handmade34]

22. Acts 13:10

"You are a child of the devil and an enemy of everything that is right! You are full of all kinds of deceit and trickery. Will you never stop perverting the right ways of the Lord?

keep praying guys... may you at last understand the "right" ways of the Lord

[MH1]

27. anyone else wonder "how is burning Korans different than burning crosses"?

[herbm]

28. The cross is a symbol of a large outpouring of spirituality to millions, whereas the Koran is a

large outpouring of spirituality to millions. World of difference.

[JuniperLea]

33. !

:applause:

[Bragi]

36. Well said! /nt

[wordpix]

58. huh?

[herbm]

68. Oh Je....eeez. I left out a word. So technicaly it wasn't well edited but my intent did.

[herbm]

69. I may have missed one or two on the last post, too. but understand, right?

[lynne]

46. How about the media just pack their bags, go home, and not give -

- these nuts the attention they want and crave? If the media wasn't reporting, no one would know if they burned the koran or if they burned their underwear.

[Bragi]

50. Other than impossible to do, a good idea

[TroglodyteScholar]

57. Hey, I have an idea...

...Why don't you pray to your God to stop you from being such an ignorant, malicious prick?

[wordpix]

59. "has started wearing a .40-caliber pistol strapped to his hip" - this is the Dove'n'Gun Church of

Violent Outreach, it seems.

[Glidescube2]

64. Because

He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword.

[Gin]

70. this pimple of a person has now gotten global coverage

the crazy's win again

[Dappleganger]

71. He better have a CCW

we don't have open-carry on church property, last time I checked.

BTW, this clown deserves to be IGNORED.