A student at Pace University has been charged with felony hate crimes for flushing and defecating on a Koran. This is an incident, yet again, where it
appears the U.S. Government is two-faced regarding its interpretation of Thomas Jefferson's idea of separation of church and state. Here is a copy of
the complaint with which the student has been charged:
image source: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20070730ShmulevichComplaint01.jpg
If you'll notice, there's no mention of whose Koran it was. It has been my experience that if a crime is committed against someone, the individual
against whom the crime was committed must file suit. The charge isn't vandalism nor theft, but
criminal mischief. Think about the
ramifications -- if ruining a religious book constitutes criminal mischief (in particular, the Koran, as many Bibles are decimated without any
criminal charges files, but we'll get into that in a moment), then anything that could be construed as offensive could be such. Thus ends the First
Ammendment for all intents and purposes.
What's even more disturbing about this is how the charges were leveled against this individual. It was constant pressure by muslim groups on the
university and local authorities that caused this man to be charged, not an obvious infraction of law.
I'd like to quote some of Christopher Hitchens' comments regarding this, because I think he makes some very valid points. If you'd like the full
Op/Ed, please visit
this link
Before me is a recent report that a student at Pace University in New York City has been arrested for a hate crime in consequence of an alleged
dumping of the Quran. Nothing repels me more than the burning or desecration of books, and if, for example, this was a volume from a public or
university library, I would hope that its mistreatment would constitute a misdemeanor at the very least. But if I choose to spit on a copy of the
writings of Ayn Rand or Karl Marx or James Joyce, that is entirely my business. When I check into a hotel room and send my free and unsolicited copy
of the Gideon Bible or the Book of Mormon spinning out of the window, I infringe no law, except perhaps the one concerning litter. Why do we not make
this distinction in the case of the Quran? We do so simply out of fear, and because the fanatical believers in that particular holy book have proved
time and again that they mean business when it comes to intimidation. Surely that should be to their discredit rather than their credit. Should not
the “moderate” imams of On Faith have been asked in direct terms whether they are, or are not, negotiating with a gun on the table?
So what's the deal? Has the US, or at least New York, adopted Islam as an official protected religion catering to whatever Imams say, or is law
enforcement now going to evaluate criminal charges being leveled against someone based on the likelihood of the individual filing the complaint to
start riots?
