Burning is so not green :)

Why was that pastor planning on burning books considered holy by some. That is so not green, and it's not even winter yet for that big bonfire in Gainesville to make any sense. ;) The event seems to have been postponed for now, but here are some thoughts around that.

Instead of burning the books, he should try selling those 50 copies for an exorbitant price citing that they are very rare. "These are the very copies that were planned to be burnt." :) I am sure there would be enough number of such people who, when the right chords are touched, would buy these copies purely out of sentiments.

Thinking of sentiments, why were people in India and other countries protesting? What were they protesting? I am sure they got to know of this event only through the media, which had also reported that people elsewhere, including in the USA, were objecting to the planned event. True, some people felt outraged at even the thought of their holy book being burnt, but is this the correct way of expressing that anguish?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100909/wl_sthasia_afp/indiausattacksreligionislam_20100909165811

PC's comments are themselves uncalled for. What irks me most is that some people burnt the US flag in protest. If you cannot distinguish between the USA and a pastor of a church with 50 members, YSSCKY. What John Bloemer said
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/08/news/la-pn-boehner-koran-20100909
"Just because you have a right to do something in America doesn't mean it is the right thing to do" applies to every other country, too. If burning the Quran hurts your sentiments, burning a country's flag would hurt the sentiments of the citizens of that country. Have you got nothing better to do? Why not go to a remote village in your state and provide a tanker of water that they so desperately need, and you can put your message on the tanker.

What PC did was not that outrageous, but is blatantly politically motivated. What have you said over and above what the government of USA and its people are saying? Aren't there more burning issues at home that you had to call a meeting for this and "condemn" an event that hasn't even taken place and looked very likely to be prevented by saner people in the neighborhood? Yes, this would have law and order implications in our country, and we should prepare ourselves for that, but why interfere with a mature government that has been openly asking the pastor to refrain from conducting this event.

This kind of politically motivated interference with the actions and responsibilities of other countries is not new. If France bans the veil, why should another country ask it to reconsider its decision? This law is not discriminatory, in general. As far as people from outside France are concerned, they do not automatically get the right to visit France unless granted by the French themselves. So, if they cannot follow the rules of that country, they should stay where they are.

All this confusion arises as follows. Someone from country A moves to country B because he/she thinks country B and its government provide a better environment and living conditions. Now, when B curbs some of those liberties, usually because they were grossly misused, this person has to choose his next course of action, which should be either to continue staying in country B following their laws, or move to a different country, where again the local laws need to be followed. There is no point in complaining to the country of his origin about the new laws and asking them to open a diplomatic channel requesting B to revoke the law. What is even more annoying is that country A entertains such requests.

Just to be clear, this is entirely different from the "stoning to death" kind of incidents, where a barbaric rule might mean the end of a life, and that the person cannot choose to move to a different country. Needless to say, those are not the countries with a proper justice system where the condemned person can appeal and get a decent trial.