With that said, I strangely find myself on the side of the Koran-burning church here.  I'm not on their side in that I agree with what they are doing.  I don't agree with it really, and wouldn't do it.  Not for any respect of Islam or any religion, but because, ultimately, I think burning ANY book in this type of ritual is a pretty pointless exercise, on top of being extremely impolite, to put it mildly.

But yet, to me, I see this as a sort of free speech issue where, if the roles were reversed, liberals and conservatives would probably flip sides like they seem to on so many issues to me as someone who can often be found on either side of the ideological spectrum. (Yes, I know many many people on the right have come out against this, but let's be honest, the left is driving it as an issue.)

No one has a right for their religion to be respected by others.  They have the right for their freedom to practice their religion to be respected, but that isn't the same thing.  To me, if someone wants to burn, piss on, or pulverize a symbol that others revere, that is their right, and if those who revere that symbol are so irrational that the burners or pissers, or even the entire country they live in, have to fear violent reprisal, well, that's a problem with the violent reprisers, not the burners.

To me, the idea that religious people get so bent out of shape that they want to do violence over some perceived act of disrespect to their beliefs that has no actual tangible impact on their life, that is a much much bigger problem than the problem of a bunch of morons lacking both a sense of basic decorum and an understanding of geopolitics and wanting to burn the Koran.

I think if we were truly being consistent in support of free speech, we would be defending the offensive speech of the Koran burners, as much as we might disagree with their motives or objectives, and defending the idea that it is never appropriate for someone to respond to speech with violence, and that those who threaten violence in response to speech are the problem, not the speakers.

We've given Muslims around the world plenty of reasons to want to dislike America, and for some few amongst them to want to do America harm.  But I actually think it is demagoguery to suggest that some loons burning the Koran presents such an enormous danger to American security.  The danger to American security was created when we started overthrowing democratically elected governments in the Middle East in the 50s and attempting to impose our will on the region to control the flow of oil.  The danger to American security was created through 60+ years of backing the Israeli government UNCONDITIONALLY no matter what they do.  The danger to American security was created through illegal invasions in contravention of International concensus.  The danger to American security was created through hundreds of thousands of civilians being killed by American bombs.  

I think it is a pretty insulting view of the Muslim world to think that there are people who wouldn't have been ready to do violence after all that, who will suddenly be pushed over the edge by what a few dozen powerless people in a nation of 300 million do for kicks on a Saturday afternoon.  Really? We have to control every idea that a tiny radical gathering of a few dozen people chooses to express for the sake of world security? That's ludicrous. 

I think it is a pretty insulting view of the Muslim world to suggest that Muslims are going to want to kill Americans for THIS more than for all the aforementioned harm we've done to the Islamic world.

This whole controversy just seems like a big gigantic diversion to me, being covered ad nauseum by the media and hyped up by people on the left side of the ideological spectrum (where I usually am), seizing an opportunity to make a parable about the dangers of anti-Islamic sentiment, almost, it seems, hoping that there will be a violent response to make the parable more powerful. 

There are real dangers to the rising anti-Islamic sentiment in America.  But to me, this Koran-burning is one of the least worrisome examples of it.  If it was flag-burning, if it was bra burning, probably even if it was Bible burning, we on the left would be talking about the importance of free speech first and foremost, not how offensive speech should be suppressed because someone might get offended and do violence.

Principles only matter when you stand by them even when inconvenient or perhaps even dangerous.  I don't think there is any point to the folks burning the Koran.  Yes, it's probably counterproductive to our geopolitical discourse.  But it is the right that we as Americans have fought to preserve.  And if there are people out there who are going to try to do violence because that right is expressed, the American thing is to protect and defend the freedom of speech, not try to pressure the speakers into silence. 

Today, we pressure people to not burn the Koran because it will offend people and violence reprisals may result.  Tomorrow, we may feel a desire to pressure people to prevent them from expressing speech that SHOULD be expressed and NEEDS to be expressed for fear of violent reprisals.