…and this is a 
Desecration: it's a fun hobby!
Category: Humor • Religion
Posted on: July 29, 2007 10:58 AM, by PZ Myers
I am appalled. A man in New York was arrested for throwing a copy of the Quran in a public toilet. He deserved arrest—everyone knows it is vandalism and criminal mischief to clog a public toilet with debris.
Oh, hang on — the guy was arrested for a hate crime? Are toilets now on the list of victims targeted by fringe fanatics? What's their slogan: "Bring Back the Open Trench!"? It is a shame to see innocent and useful toilets persecuted in this ghastly way …
Wait, never mind. He was arrested for being mean to Muslims, which also makes no sense. He destroyed a book and clogged a toilet. If some local nut started setting fire to copies of The God Delusion, I wouldn't feel personally victimized — let her burn all the copies she can buy, it's just more money in Richard Dawkins' pocket. (If she started stuffing copies into the toilets, though, then I might feel oppressed. When you gotta go, you gotta go.)
You know, there is a tradition around here, one that I've practiced for a few years: overwrought sanctimony must be met with disrespectful insolence. So I'm thinking of picking up a cheap copy of the Qu'ran. And I'm thinking … what to do, what to do. It will, of course, be something in the privacy of my home, with my very own copy — none of this public vandalism and veiled threats to people who believe. It will just be a demonstration of my right to treat my property as it deserves and of my opinion of this silly book.
So here are a few ideas. Maybe you can think of some more.
I could simply urinate on it, but that's old hat.
If I had a puppy, I could use the pages for paper training. But I do not have a puppy and I'm not going to get one for this horrible reason.
The traditional approach: keep it near the fireplace, and use the pages for kindling. Of course, there's no way I'm going to start a fire in the fireplace in August in Minnesota, so that's going to have to wait a while.
I could doodle cartoons in the margins and make my own crudely illustrated (I have no talent) version of the Qu'ran. Then I could put it on ebay and make a profit.
Here's an artsy option: I could make a new cover and a bookmark for it … out of bacon.
That last one sounds fun, and I could also put up photos on the blog (there's also a tradition there) but perhaps some of you can come up with a better suggestion.
(via Deep Thoughts)
Comments
Ohh, bacon on the Quran. Enough to drive both Muslims and veg*ns nuts. DO IT.
But I demand an equally artsy treatment of the Bible. Perhaps Canadian bacon?
Posted by: Lulu | July 29, 2007 11:02 AM
If you want to be culturally offensive, you could step on it a few times. It'll leave it in good enough shape for other treatments, and Muslims have a pretty strong sense of the foot as dirty.
Frying a few pages in bacon fat might be good, but I don't know if it's worth the waste of delicious, delicious bacon.
Posted by: Schwa | July 29, 2007 11:04 AM
Technically, the 'proper' way to dispose of the Qu'ran is to burn it or place it in running water...
Posted by: K. Engels | July 29, 2007 11:07 AM
Lulu, the equivalent treatment for the bible would be, of course, a squid bookmark, as they are an abomination ...
Posted by: llewelly | July 29, 2007 11:11 AM
/open rant
Who's the victim of this "crime"? I disagree with the hate crime laws like this, because they are criminalizing the thought behind the action. If the action isn't a crime (other than clogging the toilet), how can the thinking behind it be a crime?
/close rant
Another fine use for the Quran or any other babbley book would be to post in the toilet, so when you need some paper, it's available. I know, I know, this is more the old Sears-catalog-in-the-outhouse routine. Or since the pages are usually nice thin paper, use it for origami (origami pigs?).
Posted by: Bob | July 29, 2007 11:12 AM
OK, don't you already have one nutcase roaming America who just might mean to do you harm. Now you are deliberately gonna piss off millions of the touchiest people on the planet?
You are braver than I!
Posted by: cory | July 29, 2007 11:14 AM
I think it helps to know the culture that the book is a part of. One of my all time desecrations was done by a friend of mine. He nailed a baby jesus to a bible through the groin. He said it was a representation of what happened to him in catholic school.
Posted by: Janine | July 29, 2007 11:16 AM
geez, i just leave mine on the shelf, unread, next to my copies of the bible and the tao te jing (or however it's spelled). I know it's boring, but they're books, and I have a hard time hurting them.
Posted by: MAJeff | July 29, 2007 11:20 AM
I just file the bible, the qur'an, et al. in the fiction section. Never have made up my mind exactly what sort of fiction (other than bad), however; definitely not science fiction, nor classic literature, nor historical, maybe 10¢ novels?
Posted by: blf | July 29, 2007 11:22 AM
Is this a hate crime?-
At work I have 3 bibles(from the dollar store) glued together. When I don't believe someone, I pull out my 'stack of bibles' and make them swear on it.
Posted by: Dirk Diggler | July 29, 2007 11:26 AM
"The good Americans tolerate ideas they may find personally repugnant, keep them on the shelf and learn from them, and allow others to peruse them while they may argue vigorously against them. The monsters fear ideas with which they disagree, set them on fire, and rant against allowing anyone else to look at them.... I'd think it ironic that a People of the Book should be so blasé about destroying books"
---P.Z. Myers, 2004/07/13
Posted by: Anonymous, but you can probably guess | July 29, 2007 11:26 AM
Good suggestions all!
It's funny, though, I just realized that, irreligious as I am, I actually feel a REVERENCE for books. For the whole of my thinking life, I've felt that it was just wrong to hurt a book, any book.
Books bring light. They collect knowledge, and fuel understanding, and bring comfort. They help train doctors and teachers, engineers and researchers. They teach us the value of the individual, and of independent, individual thought. They're the pillars of civilization, to me.
(I feel a parallel reverence for libraries. You can quote me on this: "Libraries are the cheapest and best thing civilization has to offer.")
Thinking about it just now, though, I discover that the growing anti-intellectualism in certain parts of the world, the U.S. included, opens up a hole in the protective sphere of my book-reverence.
Those books that fuel the anti-intellectualism - the Bible, the Koran, whatever others there are that spawn knowledge- and freedom-hating fundamentalists - they're really sort of anti-books, aren't they? Instead of light, they bring a darkness that destroys the light of civilization.
In those places today where you find enemies of individuality and independence and freedom, you're likely to find these sorts of books. They reverse knowledge, inflame the sort of intolerance that kills equality and respect for others. They comfort and aid those who would end so much of the good - science, and open schools, and the libraries where all those other books, the good ones, are collected.
Hmm.
Have at it, PZ!
Posted by: Hank Fox | July 29, 2007 11:30 AM
"Anonymous, but you can probably guess"
Unfortunately, no we can't; the list of people too rock-stupid to understand the difference between censorship and mockery is far too long. A more specific clue, please?
Posted by: Azkyroth | July 29, 2007 11:33 AM
If you do decide to do this, at least pick up a copy of the Oxford University Press's paperback edition. It is $12.95, which is slightly more than some of the paperbacks published by the fundie publishing houses in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, but at least the money from your purchase will go to a deserving place.
Posted by: K. Engels | July 29, 2007 11:37 AM
Why not draw flip-book movies on the pages? This takes a bit of time but is fun to do. You could show a guy eating a pig, or pooping/peeing/vomiting on a Koran. Or show God vomiting up the Koran. Use your imagination!
Posted by: jimBOB | July 29, 2007 11:39 AM
The article also reports that someone (not necessarily Shmulevich) "scrawled racial slurs on a student's car... and on a bathroom wall." PZ and commenters, are you going to argue that the vandal shouldn't be charged with hate crimes because cars aren't on the "list of victims"?
Hate crimes are determined by the criminal's intent (and if you confuse this with "thought crimes", consider the difference between first and second degree murder). Shmulevich's intent is transparent. He didn't drop those Qurans in toilets to protest indoor plumbing. He did it to make Muslims feel alienated and unwelcome--to send a message that their religion makes them targets.
I'm disappointed in you, PZ. As Treebeard might say, a humanist should know better.
Posted by: Sideways | July 29, 2007 11:41 AM
I think you should rip the cover off and replace it with one that says "Holy Bible." Then, go and stick it in a hotel room. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Posted by: Dan | July 29, 2007 11:48 AM
Racial slurs, sure, that's hate. I have no problem with charging someone with trying to create an oppressive environment with that kind of behavior. That is trying to send a message to certain students of that school that they aren't wanted.
Destroying books, though, is not normally regarded as a hate crime, or we'd have a lot of fundie preachers in jail right now. This is discriminatory and a bad precedent -- it says that pointed criticism of ideas is not allowed. Throwing a book of bad ideas in a toilet is not the same as throwing people into a toilet. In particular, protesting the undue reverence granted to religious texts seems to me to be a very good idea.
Posted by: PZ Myers | July 29, 2007 11:51 AM
Hilarious suggestions, PZ. I would also suggest shredding it and recycling it or using it as confetti. But personally I like your doodle-and-Ebay idea the best.
What bothers me about calling this a hatecrime is that Christians (and their political henchmen) aren't persecuted for hatecrimes against gays. I'm not even gay, but I do consider it a hatecrime to disallow them the same rights guaranteed by marriage.
..not to mention the hatecrimes preached each Sunday when they suggest that everyone but them (and they assume all of their family and friends, too, of course!) is going to be burnt for all eternity. I touched on this briefly in my post titled, What Wearing a Cross Means.
Posted by: Tom @Thoughtsic.com | July 29, 2007 11:53 AM
Sorry, but this might be the only post I've ever read here that is absolutely, totally ridiculous. I'm hugely disappointed in you, PZ. I agree with your point that throwing the Quran into a toilet is NOT a hate crime, but you should have left it at that. What is the POINT of desecrating this book? Or any book? Frankly, you just make yourself sound as ignorant and intolerant as any fundamentalist Christian. A 12-year-old fundamentalist Christian, at that, since it's hard to believe this is adult thinking.
This is a rational response? What are we going to do next, start throwing book-burning parties? Burn religious texts and gospel CD's? Maybe we can get together with the fundies and share a bonfire? How stupid is this?
Sorry, but count me out. I will object, reasonably and rationally, whenever vandalizing your own property - whether a religious item or the flag - is made a crime. I will, calmly and politely (more or less), disagree with all religious claims that are not based on sound evidence (all of them, in other words). But I will also treat people's beliefs with tolerance, even when I think they're absolutely ridiculous. I WON'T become just as big a lunatic as my foes.
This is America. My neighbor's religious beliefs, if any, are none of my business, unless he tries to force them on the rest of us. And this is something Muslims, in particular, desperately need to learn. In the marketplace of ideas, I'll attempt to present my own reasonable, rational objections to all magical beliefs. I certainly won't try to out-loony the loonies and out-crazy the nutcases. And with any luck, my example will help uphold my arguments.
Posted by: Bill | July 29, 2007 11:57 AM
I apologize; here is the real link if anyone is interested. What Wearing a Cross Means.
Posted by: Tom @Thoughtsic.com | July 29, 2007 11:58 AM
I don't believe PZ is in favor of destroying books to keep them away from people who might read them.
Rather, he is concerned about the people who treat a book as something sacred, and the people who bow down before the zealots' outrage about the destruction of their sacred book by declaring damaging it a hate crime.
These objections of "O, you said book burning was a waste and a shame, so you're contradicting yourself by looking for ways to desecrate the Koran" are just stupid.
Posted by: Caledonian | July 29, 2007 12:04 PM
PZ--you're absolutely right, destroying books is not normally considered a hate crime. This is not a normal destruction of a book, so I fail to see your point.
I thought your post "Link to me, or the Bible gets it!" was hilarious. I wouldn't have thought it was hilarious if you'd left a urine-soaked bible on the steps of your local church. See the difference?
Posted by: Sideways | July 29, 2007 12:05 PM
I can't believe no one has suggested the toilet paper solution yet. Flushing down the entire book will clog the toilet, sure... but one paper at a time?
Posted by: forsen | July 29, 2007 12:08 PM
I know how I would desecrate the Koran or the Bible. I would find the most stupid and offensive passage and then I would tear the page out and roll it up into a very large sized reefer. Then I would smoke it. Maybe I could try to figure out which holy book makes the best rolling papers.
Posted by: Tanya | July 29, 2007 12:11 PM
I have no idea how posts like these can be considered constructive in any way.
Posted by: Erik Frederiksen | July 29, 2007 12:12 PM
I think seeing a Koran in the toilet could create an "oppressive environment" even for Muslims who don't care about desecration or even for a non-believer from a predominantly Muslim country. It's a fine line.
Posted by: poke | July 29, 2007 12:14 PM
Paint a picture of mohammed on the cover, then barbecue it with some delicious pork steak. It's three-solutions-in-one, and the paper could give the steaks a nice smoky taste.
Posted by: nemo ramjet | July 29, 2007 12:15 PM
How about putting a nice Quran copy on the shelf in the 'historical reference' section, next to a bible, a copy of Herodotus, a pre-plate tectonics geology textbook, a pre-Darwin biology text, etc...
Books of that nature are fascinating for the perspective they allow on the 'evolution' of human thinking.
I don't think the Quran needs any sort of desecration, just proper context!
Posted by: snowgeek | July 29, 2007 12:16 PM
"Paint a picture of mohammed on the cover, then barbecue it with some delicious pork steak. It's three-solutions-in-one, and the paper could give the steaks a nice smoky taste."
With that and the bacon, I petition for a new post title.
"Desecration: it's what's for dinner."
Posted by: mommyrex | July 29, 2007 12:18 PM
What a horrible thing to do! I can't imagine trying to put a book - any book! - down a toilet. What on earth are you going to read in the bathroom if you are always throwing the reading material away? Now you can't use the toilet, nor can you read.
The nice thing to do would be to leave it there next to the potty so the next person to come in wouldn't have to be so bored. Everyone knows fiction is more enjoyable in the john than non-fiction!
Posted by: Heather | July 29, 2007 12:21 PM
I would take pages from both the Qur'an and The Bible, weave them into a quilt, and shoot gay porn on them.
Posted by: efp | July 29, 2007 12:21 PM
efp, I think that was by far the most creative suggestion yet.
Posted by: forsen | July 29, 2007 12:22 PM
I'm with Hank Fox's (#12) first thought -- I have a reverence for books, all books, and hate the thought of destroying them.
After all, how am I going to show that Adolf Hitler was a nut from the start without showing the very first page of Mein Kampf?
While damning Islam, Christianity and other nutcase religions based on the evident stupidity of their followers may be enough, I still think that a sound case can be made by showing off the stupidity of their "holy" books. While the skeptic's annotated bible and skeptic's annotated koran are wonderful resources, sometimes only the printed work will do. Heck, just showing my kids that the bible says to stone disobedient children was enough for them.
So, I think we are for the same cause. However, I think that an enemies printed words are our best friends. Save the book -- it will be useful.
Posted by: spudbeach | July 29, 2007 12:31 PM
PZ, I'm not clear on what you're upset about. You seem to recognize that the orginal act of "public vandalism and veiled threats to people who believe" was somehow improper (as you seem unwilling to engage in it yourself), and that the original act was likely not just about "a demonstration of my right to treat my property as it deserves and of my opinion of this silly book". So what is the issue here? There is no law, including hate crime laws, that would prevent you from doing what you suggest in private. So what is the big deal?
Posted by: Tulse | July 29, 2007 12:32 PM
Hilarious. Pretty much fits my Catholic school experience.
Posted by: Brian | July 29, 2007 12:36 PM
The folks at LGF are appropriately incensed:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=26447_Pace_University_Koran_Case_-_Unbelievably_Outrageous#comments
Posted by: TW | July 29, 2007 12:42 PM
PZ Myers wrote:
I think you may have misread a badly worded article. It seems that the Koran in the toilet incidents were just part of a larger campaign to make Muslim students feel threatened. Only two sentences clue me in: "The incidents came amid a spate of vandalism cases with religious or racial overtones at the school... someone scrawled racial slurs on a student's car at the Westchester County satellite campus and on a bathroom wall at the campus in lower Manhattan."
No one is going to arrest you for Koran abuse done in the privacy of your own home. It's not threatening anyone.
Granting that Muslims viewing treatment of the Koran as a sensitive issue and viewing the book as a sacred object and mistreating it as an offense against God boarders on being psychotic, preventing people from doing it is more akin to keeping people from throwing things at Gorillas in the zoo than enforcing thought crimes. It's just dangerous.
Posted by: Norman Doering | July 29, 2007 12:46 PM
Now I'm picturing Professor Myers sitting in the library from The Breakfast Club and ripping up a Qu'ran while doing his best Judd Nelson impression.
Posted by: Citizen | July 29, 2007 12:49 PM
PZ, you've gone too far. Desecrating a book, any book, is a horrible thing to do, never mind that it shouldn't be crime. If you want to say that you don't think it should be a crime there are far better ways of doing it than to destroy a book.
Posted by: Lover of Books | July 29, 2007 12:50 PM
Here's a somewhat related real-world example of Quran "desecration" and the response to it. In their 1979 release "My Life in the Bush of Ghosts," David Byrne and Brian Eno had been experimenting with overlaying found voice samples with music of their own devising. One voice sample they had was someone chanting the Quran. After the album was released, they got objections from muslims saying it was desecration for the words of the Quran to be presented this way. So on subsequent releases, they removed the offending track.
So, was this a proper response? Should we accomodate such an objection? Can religious groups make such a strong claim to their words that they can reasonably request that they never be presented in any context but one they choose? (The musical track in question was trancelike but not overtly disrespectful.) Even if such a presentation does not harm any physical book or other object, and does not inconvenience any believer in any way?
Posted by: jimBOB | July 29, 2007 12:52 PM
People who desecrate a public toilet should have the book thrown at them!! Anybody who's ever had to do the squeezed cheek trot into a filthy public restroom only to find that someone has stuffed something into the toilet rendering it useless, understands. And yes,this happened to me! My alternative: The equally filthy, but functional womens toilet, where, after closing what was left of the door I read this slogan scrawled in grease or something like it: (Don't bother standing on the seat, the krabs here jump 15 feet). I say this guy should serve 30 days as a public bathroom attendant!
Posted by: DigressiveSteve | July 29, 2007 1:02 PM
Here's a plan: we all say that were going to buy Qurans and bibles in order to desecrate them, and then let slip our intentions to Bill Oreilly. Since Christians and Muslims both love a good fight, what results is a rush to retaliate in kind. Richard Dawkins makes lots of money, and the statistics regarding the number of atheist-rational-science books printed and sold go way up! (Of course, we save our money and let them do all the buying...)
And while were at it, we say that were also going to rip up goofy new age books--astrology, Sylvia Browne, numerology, etc.--all the creationist books we can get our hands on, all of the idiotic "Left Behind" series, and a whole bunch of Baptists, Mormon, fundy 'Jesus saves' religious pamphlets. Why the bookstores might have a hard time keeping up with the buying frenzy...
Posted by: RamblinDude | July 29, 2007 1:03 PM
I think a lot are missing the point: it's mostly about how they react to the desecration of a book. It's completely ridiculous so the response is equally ridiculous to show that it is JUST A BOOK. From what I read he hasn't suggested in anyway shape or form "book burning" in any other sense than one singular copy of a book that he pays for. To compare ridiculing bizarre reverance to a pile of papers to censorship is just weird.
Posted by: cv | July 29, 2007 1:11 PM
So, does someone want to do a little performance art in a large city (I'd do it, but the small town in which I live would just praise Jesus and wave flags in response)? I don't think it'd be too hard to build a platform with a functioning toilet that can be setup, allow the performance, and then move on.
Of course, anyone can do this in the privacy of his/her own home, but that's hardly speech, now is it? If you're going to make a statement, it helps to actually have a chance of people seeing it, otherwise you're no better off than staying silent.
Posted by: uknesvuinng | July 29, 2007 1:14 PM
Here are some pre-made book covers left over from the Harry Potter craze. They might work if the book is the right size.
Posted by: Spanish Inquisitor | July 29, 2007 1:15 PM
Im with some of the earlier commenters...I love books too much to do them harm. The closest thing I feel to religion is reverence for books.
Posted by: PalMD | July 29, 2007 1:18 PM
Im with some of the earlier commenters...I love books too much to do them harm. The closest thing I feel to religion is reverence for books.
Posted by: PalMD | July 29, 2007 1:22 PM
These charges sound excessive on the face of it, unless there is more behind them that we are unaware of as yet.
The people responsible for bringing these charges, though, are the police and public prosecutors. If they are over-reacting to Muslim protests then it is they who should be the target of any criticism.
Defacing or destroying any book can be defended as a legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression. To do so, or to encourage others to do so, simply to thumb your nose at a particular faith sounds a bit childish, though.
Posted by: Ian H Spedding FCD | July 29, 2007 1:24 PM
I'm rather surprised that the authors of the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, Quran and Book of Mormon aren't being charged with a hate crime.
I do like the suggestion of a bacon bookmark though. Makes me want to startup flash and do a movie with Mohamed and his sidekick God sharing bacon and eggs on a sunny morning.
That whole episode where Muslims got offended by cartoons portraying Mohamed was ridiculous. Historians are pretty certain he was an opium addict. So they're following the deranged rantings of an opium addict. Nice.
Posted by: Tony P | July 29, 2007 1:30 PM
Mmmmm, bacon!
Posted by: aiabx | July 29, 2007 1:31 PM
Well, it's just a book. I'm sorry but I don't revere books because nowadays there are millions of copies of a book out there so it isn't like the old hand copied bibles and stuff. If my copy of the last Harry Potter book burned in a fire or got stuffed down a toilet we wouldn't lose any vital information. That being said though, I don't think that they should be handled totally recklessly but, in the spirit of making lemonade when life hands you lemons, there's a genre of art that uses books. Some of it is very nice.
Posted by: mena | July 29, 2007 1:36 PM
Hum. That might be an idea, using the Quran to make a paper mache' mask of a pig (for Halloween use). I'd do it, but I only have two copies.
Is it sacrilegious to write in the Quran? I write notes in my "Holy" books. I use highlighter and bookmarks. Sometimes I quote other books in the margins to show why a particular passage is incorrect.
Old college habits die hard.
Posted by: Calladus | July 29, 2007 1:36 PM
It would've been a hate crime if he had shoved a Muslim's head into the toilet. Dropping a holy book into a toilet is, at most, just vandalism. Books are just inanimate objects, not sentient beings.
Freedom of expression shouldn't be a crime.
Posted by: Steve Sutton | July 29, 2007 1:52 PM
You say PZ is on the edge of being a book burner?
This isn't light-hearted mockery, he said it himself,
" . . . must be met with disrespectful insolence" - PZ Myers
"I have no problem euthanizing books damaged by mildew or water or insects, but taking a book, no matter how repugnant its content, and intentionally destroying it as a strike against the ideas therein is simply alien to me. Censorship and book-banning and worse, book-burning are unforgivable evils."
- PZ Myers Jul 13, 2004
Unfortunately, PZ's supposed and sweet reverence story of books has its' bounds.
Posted by: philos | July 29, 2007 1:55 PM
A friend once found, at his apartment dumpster, a foot high cross with a paper mache Jesus on it. We used to amuse ourselves by shooting blow darts into it while we chatted, much to the chagrin of the occasonal Christian visitor.
So I say use the Koran as the backing for a dart board or target. However, if you have artistic talents, balls, and time, the best way to make a point about the Koran and the goofy Muslim ideas would be to illustrate the entire thing. This would, of course, include many depictions of the world's most famous epileptic, er, prophet. Then mass produce them and sell them. What could be more offensive to a Muslim than a capitalist pi..., er, infidel profiting off pictures of He Who Shall Not Be Pictured?
Posted by: Science Avenger | July 29, 2007 1:56 PM
You could shred it and make pinatas and fill them with pork rinds.
You could incase several of them in pollyurathane and make a dog house, outhouse, a bench, shoe rack, or any other peice of furniture.
Cut it up and rearrange the words to quote almost anyone you want; Darwin, Dawkins, Segan, etc.
Posted by: MemePilot | July 29, 2007 2:05 PM
W o r d s o f a m e n t a l g i a n t :
"And I'm thinking ... what to do, what to do. . . .
So here are a few ideas. Maybe you can think of some more.
I could simply urinate on it (Qu'ran), but that's old hat."
- PZ Myers
Up there with Darwin, let me tell ya.
Posted by: philos | July 29, 2007 2:09 PM
There's protest, and then there's spitefulness. Merely burning a Koran would be protest. Desecrating one... well, since I have no particular attachment to it, I'd call it juvenile at best.
Posted by: Brian X | July 29, 2007 2:19 PM
Unfortunately, PZ's supposed and sweet reverence story of books has its' bounds.
You did notice that this post was categorized under "Humor" and "Religion", no?
Posted by: cm | July 29, 2007 2:19 PM
Excuse me, please. I see that I need to clarify one small part of my previous post. If someone flushed his own copy of the Quran down his own toilet in his own house, that would be stupid and childish, but not a hate crime. But if he flushed it down someone else's toilet, or down a public toilet, that may or may not be a hate crime, depending on the precise circumstances (though it would certainly be vandalism).
I don't know about this exact case, since I haven't read the story. It's not at all important to my main argument, and reasonable people can disagree about what specific incident is a hate crime and what is not. If you had a reasonable expectation that it was an attempt to intimidate, harass, or threaten an often-despised minority, then yes, the incident was no doubt a hate crime. The intention matters, so reasonable people may disagree. That's why we have courts, after all.
It would still be stupid and childish, of course - just like many of the proposals here. Muslims in particular have good reason to feel unwelcome and unwanted in America (somewhat like atheists, in that regard), and subject to feelings of persecution and intimidation. But Freedom of Religion means ALL religions - as well as non-belief, too. I don't know any Muslims, but I have friends who are Christians. I disagree with them, but I don't attempt to publicly humiliate them. We're still friends. And I hope I'd treat members of any other religious group the same way.
Your religious belief, or lack thereof, is your own business in America. I will resist any attempt to force it on someone else, and I'll likely argue that it's not based on reality, but I won't perform stupid and childish tricks designed to anger and humiliate you.
Posted by: Bill | July 29, 2007 2:26 PM
There's always youtube.
-Amit
Posted by: Amit | July 29, 2007 2:30 PM
What I would do:
Magic marker out all the references to killing infidels, worshipping a non-existent fantasy god, and any other dumbass stuff, then donate it to a library.
Let them throw it into a dumpster.
Be sure to attach a global positioning device to the spine before donating, then trace it to its final resting place (preferably on the Internet for all to see).
Posted by: CalGeorge | July 29, 2007 2:30 PM
This post is jejune and sophomoric.
Posted by: Vince Williams | July 29, 2007 2:35 PM
"This post is jejune and sophomoric."
You suck.
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | July 29, 2007 2:46 PM
Eh? Put what where?
Lemme see here. I need to visualize the incident.
I see the hole in the toilet. It is relatively small and round. I see the book, relatively large and rectangular.
Now, altogether, what do I see next? (Hint, picture your first pegboard toy, the one with the holes and the pegs and the hammer.)
This is silly, ain't it?
Posted by: Crudely Wrott | July 29, 2007 2:46 PM
What's the name of the variety of troll that spends his time poring over blog posts in order to trumpet what he sees as an inconsistency in the bloggers beliefs/statements?
I think the evils of religion go way way beyond the books on which they're based, so I'm rather unmoved by this sort of protest. As far as I can see, the basic idea is to rob a book, which in this case should be considered a symbol, of it's sacredness. I'm not sure destroying said book is quite the right way to go, because how often do we actively destroy any other books? Even the worst novels that we get fed up with reading just go to Goodwill. I'm thinking maybe of using the Koran as a coaster to prop up a wobbly piece of furniture. Like in the classic In Living Color sketch with the Home Boy Shopping Network hosts selling TVs that they stole from hotels. The swivel attachment made the TVs rather wobbly, so they promised to throw in a stack of Gideon Bibles to every customer. It may not be as fire-breathing, but I can more get behind the sort of statement that the Koran, Bible, I Ching, whatever, is Just A Book.
Posted by: Rey Fox | July 29, 2007 2:47 PM
You could pit it against a copy of the Bible in a highly publicized Truth-Off!
Which one weighs more?
Which one would cover more surface area when disassembled into its individual component lies?
Which one, uh, boils faster?
And so forth! Don't forget to include the Talmud, the Bhagavad Gita, Dianetics, and the Gospel of the FSM for fairness' sake. Finally, a "scientific" way to test the truth-quotients (NOT the truthiness) of all the world's great religions!
And if you don't do this, maybe I will.
Posted by: Starchy | July 29, 2007 2:49 PM
"Treatment of the Quran is a sensitive issue for Muslims, who view the book as a sacred object and mistreating it as an offense against God. The religion teaches that the Quran is the direct word of God. "
Sounds to me rather like how many Amercians view their flag.
I think free speech should allow people to desicrate both, but throwing any book down a toilet, without doing it page by page and flushing it often, should be considered a crime against the next person who wishes to use the toilet.
Posted by: sailor | July 29, 2007 2:53 PM
Charles Merrill's protest art using the Bible and the Koran
http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid47752.asp
"Charles Merrill, the out Palm Springs artist who recently gained notoriety for editing the Bible with a black marker and a pair of scissors, recently made a statement against Muslim homophobia by burning an antique Koran valued at $60,000. "The purpose of editing and burning Abrahamic Holy Books is to eliminate homophobic hate," Merrill stated in a press release posted online. "Both ancient books are terrorist manuals.""
Specifically, it was a Thomas Kinkade Family Bible.
More Koran art
http://sunbreak.blogspot.com/2003/01/seattle-critic-turns-commissar-this.html
"Gallery Roq la Rue featured a Koran in which artist Kurt Geissel had carved out the shape of a Buddhist figurine - specifically one of the Bamiyan Buddhas destroyed by the Taliban in the spring of 2001."
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051202/OPED0301/512020325/1001/NEWS01
"Many Muslim students are upset over an artwork in the current show, "My Country, Right or Left: Artists Respond to the State of the Union," at Delta's L.H. Horton art gallery.
Called "Kalashnikov Jihad," the work by local artist John Lechner is a life-sized ceramic Kalashnikov assault rifle wrapped in pages of flowing Arabic script from the Quran."
Marilyn Manson once ripped up a Book of Mormon on stage
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/bio/index.jsp?pid=36874
Posted by: Colugo | July 29, 2007 2:55 PM
As an "appeaser" atheist, I hasten to add that while these acts of iconoclasm may be personally cathartic - especially for those who have been personally traumatized by religious extremists - they hardly contribute to an image of critics of faith as exhibiting calm composure, mature civility, and sophisticated argumentation.
Posted by: Colugo | July 29, 2007 3:02 PM
I wonder how someone can put the crucifix in a bottle of urine, call it art, but flushing the Koran down the toilet is "a hate crime"?
Anyway, the YouTube user CapnOAwesome put up a video of him flushing the Koran down the toilet. It was flagged as 'inappropriate' and removed. But, this video has his flushing the Koran down the toilet again (in the last 15 seconds of the video):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB4we66KxcA
Posted by: tinyfrog | July 29, 2007 3:09 PM
Actually, as far as I am aware, according to Muslims a translation of the Quran is just a book: only the original Arab is the Quran and hence considered holy. Flushing a translation of it (such as shown in the illustration to this blog post) down the toilet shouldn't upset them at all. In principle.
Posted by: Harald Hanche-Olsen | July 29, 2007 3:12 PM
Put me on the side of those who think this post was incredibly childish and contemptible.
Posted by: Orac | July 29, 2007 3:15 PM
Grind it up into little bits and put 'em in a box labelled "Koran Flakes"!
(I also don't like defacing books, but I also can't resist stupid puns)
Posted by: T. Bruce McNeely | July 29, 2007 3:23 PM
Yeah, I see why this war will continue. I am with Orac!
Kim
Posted by: Kim | July 29, 2007 3:27 PM
Wrap the Quran and the Bible in the Stars and Stripes and then liberally douse in gasoline for a good fire. Videotape it and put it on YouTube.
Posted by: Christian Burnham | July 29, 2007 3:32 PM
Several years ago, when I lived in Berkeley and was a poor student I did use both the Bible and the Book of Mormon for puppy training. I must report that the Bible paper was superior to the Mormon paper in all ways: softer, thinner, more absorbent. I even considered...nah, forget it.;)
Posted by: Jorg | July 29, 2007 3:33 PM
Christian Burnham: Yeah, that would make a statement all right.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/32141
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28231
Posted by: Colugo | July 29, 2007 3:37 PM
Hey, untrue! We are calmly composing, in a mature and civil forum, sophisticated arguments for the disrespecting of manuals of supposedly supernatural and divine origin. All very sophisticated and of the highest intellectual caliber.
I like the 'Koran Flakes' best!
Posted by: RamblinDude | July 29, 2007 3:38 PM
Y'know, I may dislike their religion- and all religions, but I have a lot of sympathy for Muslims in the West.
e.g. see this article:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2137144,00.html
Posted by: Christian Burnham | July 29, 2007 3:39 PM
An interesting message to send would be to pile up a bunch of copies of The God Delusion, and have Richard Dawkins toss the match and explain that if he is not insulted by the destruction of his own book, what does that say about the thickness of his skin compared to the skins of the purported god and its followers. It also demonstrates that a book is wood-pulp, and its intrinsic value does not compare to the intrinsic value of a human being.
Posted by: Denis Loubet | July 29, 2007 3:45 PM
'Sorry love you've got a monotheistic sacred text best appreciated in the original ancient Arabic stuck down your crapper. I'll just go to the van and get my Koran wrench...' Why did that never happen when I was a plumber? That would have been a story to knock 'em out with down the pub.
Posted by: Peter McGrath | July 29, 2007 3:51 PM
I think Bill (#61) has the right of it. Making a religious or political point (book flushing, flag burning, bumper stickers) is legally free speech in America...
Anonymous book flushing, cross burning on the lawn, gang tag spraying, is at least vandalism - and if part of a larger set of activities or directed at a specific minority with the intent to cause fear - well that is not really free speech. Is it hate crime? Could be, YMMV.
Posted by: Bunjo | July 29, 2007 3:55 PM
Alright I admit it, i take the bible out of my motel room and line my bird cage with it.
Posted by: ckerst | July 29, 2007 3:56 PM
Well if it is anything li