A Saturday in mid-May in Iraq. Perhaps a day to reflect, relax, a day for respite. Unless, of course, you have a gun needed something to shoot. Out of targets? Well, then used the Koran. If this action sounds ridiculous that’s because it is. But, once again, America gives Muslim fundamentalists a reason to question our position in Iraq.

The New York Times posted an article on May 19 of an incident with an American soldier using the holy book of Islam, The Koran, for target practice. Major General Jeffery Hammond in Iraq read from a statement of the unnamed soldier that reads like a student who has plagiarized an essay from the Internet, trying to take credit for words written by others: “I sincerely hope that my actions have not diminished the partnership that our two nations have developed together,” reads part of the statement.

The statement may be indicative of a continuing problem with Iraq. The excerpt from “Soldier Anonymous” identifies the partnership of “two nations.” The problem is that the incident affects at least three nations; the United States, Iraq and the Islamic nation. Failing to recognize this third nation in a statement of apology simply adds fuel to the fire of disgust Islam fundamentalists have for the US, giving more propaganda for use by those wishing our extermination.

A more fundamental issue, though, is the action itself. The shooting of the Koran is completely against the basic tenets of democracy, a form of government we are attempting to sell in the Middle East as an ideology of tolerance and religious freedom. How can we possibly expect others to embrace what we know to be a great system of government when to others it appears to be a system of laws of convenience? But there is a religious reality we should acknowledge as well.

If someone where to use The Bible for target practice, the uproar in the US would be fanatical. It is difficult to imagine any reason given to the public for such a barbaric act to be acceptable to any Christian or any American. It is an act inherently provocative, meant to incite hate and intolerance, which it surely would do in every corner of America. And it has.

The BBC reported on the same day that the murder of Chaldean Catholic Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho would result in the execution of Ahmed Ali Ahmed. While the severity of the two incidents are vastly different, the targets themselves are too similar to ignore. In no way do I claim that one act lead to another. On the contrary, the fact that the two are quite probably unrelated indicates that religious intolerance is the norm- and the US government is involving itself in the fray.  We praise the death penalty for the murder of a religious leader.  We want criminals held accountable.  But isn’t the act of aggression taken by a US soldier likely to lead to further violence?  Is the soldier going to be held accountable for the actions?  I have no idea. All I know is that the soldier is no longer in Iraq, according to reports.  Probably a smart move.  A move that also may allow the soldier to escape culpability for his or her actions.

The “Koran-as-bullet-repository” incident is an act of aggression against Islam, not against terrorism or fundamentalists or Iraq or even the Middle East. An American used a holy book, a book that praises Jesus Christ, to empty a weapon of war. It is not an act of bad judgment from a soldier- it is an act the screaming hatred.

I find myself at odds with the report, however. As much as I would like, I simply cannot completely blame the soldier. I have no idea what his/her motives were. For that matter, he or she has been fighting in a war under horrific conditions. It is easy to sit in judgment. I refuse to try and convict anyone based only upon one report found on the world-wide-web. It is my right, however, to register my dissatisfaction and disgust with the act.

An American soldier unrelated to the incident apparently kissed a Koran (one that was intact and not riddled with bullet holes and gun powder) and gave it to some local Iraqi “tribal leaders.” I wonder if the leaders find themselves in a moral dilemma: How can we keep a sacred text that has been kissed by the infidels?

Christians in this country should be mortified by the actions of the military. Unfortunately, the ones with the loudest mouths on the tallest self-made pedestals are probably nodding their heads with smiles on their faces thinking of how this latest incident foretells of The Rapture. They don’t realize that as they yell of the second-coming, voices of reason- that same reason taught by Christ- are drowned out. They choose to ignore the fact that when everyone is shouting in the name of God that they are simultaneously choosing to drown out the voice of God.

The only thing this incident should foretell is a need for calmer heads. Democracy is not religious pulpit. This democratic society needs to take a stance and say once and for all that religious intolerance goes against its ideals and it will not take sides in a Christian/Muslim war. The only wars we should be fighting should be those conflicts that threaten our freedoms and the freedoms of others, not the protection of people who insist on a pissing contest where the loser is killed. When that pissing contest mean deficating a religious text, well, what reaction do we think we are going to see? We must stand firm against religious intolerance. Our government should lead the charge. A Democratic people should expect nothing less from its soldiers, leaders and diplomats. I know I expect nothing less.