Respected in Death but Supposedly Shunned in Life?

I have just a quick flame to extinguish tonight. I have read a little about the fact that Osama bin Laden (however the hell it is spelled) was killed and apparently buried at sea. What the hell is “buried at sea” anyway? But more importantly, and somewhat humorously, was the reason given for having done so: “Osama bin Laden was buried at sea from the deck of a U.S. aircraft carrier because there was no alternative to bury him on land within the 24 hours required by Islamic law”

What business does the U.S. government have concerning itself with Islamic burial rites, or burial rites in general? What is most critical here is asserting the sovereignty of the United States.

I'm not suggesting that we should have “wrapped him in bacon” or some other such nonsense (as I heard more than once at work today), but I think Muslims, especially those who claim that Osama bin Laden did not speak for them, should be outraged at the simplest thought of venerating the man as if he were a righteous individual.

No, I think that it would be warranted that he be disgraced, especially by the religion with which he claimed to affiliate. A religion he sullied irreparably by that affiliation in the eyes of many Americans.

I'm not going to sugar coat this. Seeing Muslims openly shun Osama bin Laden in his death would have gone a long way towards helping Americans see just how much they supposedly shunned his actions in life. Instead, no such reparation shall be made, and Americans will simply see this as another reason to hate Muslims and those who they think support them.

I'm glad Osama is dead (it is not often I can say that), but, now that I've had the chance to think about it a bit, I do not think anything good will come of it. The cycle of anger and hatred will continue unabated, and this unfortunate fact will lead to more lives lost on both “sides” of this nonsensical conflict.