That's right, so you should judge 100% of Muslims based on the actions of 5%? Then you expect that 95% to not be angry they are being stereotyped?
I agree, just because every serial killer came from a Christian background doesn't mean everyone with a......you get the point. You're an expert at twisting someone's words, I'll give you that. I said, make a movie about Jesus being a gay, barbaric rapist who kills any and everyone and you will have a lot of angry Christians. The reaction would not be the same because we are talking about two different religions with different beliefs. Muslims believe the prophet should not be drawn up at all. These Muslims were trolled, took the bait and they overreacted. They do this because they want the world to know this is wrong. The only way they can get attention is if they do something extreme. It honestly makes them look like the bad guys.
One key difference is that other white males do not identify with these guys just because they are white males. There is a minority percentage, but significant percentage of Muslims even in Western countries who actually admire Al Qaeda, and have frightening views - because of their religion. So in contrast to your cute "white male" example, the difference is that there is a gradual overlap of views because in one case, you are talking about an ideology, in the other case (your example) you are talking about physical features. While only 17 per cent of over-55s said they would prefer to live under Sharia law, that increased to 37 per cent of those aged 16 to 24. If a Muslim converts to another religion, 36 per cent of 16-to-24-year-olds thought this should be punished by death According to the poll, 74 per cent of those aged 16 to 24 prefer Muslim women to wear the veil. The report by Miss Mirza, British-born daughter of Pakistani immigrants, concludes that some Muslim groups have exaggerated the problems of "Islamophobic" sentiment among non-Muslim Britons, which has fuelled a sense of victimhood. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...drives-young-Muslims-shun-British-values.html Only 17 % of British Muslims believe that Arabs were involved in 9/11. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jun/23/uk.religion Do you think that only 17 % of white males believe that Jeffrey Dahmer and the others you mentioned committed the crimes they committed? More: -33% of Muslims want Sharia Law as implemented in Saudi Arabia. -28% of muslims agreed they dreamt of Britain becoming an Islamic State. -78% wanted Danish cartoonist prosecuted. -68% want prosecutions for insulting Islam. -62% disagree with the freedom of speech if it insults religious sensibilities. -50% said British people who insult Islam should be arrested and prosecuted. -Between 5-9% say that violence to protect Islam is acceptable. -Whilst 10-13% found that they “understood” why young muslims might want to become suicide bombers. http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/291 - 0% of British Muslims found homosexuality acceptable. - 3% found relations outside of marriage morally justifiable. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality --------------------------- The point of all this: Your "white male" example is pointless. You are comparing apples and oranges. You are comparing a physical feature with an ideology. A slightly more apt comparison would be: I am a Rockets fan. I might be more willing to forgive stupid or even violent behavior by other Rockets fans than if a Jazz fan were to do the exact same thing. I might even identify with some of it, just because we cheer for the same thing.
That might change if people started identifying all whites as untrustworthy. The vast majority of non-serial killing whites might be pretty upset as being cast as being the same as the minority doing the killings.
Typical leftist logic: It is all just a reaction to how society treated [insert criminal (unless Christian and/or white male) or minority group]. Society (or your own country (unless a country designated as poor victim country by leftists) is at fault.
The funny thing is that is the second or third generation of Muslims who seem to be the most radical. First generation immigrants are generally not as hateful toward their adopted Western country.
What? What's wrong with the logic that the majority of law abiding peaceful Muslims would be upset with being lumped in with violent extremists?
Sadly your own logic has been exposed on this. When you lump in the vast majority of peaceful Muslims with a tiny minority of violent extremists, you've already lost the logic battle. LOL
But that would make too much sense. Besides, rational thinking like that doesn't benefit a bigot's agenda. The debate and discussion: where the most incoherent posts win debates.
Nice try. Nothing is wrong with THAT logic (of course the majority of law abiding peaceful Muslims would and should be upset with being lumped in with violent extremists), but that is not what you said. Your previous statement implied that all the attitude polls I cited are just a reaction to how society wronged them - which is either intentionally or unintentionally completely disregarding the possibility that some of them actively caused that perception by society.
If I said that was the only reason for something, I didn't mean to. However, if you implied that it was not a reason at all, then that's also off target.
Young people are usually very plastic towards radical ideas, especially when they perceive themselves as victims to an external threat they view as being overbearing (perhaps Western influence/dominance). I liken this to a teenager rebelling against his/her parents. Their actions may be mindlessly self-destructive, but the actions are not meant to be constructive for the rebel, but rather an action committed out of spite against the prevailing authority. There's a reason why the older people, likely those who fled those stringent countries for the exact reason of Sharia law, have much less of a desire for Sharia law. A lot of those young people are born and raised in Britain, where their religion is possibly being idealized to them by some stupid mullah, all while thinking that the Old Country is this fantastic Islamic wonderland, when in reality it's nothing more than a bastardized interpretation of their religion designed to keep in power the oligarchies that are exploiting the piety of the uneducated masses. See above. Little more than an "us against them" mentality being exacerbated by the general insecurity of a young generation. If you were to put the sword in any of these people's hands, I would bet you a lot less than 36% of them would actually have the nerve to execute a "traitor". I would like to see the results divided between boys and girls. If the boys voted in a higher percentage in support of veils, then I would not be surprised. 16-24 is a very sexually confusing age for many men who are raised in severely patriarchal cultures, in which women are ideally seen as docile and submissive. In the face of a burgeoning world of gender equality, a lot of these young men respond with resentment and anger towards women rather than acceptance. Wanting the veil is a way of fighting against a rising women's struggle for equality. You mark that up to the problem of the religion, and that is wrong in my opinion. It's easy to blame Islam because it seems to be the only correlation, but that's entirely superficial. You only find it so easy to blame Islam because it already fits into your view of the religion in the first place. There are obviously other factors involved here. The ascent of women's rights in the Western world, ironically enough, is in many ways more accidental than contrived (the World Wars, for example). Inexplicable and frankly a little unbelievable. Lol, your whole post is about British Muslims, and this entire link talks about how anomalous British Muslims are compared to their other European counterparts (as they are much milder)... don't you see the problem here? 33% of British Muslims must not know what Sharia law in Saudi Arabia is, then. Not sure exactly why this is a bad thing. 1 out of 4 Muslims can want whatever the **** they want. Are you saying stupid people aren't entitled to express desire? It's not like they're saying they want to see the streets of London red with the blood of the European. They're just saying they want Britain to be Islamic. At a certain point in time, Britain wanted to the whole world to be English. Whatever "prosecuted" means, it sounds dangerous and painful... See above. When one perceives him/herself as a victim, he/she more easily resorts to radicalism to protect him/herself. If Muslims really feel that uncomfortable with British people, exactly what did you think their opinions on the topic of prosecution and arrest for insulting Islam is going to be? I'm sure there are plenty minorities who wouldn't mind seeing white people go to jail for being racist. Is it right? NO. Is it nothing more than cheap talk that is never going to come to fruition, and likely generated and perpetuated mostly by desperation and anger? YES. And this is coming from supposedly one of the most radical and anti-Western groups of Muslims in the entirety of Europe. Sounds like a pretty marginal percentage to me, especially considering that Islam actually does say you are always entitled to "defend yourself" (the same as "protecting Islam", really). What, is this supposed to be evil or something? Do you know what the depths of severe depression and despondency can drive a human to do? Are you saying that, in the midst of a personal plight, you've never contemplated killing yourself/someone else? Of course the natural progression is not to actually go out and commit those fantasies, but for many people in the world it may seem like their only option for change. Besides, understanding why someone would do something doesn't mean you condone it. See Chris Rock. Unsurprising results from a people who are generally raised in a very sexually repressive culture. I don't know what sexuality was like in pre-Islamic Middle East, but if we're really going to blame this entirely on Islam then I don't know what to say, especially given that plenty of contemporarily-revered Muslims that lived in the past were famously (and now notoriously) homosexual. Except this is still a stupid example, because the Houston Rockets are not an entire system of governance, morality, and culture that extends back 1400 years and as use for an effective form of administration to cover a vast swath of land ranging from Spain to Indonesia. Do you want to know why Muslims are so "sensitive"? It's because Islam is not just a religion nor is it just a book, but rather it's the entire foundation of many of the societies in the Middle East right now. And if you wanna get smart and say that that must be the reason why those societies are so ****ed, then you really have a very limited knowledge of Middle Eastern history (as do the vast majority of people on these boards, including the defenders of Islam).
Here are a few verses from the Quran. Now imagine if I was to stand behind a pulpit and say... Hate speech? Intolerant? Bigoted? Xenophobic? As I keep telling you mate, the difference is islamic doctrine. One question for you, In light of the anti-western hatred and recent green on blue (nice little media buzz word for treacherous killing) If you were a marine training the Muslim / Islamist Afgahns in Afghanistan, how much trust would you have in them? Now in replace Muslim / Islamist Afghan with any other religion and nationality...does the trust factor change? But now leave the word Muslim islamist in and replace just the nationality... If self preservation is in your best interests, you have to be more vigilant when dealing with the Muslim / Islamists because of their dislike (hatred) for the kufar. Where does this dislike (or hatred)come from? Let's see.... Doctrine. Would you feel safer on a plane filled with these guys... These guys... Or these guys ...and why? ( I'd personally go with the guys on the bikes. ) Are all Muslims evil West hating war monger suicide bombing terrorists? NO. But you can't argue against the fact that a vast number are, because of what they are taught in a great number the Islamic schools and mosques. My heart truly goes out to the great many Muslims who live 'normal' lives, that have been affected and unfairly grouped with these radical idiots. We had some Egyptians who escaped the Arab Spring over for dinner the other night. An awesome family. Our children were playing all night. You see People aren't necessarily evil, but can be indoctrinated with evil teachings. The Religion of Peace (Quotes used from http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Articles/Quran_Hate.)
Whether I do or not...it seems to me that is not MY problem. If the 95% of Muslims don't like being judged by the actions of the 75 million or so crazies among them, then THEY should do something about that. The 95% that act like they have nothing to do with it makes them accessories after the fact because a lack of action to against the crazies looks like tepid acceptance of the crazies.
Sura 8:55 - Verily, The worst of moving (living) creatures before Allah are those who disbelieve , - so they shall not believe. Sura 48:29 - Muhammad () is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves Sura 9:30 - And the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allah's Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth! Sura 8:12 - (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes." Sura 9:123 - 123. O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who are the Al-Muttaqun (the pious - see V.2:2). Sura 5:33 - 33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter. I don't think either translations are that great. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_war https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...r_pw.r_qf.&fp=fd674d93c128d1&biw=1280&bih=647 https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...urce=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=0nNWUJaRJvL9yAGU5oCwDg https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...r_pw.r_qf.&fp=fd674d93c128d1&biw=1280&bih=647 I'm not gonna post the pictures like you did. Spoiler
Lol it's so funny how that troll izakdavid is getting ignored by everyone. Now just if we can all ignore gwayneco and ATW.
It's not that they're ignoring me, it's just hard to argue against factual truths without looking like a total imbecile, although you continually try. I find debating with you is like playing chess with a pigeon. You knock over all the pieces, crap on the board and then strut around like you're victorious. I was going to post a picture or funny gif, but... Your argument is always invalid. Thanks for coming.
I will say this: it's always been curious to me that leftist movements are unwilling to criticize Islam, and even jump to its defense while disparaging other religions. It's why I respect guys like Bill Maher and Christopher Hitchens. I do think that Islam can lend itself to violent behavior, based off its holy text. It doesn't mean that stereotyping is acceptable. I have plenty of Muslim friends who I trust whole-heartedly, and have even discussed this issue extensively with (and shocker, they were willing to engage and weren't offended!) It's largely a product of culture. Islam can be a religion of peace as well, but if you're brought up in oppressive, violent cultures, you're more likely to act on the violent portions of the holy texts. Unlike my fellow liberals, I think it's fair to criticize Islam. THAT BEING SAID, guys like AroundTheWorld and IzakDavid are misguided too. Christianity in my opinion, while less violent per se than Islam, also is problematic (also IzakDavid, your laughable cherry-picking of Quran quotes is mega-dumb, I could easily do the same with Christianity). Christianity has been responsible for the deaths of many (yes, the Crusades are a valid example, or how about the Spanish inquisition?), and had a period of extremism as well (ever heard of the Thirty Years War?) In modern society, it's also used as a tool of oppression (gay people, black people in the 50s etc., current secularists), and I personally think it stifles free thought. Does that mean all Christians are bad? Of course not. So why do we see a difference? I think the two religions are on different timelines. We don't have Christian countries that are as undeveloped and oppressive, and when we do, we can see that type of violent oppression (hello Sudan). Islam is focused in countries of the world that don't value free expression and that don't have a cultural identity focused with individuality. It's why you see punk bands prosecuted in Iran, which is one of the only middle-Eastern countries with a vibrant, growing, educated young population. These young people haven't been able to utilize free expression, and from day one are programmed to believe and act upon certain tradition. Thus, when people insult their religion, their immediate reaction isn't one of free expression (oh, that person is just having a different opinion), it's one of violence, because that reaction is what they know. Did we see the same process in Christianity? Hell yes we did. If we lived in Europe in the 1500-1600s you bet we could have this same conversation. Christian extremists were violent, and theocracies put down any non-believers (infidels?) with violence. The difference is, the Enlightenment period happened in Christian countries, and thus was contextualized with Christian and Jewish thought, and therefore the two religions became compatible with free thought. Islam had no process like that. And by the way, if you don't think it was bloody for enlightenment thinkers, think again. The Church in Europe was BRUTAL. It used violence. It suppressed speech. It carried out justice in a biblical sense. It was the Christian equivalent of Sharia Law. So next time you guys climb up on your Christian high horse, remember that the majority of Christians are peaceful based on the moral luck of history. Islam is going through a process too, and we might not see free expression embraced for some time. This is why I think all religion is bad tldr; Liberals shouldn't be afraid to criticize Islam, IzakDavid and AroundTheWorld need a history lesson, and moral luck/cultural norms shape how religions are interpreted.
