Why is sympathy for Islam so common on the political left?

Excellent post. You will never get a straight answer.

 

I think you and I know very well that this 'phenomenon' that you are trying to frame here has almost EVERYTHING to do with the Christian right having ACTUAL political clout in the United States and using that clout to legislate their agenda.

Muslims aren't trying to defund planned parenthood. Muslims aren't trying to pass Orwellian double speak 'religious freedom' bills. You know this.

In reality, Muslim Americans are far less pushy and keep to themselves in regards to their religion than Christian Americans on average.

 

Your view does have some insight. However, I don't think this has anything to do with any inherent "pushiness" of Christians. This country's very roots are deeply entwined with Christianity. They are still largely the "establishment" - and the left (almost by definition) is anti-Establishment. Islam is perceived as anti-establishment too (it is a non-Christian/non "white" religion). Thus, the allegiance seems almost natural. On a purely ideological level however, the left wing, which I would assume is pro-equal rights, etc. should harbor very suspicious and hostile views about Islam as it is practiced in some parts of the world. If anyone thinks that that "Christian" countries are too theological and border on being theocracies, they should take a second look at other countries.

 

Really? Are you this narrow minded for your hatred towards Christians?

Lets first note that if any group uses the legal system to achieve their goals, then fair is fair. Liberals love to take their actions directly to the supreme court and allow the now politically active supreme court justices to bypass the proper means to lay the law of the land.

Secondly, Muslims are politically active. Quit pretending Muslims would not push their agenda's if they had a bigger representation.

Third, we have already established Islam has a rather significant extremist sect. So no, they are not trying to defund planned parent hood ... They just sit by idle as violent extremist are busy shooting up night clubs and government offices in the name of their god.

Forth, we are talking about all Muslims. Ignorant liberals like yourself love to hate on Israel and swoon the the Palestinians. 40% of Palestinians believe its ok to use suicides bombs. Where is your logic? You have none!

 

I am sympathetic with Muslims for the same reason I am with Christians, Jews, Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Buddhists, Bahaii and Athiests/Agnostics. The people that I know and work with of those faiths are decent people, and I genuinely believe most people are decent no matter what different religious rules and rituals they have.

 

Bill Maher equally hate both religions (and all religion). He is one example of an "arrogant" left person that doesn't fit the generalization above. BTW, I do have an opinion that he's an arrogant pr*ck.

Could you name me an example of an "arrogant" left that belittle peaceful Christians and feel sympathy for Muslims?

 

You really have a difficult time comprehending that majority of 'angry atheists' or liberals that are American citizens have been more affected by right wing christian policy than Islam thus they will rationally pose criticism towards the Christian right wing than the Muslim population in the U.S.

Do you even read who you respond to? I've defended Christianity over Islam MANY TIMES on this message board EXPLICITLY. The mere fact that you believe I am a 'Christian hater' speaks volumes to the irrational paradigm you live in. I am one of the largest critics of Islam on this message board and could run circles around you in providing nuanced criticism of why Islam is a draconian ideology, so please... direct your false outrage somewhere else.

 

If you have to bring up other religions while in a discussion that is critical of Islam, then you are doing it wrong.

 

I like Bill Maher. He gets it.

Ben Affleck. What a dumbass.

 

Except I are not limiting it to the American Muslims. You are. Liberals love to defend their poor poster children in Palestine. Here is another pointer for you; Christianity has been losing its grip in American politics for the last 30 years. Liberals are winning more and more of their battles against Christian beliefs. With every victory, liberals become more arrogant and condescending.

You are correct and I apologize. I appreciate an objective stance. I by no means believe Christians are the golden children of this world. I know first hand how nasty they can be. I also know how genuine others can be, just as with Muslims.

 

Sweet Lou, North Side Storm, Sam Fisher. Its a pretty common theme.

 

Apparently you failed to notice that I responded to a very particular section of the post and deliberately did not quote certain parts of it. There are plenty enough reasons to mock and disparage Trump supporters without conflating them with savages who murder innocents.

What you and other assorted bigots and idiots don't seem to get is that most of these horrible attacks are committed by people who are by and large not religious. Start with 9/11 and carry on to today's Munich atrocity. I feel ridiculous arguing this with someone like you but I'll speak my mind and turn the floor back over to you and the Islam is Awful crowd and let you continue your olive oil lubed circle jerk.

Let me quickly say that I am deeply contemptuous of most any form of monotheism. The more orthodox it is the more idiotic it is, as far as I'm concerned. So I am no apologist.

But when some non-observant idiot does something horrific your insistence in inculpating peaceful people who live in Denpasar, Doha or Dearborn is neither helpful nor instructive. Blaming the violence on a particular mythology simply obfuscates what is really happening and impedes any solution. So long as you and others like you insist that Islam is itself the problem, progress will difficult because the prognosis is simply wrong.

The problem, in sirbaihu's words, is people who are poor angry stupid-ass. I might have said marginalized. These people are not motivated by their religion. Often they do not subscribe to one, like the Brussels attackers, for example. It is not religious, not most of the time. It is economic, political, personal.

I don't like Islam any more than you do. But to point to Islam as the genesis of this terrible violence is to succumb to simplicity. I get that it's easier to blame some abstraction that can be fashioned into a monolith. A lot of people don't care for nuance. And it's easier to deflect the blame than it is to wonder why Muslims in Europe are so much more poorly adjusted in their respective societies (and angrier!) than they are, for example, in the United States or in Latin America.

There's a reason why responsible global leaders don't participate in the Islam is Awful charade. They have the intelligence, perspective and judgement to realize that this is non-productive. I understand why this reasoning would be unpalatable to simpletons but I also understand why it is wise and correct. In order to confront the problem we have to speak realistically about what the problem is. Explanations that satisfy the base instincts of the lowest common denominator do nothing beyond provide oxygen to the fire.

 

Why do you lie so blatantly?

It would be nice if you debated with some sense of integrity instead of just making things up.

 

Please provide evidence for this assertion. Your whole post reeks of the attempt of replacing evidence with an attempt at playing an internet tough guy. You get an F for that.

Yes, let's start with 9/11. Your and sirbaihu's argument was:

So you two were basically blindly blabbering out the "socio-economic reasons and lack of education are the root causes of terror, Islam has nothing to do with it" myth.

Again, let's start with 9/11:

The facts do not support your statements, in fact, they contradict them.

This sounds like when someone prefaces his upcoming idiotic statement by saying "I'm not a racist, but..."

Of course you are.

I am not inculpating peaceful people who live anywhere. I am correctly pointing out that the common denominator in terror, especially suicide terror, is belief in some kind of ideology, some higher cause people are willing to kill and die for. In most of the cases of terrorism nowadays, and in the most deadly cases, this "higher cause" is Islam. Trying to obfuscate that fact only annoys people with common sense who plainly see this in front of their eyes, with another deadly terror attack in the name of Islam practically every day somewhere in the world.

You are absolutely wrong. The opposite is true. First of all, it is not a prognosis. I think the word you were looking for is diagnosis, because the atrocities have already been happening. Secondly, what impedes any solution are morons like you who present zero facts, but instead angrily stomp their foot and insist that "it must be poverty and lack of education, Islam has nothing to do with it". The one thing you got right is that progress is made more difficult by not diagnosing the root cause correctly. As long as you - against all facts - insist that "Islam has nothing to do with it" when the "Islamic state" murders people in the name of Islam, then your attempts at fighting terrorism with economic aid will not do anything to reduce terror.

Once again, you provide zero evidence, just false opinion. I will teach you how it is done:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB110911119848561282

Let me give you some more educational material:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...ty-islamic-terrorism-link-has-been-challenged

And here is some more free schooling for you:

http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/Vie..._merrcol&zid=8f21112549d5141c3765131545475d32

Wrong, see above. You are also wrong about the Brussels attackers.

The Brussels attackers died for the cause of the Islamic state, which is Islam.

No, it is the truth. I provided evidence. You provided your own, wrong opinion, and you tried to replace facts with playing some kind of internet tough guy. You should not ignore the studies. Read them and become more educated. According to your theory, that should make it less likely that you become a terrorist.

This is the first somewhat factual argument you bring up, and a question that deserves being addressed.

Here is a pretty good article on CNN that addresses that question. It mentions that 1) Europe has more law enforcement and intelligence gaps, 2) The U.S. doesn't have open borders close to ISIS' heartland, 3) Europe's politics can work against catching terrorists, 4) The U.S. has fewer homegrown ISIS fighters, 5) American Muslims are more integrated. I actually agree with that article that economic factors do play a role - in other words, I personally wouldn't even go as far as the three articles I cited above that they play no role at all. But they are a contributing factor. The root cause is how strongly a person believes in the religious ideology of Islam.

Actually, even in the CNN article, there is evidence for that:

So, in other words, in answer to your question - the more Islam is part of people's identity, the more poorly adjusted they will be in a Western society.

Yes, we have to speak realistically about what the problem is. I believe that is what we are both trying to do here.

I have provided links to articles and scientific studies which debunk the myth that poverty and lack of education are the root causes of terrorism. You have provided nothing but your unsubstantiated opinion.

Let me ask you a few questions.

• If poverty and lack of education are the root causes of terror and Islam has nothing to do with it, why is most of the significant economic aid to Palestine used to fund terror?
  
• If poverty and lack of education are the root causes of terror and Islam has nothing to do with it, why does Boko Haram commit the most terrible atrocities in the Nigerian conflict? Are all the Christians in Nigeria rich and all the Muslims are poor?
  
• If poverty and lack of education are the root causes of terror and Islam has nothing to do with it, why were 450 of the 452 suicide bombings in 2015 committed by Muslims? Are only Muslims poor and nobody else in the world is?

Let me close by re-quoting a part of the WSJ article that debunks the only poverty causes terror myth.

Some development experts assert that if only more money were spent to alleviate poverty, terrorism would disappear. Poverty breeds a sense of deprivation among the poor, and because in their view the current economic system perpetuates inequality, it would compel the poor -- driven to desperation because of social injustices -- to turn to terror. This is reductive revolutionary rhetoric masquerading as an explanation. What's surprising is not the vacuity of this idea, but its resilience. It plays on collective guilt, seeking to rationalize the unjustifiable.

Think of the millions of poor people who live in abject conditions in Africa and Asia. They suffer from widespread diseases and persistent malnutrition. Parents can't assume that their children will have a better future than their own. Many of these countries have experienced strife and violence. But the poor there do not routinely blow up buses or turn their bodies into bombs. To suggest that the poor will become terrorists unless their plight is addressed is gratuitous; worse, it insults them -- most poor lead dignified lives, trying heroically to improve their lives when they have little control over their destinies. The poor value life -- their own, of their families, and of their neighbors and others around them. Terrorists don't.

 

Maher is anti-religion. I believe that's also pretty popular in Europe right? It's not that helpful .

I don't know Affleck. No comment there.

 

Islam is a religion; Trump is not.
Believers in Islam are many; believers in Trump are not.
If you were reasonable, you would be asking how many Muslims are murderers and, say, how many Christians are murderers.

 

There you go. Think about that one again.

I assume you didn't read my post above yours. TL;DR? 450 out of 452 suicide attacks last year were committed by Muslims.

Barely anyone knows Maher in Europe. I only know him because I follow US culture and news a lot, and I lived there.

 

Year-2002 studies on terrorism . . . really relevant!

"Look: those 19 guys in 2001 were not poor. And those eight guys in Ireland! Plus bin Laden, plus another one! That's like . . . 30 guys!" Bravo.

"Look at Africa! All those poor people! They're not terrorists!" Yeah, Africa's totally peaceful, haven't you heard? No child warriors. No Christians pulling a Muslim off a bus and eating parts of his body http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ting-leg-Muslim-Central-African-Republic.html

Well Dude, since you like research so much, maybe you can peruse the list of mass shooters in America and look for patterns: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

Guess what: between 1982 and 2016, 81/83 mass shooters in America were male. Hmm. I'll give you a moment to try to mentally process that. . . .

. . . .

81/83 mass murderers were male. Does that mean males are even more homicidal than Muslims? No, it means the small numbers you and I are both using (30/1,600,000,000 Muslims; 81/150,000,000 males) are not statistically significant, and attempting to draw patterns from such small samples is hasty generalization or stacking evidence.

 

What kind of person would not love defending INNOCENT children? Christianity or any religion should not have ANY grip in politics in the U.S. or any country.

 

2015:

452 suicide attacks
450 of those committed by Muslims

Everyone else in the world must be rich?

It has nothing to do with Islam, amirite?