Dear self-hating white "progressive" idiots. STFU about the Crusades already. Why is it that the same people who say "omg not all Muslims are violent, you guys!" are the same people to brush aside modern day massacres of Christians (and others) in the middle east by essentially saying "they had it coming because the Crusades"? Is this the nadir of white self-hatred? One day we'll wonder why nothing was done to help our brown skinned fellow humans when they needed it and if we're honest we'll say we were afraid of causing offense. I like to joke about PC nonsense as much as the next person but it's not funny anymore. The moral equivalence games are getting old. Yes, there have been violent Christians in the past and therefore....fucking what? What purpose does this serve but to deflect any possible criticism away from Islam by changing the topic? It's as stupid as responding to someone critical of US foreign policy by saying something like "well what about Genghis Khan?"

There are plenty of violent Christians groups today. The only people who believe that there aren't ignore then entire continents of Africa and Asia.

No one I personally know deflects the facts that Muslims around the world cause terror and horror on others.

But to deny that Christians have in the past, and do in the present, commit atrocities is something that cannot be denied.

We have examples from the war in the former Yugoslavia where towns full of Muslims were slaughtered by Christians. Are those Christians representative of all Christians?

How about the Lords Army in Africa?

Don't get me wrong, I greatly dislike Islam, probably more than I do Christianity, but don't claim that all Muslims are represented by the extremists.

(August 13, 2015 at 10:33 pm)Beccs Wrote: No one I personally know deflects the facts that Muslims around the world cause terror and horror on others.

But to deny that Christians have in the past, and do in the present, commit atrocities is something that cannot be denied.

We have examples from the war in the former Yugoslavia where towns full of Muslims were slaughtered by Christians.  Are those Christians representative of all Christians?

How about the Lords Army in Africa?

Don't get me wrong, I greatly dislike Islam, probably more than I do Christianity, but don't claim that all Muslims are represented by the extremists.

And if I'd been aware of world events in the 90's I'd have stood up for the Muslims in Bosnia just as I stand up for Christians in Syria now. If I'd been around during the Crusades I'd be against them. But I'm not. I live in the present. So that's what I'm most concerned about.

I think most of this Christian violence you're referring to is a natural retaliation against the Islamic political regime. Why do we sit idly by while Christians are drowned in cages, beheaded, shot, etc for simply being Christian then actually stand up for Muslim people there by saying the Christians are violent!? We have for the first time in ages seeing Buddhists become violent toward their Muslim neighbours, and I'm for one with the Buddhist people! No, I don't think that a Buddhist beheading a Muslim is morally any better than a Muslim beheading a Buddhist, or a Christian, et. al, but I do think it's a moral injustice that a Buddhist monk would be found doing this simply out of retaliation.
Many westernised opinion would argue that Muslims are to blame and not Islam but I think this is false. I think in this case it's Islam which is more often the problem as the more an individual embraces Islam the more conflicted in attitude they are concerning the rest of the world - and I'm not talking about a minority (as many are becoming aware, 10-20% is not an outlier by anyone's standards, and this figure is known to be much higher based on opinion of such Imams as Anjem Choudry, or the principles of the koran - remember these statistics are taken from within a western civilisation).

(August 13, 2015 at 10:33 pm)Beccs Wrote: Don't get me wrong, I greatly dislike Islam, probably more than I do Christianity, but don't claim that all Muslims are represented by the extremists.

Yeah, it's the extremists who claim that. Which is the problem.

I don't see enough Muslims contending such representation however, which is also the problem.

(August 27, 2015 at 6:24 am)Napoléon Wrote:

(August 13, 2015 at 10:33 pm)Beccs Wrote: Don't get me wrong, I greatly dislike Islam, probably more than I do Christianity, but don't claim that all Muslims are represented by the extremists.

Yeah, it's the extremists who claim that. Which is the problem.

I don't see enough Muslims contending such representation however, which is also the problem.

Muslims are not supposed to snitch on each other.  Christians are not supposed to snitch on each other either but they like to confess to each other.  And they are not good at keeping secrets.

" Oh, the catholics hate the protestants,
and the protestants hate the catholics.
And the Hindus hate the moslems,
and everybody hates the jews."

Tom Lehrer, "National Brotherhood Week" c 1965.

The idea is that it's hypocritical for Christians to bring up the Muslim extremists, while ignoring their own atrocities.  Both Christianity and Islam have had violent movements, both claimed the righteousness of their acts, and both did them in the name of their god.

Aye.