Another thing to consider in this conversation is where does one draw the line between political and religious in Islamic counties?

(September 3, 2015 at 8:34 am)Cato Wrote: Another thing to consider in this conversation is where does one draw the line between political and religious in Islamic counties?

Considering a lot of them have Islamic law, I'm less inclined to draw any such line.

(September 3, 2015 at 8:37 am)Napoléon Wrote: Considering a lot of them have Islamic law, I'm less inclined to draw any such line.

I think there's a bit of superficial reasoning involved with this conclusion. It's similar to one arguing that gang violence is strictly because of a blind fealty for the colors/creed of the gang and has nothing to do with socioeconomic factors.

(September 3, 2015 at 6:46 am)MrNoMorePropaganda Wrote: Ok so I re-watched the video Shuffle cited and it seems he took my comments out of context. So I in fact wasted my time typing that example and I'm not even going to attempt to defend it. I was merely saying that Muhammadans don't like guilt by association and yet they love to use guilt by association to attack the West.

I said something along the lines of: "saying the entire West is immoral based on a study by one woman who happened to find fecal matter when she swabbed an office is like saying all Muhammadans are terrorists". Yusuf Estes says he doesn't like being called a terrorist yet he calls me, as a Westerner, immoral based on how one person, probably, was not considerate enough to wash their hands. And I often hear people moan about how drunk Western society is and I hate it, because I don't consume alcohol myself.

But then you said that christians call atheists communists and fascists, which they actually do. Why would you give a made up example, and then use one that is actually used?

(September 3, 2015 at 8:31 am)Cato Wrote:

(September 3, 2015 at 8:22 am)Napoléon Wrote: *in the EU.

I was only dismantling the 99% claim. Your additional figures bury it.

If Shuffle's argument then becomes that most terrorism in predominantly Muslim countries are committed mostly by Muslims, then we have a true master of the obvious.

I'd like to see how the figures change if we add American drone strikes to the tally.

Take a look through this list, and try to find a non muslim. It is a little game a like to play, which I have called, "Find That Non-Muslim." I haven't won yet.

(September 3, 2015 at 9:44 am)Cato Wrote: I think there's a bit of superficial reasoning involved with this conclusion. It's similar to one arguing that gang violence is strictly because of a blind fealty for the colors/creed of the gang and has nothing to do with socioeconomic factors.

Um, I never discounted other factors or said it was strictly because of one thing. Shuffle might be arguing that but I'm not.

I'm just saying there is such a thing as Islamic terrorism and it is quite prevalent. That should be the crux of the issue. It is for me at least.

You ask where to draw the line between politically motivated and religiously. My point is, the line is obviously blurred in many countries, and in effect it's both. Not either/or.

(September 3, 2015 at 10:03 am)Napoléon Wrote:

(September 3, 2015 at 9:44 am)Cato Wrote: I think there's a bit of superficial reasoning involved with this conclusion. It's similar to one arguing that gang violence is strictly because of a blind fealty for the colors/creed of the gang and has nothing to do with socioeconomic factors.

Um, I never discounted other factors or said it was strictly because of one thing. Shuffle might be arguing that but I'm not.

I'm just saying there is such a thing as Islamic terrorism and it is quite prevalent. That should be the crux of the issue. It is for me at least.

You ask where to draw the line between religiously motivated and religiously. My point is, the line is obviously blurred in many countries, and in effect it's both. Not either/or.

Exactly, it doesn't matter why the muslims are doing it, it just matters that they are doing it, and they are doing it at an exaggerated degree more compared to the other major faiths.

(September 3, 2015 at 10:07 am)Shuffle Wrote: Exactly, it doesn't matter why the muslims are doing it, it just matters that they are doing it, and they are doing it at an exaggerated degree more compared to the other major faiths.

It does matter, but I think the question is are they doing it because of their religion or in spite of it? For other reasons? For me it's the former. There are obviously other factors that contribute, I don't ignore them. The middle east for example has been a shithole since the dawn of time, ISIS have very good recruitment tactics etc. But Islam is the main justification and at the heart of these factors. Lots of other things are factors too ofcourse, politics for example. But there's only really one religion you keep hearing about in the news that's causing attack after attack after attack. Problem after problem after problem.

Bringing this back to the OP, is it then unreasonable for people to have a level of prejudice against muslims? To be fearful of them? I don't think so. I don't think prejudices are rational ofcourse, but I don't think they're always unreasonable. But then on the flip side no one has, to my knowledge, ever said 'all muslims are terrorists'. And this is an argument that does come up quite a bit. What people tend to be is just fearful in general (or weary, I don't like the word 'fearful' in this context, kind of like how people say "Islamophobia", umm, I don't think anyone screams at the sight of a muslim, unless ofcourse they board your train with an AK-47).

(September 3, 2015 at 10:24 am)Napoléon Wrote:

(September 3, 2015 at 10:07 am)Shuffle Wrote: Exactly, it doesn't matter why the muslims are doing it, it just matters that they are doing it, and they are doing it at an exaggerated degree more compared to the other major faiths.

It does matter, but I think the question is are they doing it because of their religion or in spite of it? For other reasons? For me it's the former. There are obviously other factors that contribute, I don't ignore them. The middle east for example has been a shithole since the dawn of time, ISIS have very good recruitment tactics etc. But Islam is the main justification and at the heart of these factors. Lots of other things are factors too ofcourse, politics for example. But there's only really one religion you keep hearing about in the news that's causing attack after attack after attack. Problem after problem after problem.

Bringing this back to the OP, is it then unreasonable for people to have a level of prejudice against muslims? To be fearful of them? I don't think so. I don't think prejudices are rational ofcourse, but I don't think they're always unreasonable. But then on the flip side no one has, to my knowledge, ever said 'all muslims are terrorists'. And this is an argument that does come up quite a bit. What people tend to be is just fearful in general (or weary, I don't like the word 'fearful' in this context, kind of like how people say "Islamophobia", umm, I don't think anyone screams at the sight of a muslim, unless ofcourse they board your train with an AK-47).

But why does it matter why they are doing it? It just muddies the water and distracts from the central point that 99% of deaths by terrorism are carried out by muslims. Period. End of story. Pack it up boys!

(September 3, 2015 at 10:39 am)Shuffle Wrote: But why does it matter why they are doing it? It just muddies the water and distracts from the central point that 99% of deaths by terrorism are carried out by muslims.

Uh, no. Sorry but that's not true. Do you have the stats to back this up? Because myself and Cato have already posted actual stats that disprove this point.

I guess I shouldn't have given the benefit of the doubt, you really are suggesting 99% of deaths by terrorism are carried out by muslims.

You could argue a significant proportion of attacks are carried out by muslims, sure. But 99%? This is just flat out wrong and detracts from any point you may actually have. People aren't gonna listen if you're coming out with stuff like this.

Quote:Period. End of story. Pack it up boys!

So, what is your point exactly? 99% of terrorist attacks are carried out by muslims (wrong) ergo... what?

Even if 100% of terrorism was committed by muslims, it wouldn't mean all muslims are terrorists. It would just mean all terrorists are muslims. Really not sure what your point is.