Torn to pieces for being a Muslim in the West?

I can only speak for England but I've seen many muslims (or people I assume are Muslims) and not once has anyone given them any trouble. There may be problem in the big towns, but I've never seen any there either during my stays.

How would you know someone is a Muslim anyway? Unless they come up to you at random and tell you? Otherwise, we're just talking about racism and stereotypes. Which exist sure, but not to the degree being described in my experience in England.

I suppose people could go and attack Mosques or something. But unless I've missed a lot of news stories, this is uncommon.

Where in the West are they being "torn apart"?

(March 18, 2015 at 9:34 am)AtlasS2 Wrote: Yet again, he only changed that language and started to say Islam is a religion of peace, when he saw the deep shit he got himself along with america, into.

Uh...you really need to fact check yourself. Bush spoke about Islam as a religion of peace less than a week after 9/11, and long before the invasion of Iraq.

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.g...17-11.html

(March 18, 2015 at 5:27 am)AtlasS2 Wrote: All killers, DeistPaladin, are sick & twisted and suffer from a mental problem.
Nobody sane, picks up a gun (or charges against Charlie Hebdo with AK-47 like a hollywood action movie then leaves his identity in the car), unless they suffer from a real mental issue.

I quite agree that someone has to be sick and twisted to kill the way the atheist at Chapel Hill or the shooters in Paris did. No one here will suggest that the end of religion will bring an end to madness or cruelty. As you have pointed out, imperialism, greed, and politics can cause plenty of havoc. I think it's fair to say you will also find few supporters among atheists here for W Bush or his warmongering policies in the Middle East.

All that said, the line between madness and religious fanaticism seems to be a blurry one. Without religion, you will still have crazy people doing crazy things. Without religion, you will still have greedy, imperialistic countries harming and exploiting weaker nations. But with religion, you can get otherwise sane people to do crazy things and support imperialistic policies in the name of some "crusade/jihad".

The 9/11 hijackers came from middle class families and some of whom were very well educated. They might have had great futures working promising jobs and contributing to society. Instead, they flew planes into buildings and murdered thousands. Why? They were convinced that God wills it and God would reward them. However you may think they got Islam wrong, they did believe it.

Politics and economics can cause cruelty and suffering too but religion is uniquely dangerous because it has no "reality check". Communism collapsed because people finally realized that the promised "worker's paradise" never came. Other imperialistic, economic or political ideologies collapse when people realize they're not delivering the goods. Religion promises a reward after we're dead and can't come back to tell anyone about it. Religion deals not with real political or economic events but unseen, undetectable forces that can't be understood or explained. There's no "reality check" to step on the breaks.

What makes Islamo-Christianity especially dangerous are two things:
1. The God/Satan Conflict: According to both religions, the universe is a battleground between two sides. One is the god your religion serves, the sources of goodness in the universe, and the other is Satan. If therefore someone isn't part of your religion, it narrows it down who they serve (or at least are being duped by) doesn't it?

If you think your neighbors are working for The Devil, you are capable of doing anything to them. Islamo-Christianity literally demonizes others.

2. The Faith-Based Salvation Concept: Islamo-Christianity suggest that life is just a transitory stage, a "test" that determines where we will spend eternity. The two outcomes are eternal, horrific punishment or eternal bliss in Heaven. The stakes are as high as they can be.

So what's a little torture on this earth if you save a soul for Heaven? So what's a little murder on this earth if you save more souls for eternity? If you send some unrepentant blasphemer to Hell a little early and by doing so, prevent him from causing the loss of faith of others, thereby saving more souls, isn't that a good thing?

Now, of course, 99% of Muslims and Christians don't take it to that extreme. I'm just showing how the potential is inherently there for anyone who really is convinced.

Quote:I presented in more than once, that the Middle East is now the perfect land to spawn insane people (please come visit, please, and see by yourself).

Our policies have certainly made a mess of everything. As an American, I'm sincerely sorry we failed to stop W Bush from coming to power. I'm sorry we allowed 9/11 to drive us mad and follow the sociopaths in the Bush administration who were willing to exploit that to lie us into a war of aggression in Iraq that destabilized the region. I'm sorry that a few major corporations that make money off the American war machine have control over our media and most Americans have no idea what's going on in the world.

None of that absolves religion from any responsibility for the harm it does.

The Middle-East used to be a place of learning and enlightenment. It used to keep alive the knowledge of Greeco-Roman civilization. The mighty have fallen. The mild form of Islam that allowed the golden age of Islamic civilization was replaced by a more radical strain. Western imperialism isn't helping but that's not the cause of the current Dark Age in the Muslim world.

Quote:Nobody ever said that this atheist represents the whole crowd, but who ever said that bad muslims who kill, also represent the whole crowd ; too ? Rather, you can consider a mere counter argument, because once a Muslim scratches his nose, the whole media starts to beat the drums and all Muslims (ALL) turn into hellish demonic goats.

Really not true, although there are bigots everywhere.

In WWII, we interned Japanese Americans in prison camps. In WWI, German Americans changed their names to avoid discrimination. We do have a bad history of bigotry in my country.

None of that means we can't criticize Islam or inspect the ideology for what might promote violence. I'm willing to grant that 99% of Christians are good people but that doesn't mean I don't criticize Christianity as being a bad religion. Same is true for Islam. It's the ideology I have a problem with, not the people.

Muslims escape that criticism by becoming moderate Muslims (shedding the bad parts, like moderate Christians do with their religion) or better yet, becoming ex-Muslims.

Atlas I'm going to disagree with you - You don't need to be mentally ill to commit acts of terrorism, you simply need to believe what you're doing is right. Many terrorists are mentally sane (not schizophrenics, psychopaths or bipolar, etc). If you interview Islamic terrorists you'll notice it's all about religion and what they believe, they think what they're doing is correct and saving the world. There's not mental illness unless you have evidence -

Not to mention there have been plenty of cases of people rebelling against a brutal military government or junta or dictatorship in acts that could easily be classified as 'terrorism' by the incumbent regime, and I wouldn't call those rebels "mentally ill".

Right. Religion can make good people do bad things. It's not hard to see why. You tell them a book is the "word of God", so they do what it says. Then you call them a radical, an extremist and mentally ill. For following the word of God.

In other words, you don't believe your own shit.

Indeed, I think we put human kindness on a high pedestal, considering some people call terrorists mentally ill because they're afraid to admit those people voluntarily want to do what they're doing and believe it is right and good.

(March 18, 2015 at 11:20 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Not to mention there have been plenty of cases of people rebelling against a brutal military government or junta or dictatorship in acts that could easily be classified as 'terrorism' by the incumbent regime, and I wouldn't call those rebels "mentally ill".

The word "terrorist" is often bandied around by those in power. The word should have a specific meaning: using fear, by targeting civilians, to affect political outcome.

The tactic can be used either by those in power to sustain the status quo or by those rebelling. The KKK's lynchings were terrorist actions even though they were promoting those in power.

(March 18, 2015 at 11:26 am)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(March 18, 2015 at 11:20 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Not to mention there have been plenty of cases of people rebelling against a brutal military government or junta or dictatorship in acts that could easily be classified as 'terrorism' by the incumbent regime, and I wouldn't call those rebels "mentally ill".

The word "terrorist" is often bandied around by those in power. The word should have a specific meaning: using fear, by targeting civilians, to affect political outcome.

The tactic can be used either by those in power to sustain the status quo or by those rebelling. The KKK's lynchings were terrorist actions even though they were promoting those in power.

Oh I understand, I was more pointing out Atlas' sloppy use of 'terrorism' and his equally vague and sloppy ideas of mental health. The whole "nobody sane would ever kill anyone" axiom is patently absurd.

(March 18, 2015 at 11:28 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Oh I understand, I was more pointing out Atlas' sloppy use of 'terrorism' and his equally vague and sloppy ideas of mental health. The whole "nobody sane would ever kill anyone" axiom is patently absurd.

Just so you know, I was agreeing and adding to what you said. Voice inflection is lost in this medium.