US Muslims struggle with condemnation

[Minimalist]

Talk is cheap.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Should I as a white man have to condemn each act of white-on-black racial violence in America?

[paulpablo]

Should I as a white man have to condemn each act of  white-on-black racial violence in America?

You do condemn those things don't you?  Do you think you shouldn't? It's not that you have to, it's just that I'm pretty sure most non racist white people at some point in their lives condemn the acts of white on black racial violence in America, including you on this forum at some point.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Should I as a white man have to condemn each act of  white-on-black racial violence in America?

You do condemn those things don't you?  Do you think you shouldn't?

Sometimes I do. Other times I don't know about the incident.

However, at no time have I had a microphone stuck in my face and been asked to condemn racial violence committed by another white man on a cable news network. It wasn't expected that I should be a spokesman. That double-standard is the point of my post

[FatAndFaithless]

I actually used to be seriously in line with folks like Megyn Kelly on the idea that members of a group should have to 'denounce or apologize for' actions of other members. But upon further examination, that idea is a bit ridiculous. Should every American be expected to apologize or justify the actions of Bush in Iraq or Reagan in Afghanistan in order to 'justify' the existence of their group? Should every Christian be forced to condemn the Crusades 500 years later? I'm not denying that there exists a non-trivial fraction of the ideology that approves of these actions, I'm just skeptical of the notion that there needs to be a concerted effort to oppose ideas that are in opposition to basic human ideas of morality.

I'm a (potentially) naive optimist. Most Muslims are good because most humans are good. If you go to every member of a given or constructed group and hammer them about approval/disapproval of certain actions, you won't get anywhere. Most people think murder is wrong. Most people think stealing is wrong. Most people think assault is wrong. If a white guy assaults someone, you don't go to the "white community" and ask for condemnation. If a muslim stabs someone over a snickers bar you don't ask the "muslim community" for condemnation.

Remember that atheist that shot three muslims in NC? Do any of you feel like we have an obligation to condemn their actions or apologize for 'atheism'? Of course not. We condemn his actions without any reference to his ideology.

To preempt any 'ideology' talk, yes I understand that certain ideologies provide reasons for action (as I have emphasized countless times in my post history) and that Islam gives certain people certain reasons to take certain actions. However, just as you wouldn't condemn Barry Sanders for being a socialist because STALIN or MAO, you shouldn't condemn someone else following a different ideology. Their actions are unforgivable. Their ideas are refutable. The thing that matters out of those two are their ACTIONS.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I actually used to be seriously in line with folks like Megyn Kelly on the idea that members of a group should have to 'denounce or apologize for' actions of other members. But upon further examination, that idea is a bit ridiculous. Should every American be expected to apologize or justify the actions of Bush in Iraq or Reagan in Afghanistan in order to 'justify' the existence of their group? Should every Christian be forced to condemn the Crusades 500 years later? I'm not denying that there exists a non-trivial fraction of the ideology that approves of these actions, I'm just skeptical of the notion that there needs to be a concerted effort to oppose ideas that are in opposition to basic human ideas of morality.

I'm a (potentially) naive optimist. Most Muslims are good because most humans are good. If you go to every member of a given or constructed group and hammer them about approval/disapproval of certain actions, you won't get anywhere. Most people think murder is wrong. Most people think stealing is wrong. Most people think assault is wrong. If a white guy assaults someone, you don't go to the "white community" and ask for condemnation. If a muslim stabs someone over a snickers bar you don't ask the "muslim community" for condemnation.

Not to mention that the concept implies the guilt of any individual in the group under scrutiny that doesn't for whatever reason condemn an act.

[FatAndFaithless]

I feel like I will get some backlash for my statements.

Let me make this clear. Is Islam ridiculous? Absolutely. Is religion ridiculous? Absolutely. But asking all muslims to apologize/condemn the actions of other muslims is like asking every church in america to apologize/condemn the actions of everything Christians have done. It's useless, distracting, and ineffective. It doesn't help us address the causes of extremism, it doesn't change the religious ideas of the accused or accuser, and it doesn't provide a reason for change.

It's just a vindictive instinct of "we're better that they are."

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't ask all Christians to condemn the KKK's actions.

[FatAndFaithless]

I don't ask all Christians to condemn the KKK's actions.

But that's the point.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't ask all Christians to condemn the KKK's actions.

But that's the point.

I know. I'm reiterating it so that it doesn't get missed.