US Muslims struggle with condemnation

[God of Mr. Hanky]

If you really don't smell the rankness of that red herring, then I'm afraid this thread is going to bury you.

Race <> Ideology, Choice, Moral Code, Public Statements, nor Actions, and none of this needs explaining to most people in this world!

Well, can you prove that anything is a choice?

1. That people are faced with multiple options in life requires no proof.

2. That people are to some extent influenced behaviorally by their genes is evidential to some extent, but no data attests for complete control by them.

3. That they are capable of choosing Option B over Option A would be hard to prove, if you have never observed any effective behavioral modification in the individual.

4. (2) and (3) notwithstanding, humans are not puppets. Our natural proclivities which certain genes control are instinctive behaviors, not cognitive, which is on a higher level. We have neural complexity which is levels above other large land mammals, and it opens up our field of options wide so that we can counteract our base instincts, if our cognition calls for it. The field grows with the growth of perception, and we had to evolve very high perception before we were capable of living in densely-packed and stable societies. Ask any competent neurologist, my money says he can prove this!

5. Even much smaller-brained animals can be trained to modify their behavior, to some extent.

6. Can a dog be trained to modify its behavior? Then human behavior can be modified, and behavioral modification actually happens only when the individual makes a different choice! 

By primordial human standards, Islamic society is backward, and this is by unfortunate choice!

I don't think this is about "choices", it's about people belonging to a specific artificial group and having to apologize for what members of the same group did now or a few hundred years ago.

What makes a group "artificial"?

The last time I checked, racial groups were of very natural origin.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The last time I checked, racial groups were of very natural origin.

... but racist groups aren't.

The fact that I'm not asked to answer for the behavior of white-supremacist groups, while random Muslims are expected to answer for the acts of other Muslims who have a different version of their religion -- that fact is the point. It's a double standard.

If my son were a white-supremacist, I would denounce him (and any atrocity he might commit). But some random asshole up in Idaho? He has to answer for himself. And I have the luxury of holding that attitude, because it is not expected of me to answer for him.

You want an American Muslim to condemn acts of terror? They do it all the time. They have to -- it is expected of them.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

The last time I checked, racial groups were of very natural origin.

... but racist groups aren't.

The fact that I'm not asked to answer for the behavior of white-supremacist groups, while random Muslims are expected to answer for the acts of other Muslims who have a different version of their religion -- that fact is the point.  It's a double standard.

If my son were a white-supremacist, I would denounce him (and any atrocity he might commit). But some random asshole up in Idaho? He has to answer for himself. And I have the luxury of holding that attitude, because it is not expected of me to answer for him.

You want an American Muslim to condemn acts of terror?  They do it all the time. They have to -- it is expected of them.

There does seem to be some cognitive dissonance here, **sigh**:

Race is a natural group, racism is artificial.

Islam is artificial.

You should never have to answer for what anyone else does on account of anyone's ridiculous association of you to said asshole on account of your race - this is no choice that you ever could have made! Race is not a choice because you could never have had the option of shedding your skin in trade of one more politically fashionable.

Islam is in fact a choice, hard though that choice may be for many of its followers when they choose to swim against the stream. You really do have the choice not to publicly endorse Islam, and you can even walk away from it completely.

The idea that anti-Islamic sentiment is a race thing is the work of Islamic asshats, and the even bigger non-Islamic or white ones who get paid to project their wrongs on the rest of the world. It's easy to do, considering how overzealous cops have profiled those who "look Islamic", but the fact is that people of all races are Musims - Islam is not a natural physical trait!

Sorry, but based on the above, I see no valid point in your argument.

[Mister Agenda]

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.

Sure. But how many times should I be patient with people who ask me to condemn them afresh every time another white guy murders a black guy? Why should my silence be interpreted as supporting white guys murdering black guys. Why does it not go without saying that if I am personally not doing anything to support white on black violence, that I condemn it.

Because I'm a white guy and I'm in the majority and I don't have to be held to the same standards as those shitty little minorities who better reassure me they're not 'one of the bad ones'.

[Mister Agenda]

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

If you were part of the same organization that white person claimed to be a member of you might be asked those sorts of questions by people wanting to know what your view of the groups beliefs were.

Remember this is a religion not a race, you weren't raised to be a white man and there's no white man belief system, so it's slightly different circumstances.

But say if you were to go ahead with that analogy, I'm sure throughout American history it's very common, especially these days, to have a vast vast VAST amount of white people who will put themselves at risk, sometimes even their lives at risk, for the sake of racial equality in America and for black civil rights and so on.

But in western countries you do get Muslims saying "These aren't real Muslims." but I don't know if there's a level of total outrage.  I don't know if many Muslims are going over there to fight ISIS, I think more of them are going over to abroad to fight FOR ISIS rather than against them.

I agree that not all Muslims should have to make a public apology but some genuine non forced condemnation goes a long way I think, on the one hand it is relieving to see a lot of Muslims condemning ISIS.  On the other hand it's scary that all you have to do is interpret a book a different way and you could end up joining ISIS.

A positive example was in the news today involving a knife attack and a Muslim bystander shouted out something like "You ain't muslim bruv, you're an embarrassment." And that's slightly encouraging, it wasn't forced it was just a reaction.

A negative example would be when someone I know was talking to a Muslim who I also know, saying to him something like "They don't like homosexuality in Islam do they? They can be executed in some of those Islamic places."  And the Muslim who is usually talkative about most topics just flatly said "Yeh."  And It was just a feeling I got but the silence after that was a bit awkward.

I'm not saying that proves he's homophobic, but if that was me and someone said "Hey Paul, a lot of atheists are left wing communists."  The very first thing I would do is explain I don't have much interest in Communism and I don't really politically swing on either left wing or right wing.  And I don't even condemn Communists but I'd be quick to point out false associations with me being an atheist just out of the principle of it.

Pretty much all the people fighting ISIS on the ground are Muslims. Just sayin'.

[Thumpalumpacus]

... but racist groups aren't.

The fact that I'm not asked to answer for the behavior of white-supremacist groups, while random Muslims are expected to answer for the acts of other Muslims who have a different version of their religion -- that fact is the point.  It's a double standard.

If my son were a white-supremacist, I would denounce him (and any atrocity he might commit). But some random asshole up in Idaho? He has to answer for himself. And I have the luxury of holding that attitude, because it is not expected of me to answer for him.

You want an American Muslim to condemn acts of terror?  They do it all the time. They have to -- it is expected of them.

There does seem to be some cognitive dissonance here, **sigh**:

Race is a natural group, racism is artificial.

Islam is artificial.

You should never have to answer for what anyone else does on account of anyone's ridiculous association of you to said asshole on account of your race - this  is no choice that you ever could have made! Race is not a choice because you could never have had the option of shedding your skin in trade of one more politically fashionable.

Islam is in fact a choice, hard though that choice may be for many of its followers when they choose to swim against the stream. You really do have the choice not to publicly endorse Islam, and you can even walk away from it completely. The idea that anti-Islamic sentiment is a race thing is the work of Islamic asshats, and the even bigger non-Islamic or white ones who get paid to project their wrongs on the rest of the world. It's easy to do, considering how overzealous cops have profiled those who "look Islamic", but the fact is that people of all races are Musims - Islam is not a natural physical trait!

Sorry, but based on the above, I see no valid point in your argument.

What you're missing is that you're grouping all Muslims together. When you get to seeing that, we can perhaps make headway in this discussion.

I'm not nor have I ever argued that Islam is a race. That is a strawman you're beating there. You should learn the difference between a comparison and an equivalence.

[Mister Agenda]

It might help clarify the issue somewhat if the response wasn't seemingly muted... but I can't think of any specific reason they are obligated to.

Demanding this kind of thing otherwise we will assume they are with the terrorists isn't a terribly honest or fair preposition.

Maybe the muting is due to 14 years of people saying Muslims aren't condemning terrorism without bothering to Google 'Muslims condemning terrorism'.

I think we're reaching the 'what's the point?' stage. And I definitely sympathize, given how many times I've had to walk people by the hand over to the documentation of Muslims condemning terrorism, I'm about at that stage myself.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

There does seem to be some cognitive dissonance here, **sigh**:

Race is a natural group, racism is artificial.

Islam is artificial.

You should never have to answer for what anyone else does on account of anyone's ridiculous association of you to said asshole on account of your race - this  is no choice that you ever could have made! Race is not a choice because you could never have had the option of shedding your skin in trade of one more politically fashionable.

Islam is in fact a choice, hard though that choice may be for many of its followers when they choose to swim against the stream. You really do have the choice not to publicly endorse Islam, and you can even walk away from it completely. The idea that anti-Islamic sentiment is a race thing is the work of Islamic asshats, and the even bigger non-Islamic or white ones who get paid to project their wrongs on the rest of the world. It's easy to do, considering how overzealous cops have profiled those who "look Islamic", but the fact is that people of all races are Musims - Islam is not a natural physical trait!

Sorry, but based on the above, I see no valid point in your argument.

What you're missing is that you're grouping all Muslims together.  When you get to seeing that, we can perhaps make headway in this discussion.

I'm not nor have I ever argued that Islam is a race. That is a strawman you're beating there. You should learn the difference between a comparison and an equivalence.

Yes, I am grouping all Muslims together, as one group which follows the same holy book, and I need not apologize for that! From the very reasonable perception of outsiders to Islam, it's a fair judgment to make. It is full of some extremely evil ideas, which influence much horrific and barbaric behavior. Millions of Muslims read this book, and follow it to the letter, and where the f*** are the Muslims who actually stand up and explain to the world how wrong they feel this is? There are none, there are only people like you who cry "NOT FAIR"!

Yes, I am vaguely aware that Islam is deeply divided, if not quite as interestingly splintered as Christiantiy with over 400,000 sectarian divisions, and when one group decides to kill people or starve children to death, others who follow their holy book are not silent!

Either give us a credible reason to believe that your holy book, in its ugliness as we understand it, is not your religious, social, and political philosophy, or go cry up a river elsewhere!

[Catholic_Lady]

I agree with every word of this. Well said. As a Christian I will be sure to stand up in condemnation towards any mofo who kills people because of his Christian beliefs.

Did CNN come and interview you?  Because that double-standard is the point.

If a group of Catholics started terrorizing the world by killing thousands of people for the past year, I would want CNN to bring in a priest or bishop or whatever to set the record straight that killing people is against Church teaching and that we don't stand for that.

[Mister Agenda]

We had this in another thread. Why are muslims supposed to appologize for every action their radicals do? Did anyone ask christians to distance themselves from Brejvik? For the other nutters, shooting up abortion clinics or doctors? Why the double standards? Were jews called out when Barruch Goldstein shot up a mosque?

Short answer, if you're not affiliated with certain actions, you shouldn't be called out. You had no part in it, so you're not guilty by association.

I didn't say apologize. I didn't say call out. I didn't say guilty by association.

Brievik's actions were condemned:http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/08/08/comp...o-attacks/
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/ch.../28324.htm
http://www.worldmag.com/2011/08/blasphemous

Jews were called out, Goldsteins actions were condemned: http://www.jpost.com/Features/In-Thespot...n-massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Gol...Haberman-5
http://www.gutenberg.us/articles/baruch_goldstein
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/03/01/world/...wanted=all

Pro lifers condemn abortion clinic shootings: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/p...ims-94611/
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/p...ims-94611/

If a self professed atheist commits a act of atrocity in the name of atheism I'm certainly going to condemn it. Not being in the public eye, I may not be asked but that does not stop my condemnation.

Were they condemned by the Christian and Jewish communities in general? Were they condemned enough? If I go out to Google, will I find enough condemnations by those groups to satisfy my need to hear people condemn bad things? What if I'm still afraid not enough of them are condemning it?

Since it's been established that we have a right to expect condemnations to the degree we want to hear them. After all, the complaint isn't that no Muslims are condemning atrocities, so it would not be sufficient for me to post a few linkies that show at least some of them do. Maybe it's only a minority that do, that would mean the majority aren't condemning awful things.