Muslims

[Heat]

Yes but key word "Can".

Religion is not the same as action.
Action is choice.

We should not group those who choose a religion as bad, under the assumption they will make the choice to act on it.

But isn't that the point.

The Muslim on the radio felt that all these terrorists  that were indoctrinated into "a" version of the Qur'an are themselves victims. My point is, once they're exposed to it, they then are no longer responsible for atrocities they commit. They ALL believe they are on the right side fighting the good fight.

At least "our"  stupid bible doesn't talk about martyrdom
or jihad as part of the belief system.
Using this logic, we must find all religious terrorists as well meaning according to their sacred texts.
This is why we must stop it spreading. yes? no?

This may not really pertain to what you said^, but I wanted to mention earlier that;

On a small scale, yes, ideologies that preach violence, hate, should be looked down upon, and if this "ideology" is just a few values held that they are spreading to people like "Bomb all the muslims", we can take action and say that is hate speech regardless.



However, even though people in ISIS use the same teachings as most peaceful muslims, on a larger scale, the same logic does not apply, and even though they believe this book that does have "hate speech" INCLUDED we can't group them, because it is much more complicated than that.

It's not just as simple as saying "If something has __ included we should assume they believe __"


Just like Christianity, regardless of what the example is in question, there are many interpretations of whatever this ideology says, or holds. In a larger scale like the Quran, there are violent passages, but also quite the opposite, and many people pick and choose what they believe, we shouldn't assume that just because a Muslim follows the Quran that they believe and take every word written in it literally, and we should assume that since they believe it they think these violent acts are justifiable or should suspect them, or anticipate they will partake in them. 

This is, in my opinion, the difference between ISIS and regular peaceful muslims, and why I think we should treat certain ideologies with respect[not to be confused with preconceived bias picking and choosing]:
ISIS is preaching, and believes, only in hate, and violence. They are not taking the peace promoting text within the Quran and using that to push their agenda. We can take that and assume that is what they believe, and anticipate it.

However,
Peaceful, average Muslims are preaching, or not preaching, but believe in most probably love and peace, maybe they interpret the violent passages in a way that they think the violence is just, but still don't believe they should act on it[like commonly confused when reading polls]. Someone who believes in peace(mostly), but still gets that belief from the same book used to promote violence and hate, should not be associated with those who are promoting and believe in violence and hate. Their view is on a much broader spectrum, and the broader the spectrum[less one sided] the ideology gets, the less we can assume about the beliefs being acted on.

That's why we shouldn't treat terrorists, or people holding all around hateful ideologies with equality because action is choice. Yes action is choice, but that only becomes more of a factor in the assumptions you make about people when the ideology possessed isn't one sided.

Terrorism is one sided. So we can draw one conclusion.
However, most Muslims beliefs are not one sided. So we can not draw one conclusion.