RE: US Muslims struggle with condemnation
December 6, 2015 at 10:57 pm
(This post was last modified: December 6, 2015 at 11:05 pm by 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.
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.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
- Thomas Jefferson