Why do Atheists defend Islam?

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Let me make something perfectly clear, because I think my actual stance on this is getting lost in the debate. 

I don't have anything against Muslim people. I don't think good, peaceful Muslims should stop being Muslim. I do think the Islam ideology, as it stands right now, has one major issue - and that is that it can be easily taken in a way that gets many people do many heinous things. It needs some sort of reform. And for those of you who immediately say "well Christianity blah blah blah," yes, I get it. Christians have killed many people too, in the past. Trust me, if Christians were running around right now killing thousands of people in the name of Jesus like the Islamic Jihadists are doing in the name of their god, I would be condemning the hell out of their behavior and saying the same thing I'm saying about Islam - that we need a reform and that this needs to stop. Like I said, I have nothing against good Muslim people practicing their faith peacefully. But I hold them to the same standard that I would hold my own Christian faith to and that I hold myself to: condemn every attack in the name of your faith.             

Seriously, I have no idea why the stance that...

1. islam needs a reform so that we don't have millions of its followers believing they need to commit heinous acts, and 

2. people should openly condemn/denounce horrible things being done in the name of their ideology (Christians and Muslims alike),   

...Is being met with so much hostility. Heaven forbid I think an ideology that is killing so many needs a reform. Heaven forbid I think we need to openly denounce murder being done in our name.

Hello, Catholic Lady!

You really do have a beautiful heart, and I can only agree there's a fundamental problem with Islam in need of reform, and failing that, perhaps exorcism.

Somebody earlier noted how different the central figures are between Christianity and Islam: Jesus is remembered as a friendly, and likeable sort of a hippie who was sympathetic to any woman about to be stoned to death for adultery, while Mohammad was a brutish, vindictive, and misogynistic pedophile. The latter being what he is would indeed make it difficult for Islamic reforms compared to reforming Christianity.

The personality traits of Jesus were probably not quite all which is said of him, if he actually existed, but those who wrote of him were Greek-educated Westerners with an eye to the future. 

The tale of Mohammad was told by people who inherited a vast, cruel desert, which their ancestors created through thousands of years of intense animal grazing without a thought for future preservation. At his time, Arabs were getting by much through the killing of each other for their animals, or selling each other off in slave markets.  Historical reports of Arabs carrying Korans into the northern Mediterranean during medieval times reflect a very negative attitude toward agriculturalists, who they regarded as lazy and craven. Yes, they were certainly the culture of machismo, and so became their religion, their god, and their prophet Mohammad. 

Because Muslims are unable to deny that Mohammad was such a dick, they would not be able to reform their religion without denying him as a true holy figure, which would bring their whole platform crashing down on their heads. Therefore, Islam most unfortunately cannot be reformed, and it will never enter the modern world without attempting to destroy it. Islamic leaders know that a strong Western society will always bring strong criticism of Islam, and they are in trouble because they have no positive way by which they can respond to this. Therefore, the desperation-fueled and ruthless tactics to silence any critics who draw attention to the problems of Mohammad!

---

The fact that not every Muslim is involved in Islamic terror is greatly overshadowed by their silence on terror, on genital mutilation, on oppressive misogyny, on bigamy, on the most barbaric excuses for justice since the 7th Century, the murder of "apostates", and fatwas to intimidate...CRITICISM OF ISLAM!!

While leaders of every other world religion jump to disassociate themselves wherever such atrocious horrors are known, Muslims implicate themselves through their apathy, regardless of how they practice their religion. They do this because they really don't respect the rights of people with ideas which are different from theirs, so rather than respond to distance themselves from the Paris attacks they do what they wish to, giving the world the finger. They know they can get away with it while stupid Western journalists enable them!

That's untrue in the UK. Check out the work done by the Muslim Council of Britain, the Association of British Muslims and even the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain. Their work to eradicate extremism, speak out against atrocities carried out in the name of Islam and ensure the continued, successful integration of muslim immigrants (which has been working for decades BTW) is worthy of more than just appreciation. Between them, the MCB and the AoBM represent the overwhelming majority of British muslims. In addition to 'official' protests carried out by these organisations, there have been spontaneous demonstrations by British muslims in response to every terrorist action that occurred in western nations in the past 10 years.

You misrepresent muslims with our statements and make it clear that your view is not broad enough to understand the rifts between not only different sects but also different groups within each sect (often identified by nationality).

I probably should not have included terror on the list of fundamental problems with Islam, and Mohammad certainly had nothing to say of suicide vests, bombs, or other terror tactics.

Muslims do respond when terror attacks shock the world, but on social horrors which you would probably not wish to see practiced in your own neighborhood, very little is said. These fundamental problems relate directly to the personality of Mohammad, whose tale was written not by people who were not the product of Greek culture, but of desert raiding, horse-stealing, woman-beating, and slave-marketing machismo. Reform of a religion is much easier when you have a compassionate hippie dude like Jesus as your central figure to look to for behavioral standards, while a dick like Mohammad, remembered as he is, is keeping Muslims forever in the 7th Century. You cannot criticize what he did without denying him as your holy man, a serious threat to any faith in Islam, and this has the imams threatening with violence anyone who makes such criticism in defense of their job security.