(November 18, 2014 at 7:23 pm)lifesagift Wrote: You've added a layer...
you say " I can tell you that they're not all bloodthirsty extremists. "
You were the one who said they would all die for the Caliphate.
(November 18, 2014 at 7:23 pm)lifesagift Wrote: I didn't say that... I said the bloodthirsty extremeists are wrong
You also said that you would only believe the moderates when they "marched in the streets".
I notice you still haven't answered my question: why do you hold them to a different standard than you abide for yourself? You certainly don't march in the streets whenever you find actions offensive. Indeed, you're sitting here online venting your ire on the Internet in this discussion.
Yet somehow, that is not good enough for Muslims who had nothing to do with those murders.
(November 18, 2014 at 7:23 pm)lifesagift Wrote: Isn't it funny how you can get aggressive to a western atheist for using the wrong word, but you're happy with this (seemingly):
http://video-islamic-state-stones-young-...d-adultery
Firstly, your link didn't work.
Secondly, I've called many things done by Muslims "atrocities", both at this forum and elsewhere, and if you want to argue that I've supported them, you'll need evidence. Link to a post of mine where I assert the propriety of a stoning, beheading or other atrocity committed by a Muslim. Just one. Go on ahead, I'll wait.
Thirdly, just because you're a western atheist doesn't exempt you from sloppy thinking, as you're so avidly demonstrating in this thread.
So, you can answer my question, or not: why do you insist on a double-standard for Muslims?
Oh, and while we're at it, you're right, saying "all Muslims" was stupid of you -- but it also gives insight into your thought processes. Had you been talking about any other group, would you have made the same error?
If "no", then you've found bias.
If "yes" is your answer, then you've found sloppy thinking.
Either way, you're better off for ditching the absolutist mentality and adopting a more nuanced approach.
