(May 31, 2015 at 7:43 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: They're all Muslims.Sure, they're sort of Muslim ish. Again, by definition, extremists take things to an extreme. Moderates, by definition, water down.
Quote:The fact is, some moderates can be very intense believers about some things, ...
Sure. I've known "moderate Christians" who are anti-gay and reliably vote Republican (the only thing "moderate" about them is they accept evolution). I've also known "moderate Christians" who are pro-gay rights and liberal Democrats. I did tell you that the "moderate" part tells us fuck-all about what the person really believes. I didn't say they water EVERYTHING down. Just that it's only the extremists who completely tow the line of an ideology.
Quote:Just because they're not radical by your Western definition doesn't mean they're not Muslim.
It's not my definition and I don't think it's exclusive to the west either. I'm going by basic definitions of the words "radical" and "moderate".
Quote:This is simply you practicing a No True Scotsman: [/i]All[/i] true Muslims are radicals.
No, this is me using a dictionary.
Quote:Because it supports your own narrative, that's why.
No, because it's how words are defined.
Quote:I think you're entirely missing a kep issue in the matter, which is the use of religion as a fig-leaf to cover what are already mentally unstable thoughts and actions. In other words, you're confusing cause and effect, in my opinion; you have no way of konwing that radicals are radicals because they've read the Koran and take it seriously, of if they've read the Koran and cherry-picked the [i]suras which support and strengthen their mental instability.[/i]Occam's Razor: The reason that Islam seems to inspire such violence is because it does inspire such violence.
I don't see Hindus killing and terrorizing people for mocking the Baghavad Gihta. I don't see Buddhists threatening to cut people's heads off for disrespecting Buddha. I can't think of the last time I heard about a Sikh terrorist. Some people blame Islamic terror on the oppression and economic conditions of the Middle East. Yet we see plenty of oppression and economic want elsewhere in the world without the same degree of religious inspired violence. Now all religions are crap and all of them have some potential to inspire sectarian violence but some clearly are more dangerous than others.
The insistence among the pig-headed, religion-enabling, co-exist fetishistic demagogues that religion is never "really" the cause of religious violence, that it is always due to "mentally unstable" or "bad" people or some other cause, is a non-falsifiable hypothesis established by a bare assertion and defended with a chorus line of No True Scotsmen.
Quote:We're talking about people, not governments.
Actually, we're talking about neither. We're talking about an ideology, specifically Islam. I have no doubt that you've known many nice Muslims in your time. That's great. Maybe they represent 99% of all Muslims out there. Sure, whatever. The fact remains that the extremists represent the molten core of Islam, what Islam is when it is fully and completely embraced.
Quote:Hey, since we're talking about percentages and what they do or don't represent, what percentage of all the Muslims in the world do you think have been implicated in terrorist attacks over the years? Out of all the Muslims, how many have attacked others for the "sin" of being non-Muslim, do you think?
Don't know. Don't care. Beside the point. Next?
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
