Actions
Post info
cosmicrat
Peace, freedom, equality, tolerance, and justice for all
14.01.2018 (36 days ago)
Recommend
 
Post view

Don't Blame the Innocent
by cosmicrat ·
14-January-2018, 9:24 pm

There were 1.8 billion Muslims in the world as of 2015 – roughly 24% of the global population.

There are about 3.45 million Muslims of all ages in the U.S., or about 1.1% of the U.S. population. This is based on an analysis of census statistics and data from a 2017 survey of U.S. Muslims.

Reza Aslan: Anyone who asks why Muslims have not condemned terrorism can’t use Google

“first of all, let’s be clear that every single organization, major organization, Muslim organization throughout the world and in the United States, every prominent individual, be it political or religious leaders — everyone has condemned, not just this attack, but every attack that occurs in the name of Islam.”

“Anyone who keeps saying that we need to hear the moderate voice of Islam — why aren’t Muslims denouncing these violent attacks doesn’t own Google.”

I would add to that statement that everyone's Google search experience is not the same. It is designed to lead you to what you WANT to find, once it "knows" your preferences. If you have chosen to view bigoted anti-Muslim sites, even accidentally, you'll find even more of those. And the media does not interview Muslims every time a terrorist acts to get their opinion. Why should they? It is not normal nor sensible to blame the innocent majority for a crime.

It is not every Muslim's responsibility to disavow, nor to apoligize for acts by other Muslims.

Many Americans, though not all, condemned the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. A number of us would express regret for the US/UK overthrow of Iran's government in 1953. Many of us sympathize with the Palestinian cause, and believe our country should put real pressure on Israel to end its occupation and violations of human rights.

Americans have perpetrated reprehensible acts on Muslim nations and populations, directly or indirectly, things our government did, but not because the people wanted them to happen. Should we all explicitly apologize? Are we all guilty?

Should all Christians take the blame for Dr. Tiller's murder? Should all white people apologize for the many black people unjustly lynched, shot, or otherwise killed or maimed by pale bigots?

No, we don't blame the innocent. Many good people are working to make the future better than the past, but all those who simply lead their lives and do no harm, regardless of race or religion, do not deserve prejudice.

--cosmic rat  Jan. 14, 2018

Comments
Order by: 
Per page: 
 
  •  cosmicrat: 
     

    If Islam Is a Religion of Violence, So Is Christianity

    http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/06/14/if-islam-is-a-religion-of-violence-so-is-christianity/ 

    There is ideology in all religions, and some sectors within them that concentrate on the ideological aspect.  It would be reasonable to say that the Wahabbis are such a sect in Islam, comparable to the Christian fundamentalists who attempt to force their dogma onto secular law.  Hinduism has become more of a political ideology in India under the current government.

    Religion often affects politics, and vice versa.  When people see their religion as under attack, they seek political solutions.  Religious beliefs are bound to affect ideological attitudes to some extent.  Those in both Christianity and Islam who see their messages as being kindness and charity toward others want to see their governments enable that.  Those who concentrate on enforcing certain behavior will favor authoritarian law.

    The majority of all Muslims would prefer a democratic form of government.   Muslim-majority countries have lower rates of violent crime.

    Calling the world's second largest religion "not a religion" doesn't mean anything but to express your own prejudices.

     
     36 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
    0 points
     
    •  Midianlord: 
       

      "[...] Muslim-majority countries have lower rates of violent crime." (CosmicRat)

      Well, yes, when your ruling ideology doesn't acknowledge things like honour-killings, executions for apostasy, and being stoned to death for being a victim of rape as being crimes, then yeah.

      Seriously, Boo? Seriously?

      You're seriously so incapable of critical thought that this didn't occur to you?

      On second thought, fuck it: "I can't even," as they say,  and there's no point in even trying for someone as clearly deluded as you.

      "The majority of all Muslims would prefer a democratic form of government." (CosmicRat)

      Seeing as how all majority-Muslim countries are under some form of autarchic/dictatorial government at present...Then well, maybe they should...Oh, I don't know...like start doing, and stop talking?

      (E: Nope, sorry --the pretenses of democracy in Bangladesh and Indonesia, among others, are not even remotely convincing.)

      And no, India doesn't count: Not Muslim-majority, and severely corrupt.

      So willingly, pitifully deluded; Fuck me, you people...

       
       36 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
      0 points
       
      •  cosmicrat: 
         

        "Wide majorities of Muslims in most countries say they prefer democracy over a "strong leader," which is Pew's standard question for determining support for democracy.   Support is particularly high in Africa and Southeast Asia. It's more mixed in the Middle East, with opinion varying between countries but generally leaning pro-democracy. Support is weakest in post-Soviet countries, as well as in Pakistan."

        Obviously, preferring democracy is not the same as having it.  There is a high cost in human lives to revolution, and no guarantee of overcoming autocracy or military power to achieve democracy.

        Most of the harsh anti-sexual dogma attributed to Islam was actually imported from pre-existing cultural attitudes, and reflects the values of its early years, just as the Christian equivalents added similar dogma that was never preached by the supposed founder.

        The US, and other countries that followed our example by transitioning to democracy, have fortunately created more or less secular governments that accepted a diversity of religious sects but resisted undue religious influence on laws.  The interaction of government and religion has gradually modified the harsher aspects of Christianity for most, though the extremists are still around.

        Areas that kept religion as a basis for government didn't have that compromise-inducing effect.  Religion and nationality, belief and loyalty, are much closer to being the same.  

        That difference in the way people self-identify results in a variance in their reaction to criticism and to threats.  While we may react defensively to criticism of our countries, or of our beliefs, the reactions would be separate and different, and though either or both might be important to a given individual, neither wholly defines our concepts of Self.

        If we imagine those two aspects of being as inextricably intertwined, it might open a clearer understanding of a different way of perceiving the world and its challenges and conflicts.  It's normal to be biased in favor of our Western way of thinking, but not to say it is the only way, or the only right way.

        I am not a fan of any religion, but they exist, and we need to understand how they affect thinking, and determine the best approach to peaceful coexistence.

         
         35 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
        0 points
         
        •  Midianlord: 
           

          "There is a high cost in human lives to revolution, and no guarantee of overcoming autocracy or military power to achieve democracy." (CosmicRat)

          Yes, there is. But sometimes revolutions are necessary, and the price of complacency is much higher.

          "Most of the harsh anti-sexual dogma attributed to Islam was actually imported from pre-existing cultural attitudes, and reflects the values of its early years, just as the Christian equivalents added similar dogma that was never preached by the supposed founder." (Ibid.)

          I'm gonna need a citation and/or specifics. In any case, what does it matter? Those "harsh anti-sexual attitudes" are clearly not only still present, but elevated as cynosures by law and/or force. I'm pretty sure if you're about to be executed for being raped, that you wouldn't care who pirated what from whom back in CE 770, or whenever the fuck.

          Come on, is that the best you've got? Really?

          As well, the founder if Islam was a paedophile who married his "wife" --she was only one of many, apparently-- when she was aged nine, and he in his fifties. Modern Islam still projects these disgusting appetites away from itsself onto its women by using FGM, forcing them to wear black burlap sacks in 50 C heat, forbidding them from going out un-escorted, and blaming them for their rapists' actions,up to/including legitimising the last by executing the victims.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha

          It was the same in the seventh century, it's the same now --Christianity has at least tried to evolve, and allows itself to be policed by external organs...It's how the cover-up of centuries of sexual predation was brought to light. Islam refuses to even acknowledge that it can be criticised, and depending where you are, you might just get a knock on your door at 3.00am if you try to do so.

          My God, is there any length you won't go to to apologise for these fucking rabid animals?

          Judge them by their current actions, and their current actions are inexcusably barbaric, and their justifications for same even more so.

          No: They want war, then let them have it.

          'Course, there's reasons beyond the religious why, even for them, this will be an incredibly stupid idea, but that's a tale for another campfire.

           
           34 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
          0 points
           
          •  cosmicrat: 
             

            You can lead a horse to knowledge, but you can't make him think.

            No,, I am not "apologizing" for Islam, nor for Christianity or any other belief.  I was trying to stimulate actual thought, possibly leading to understanding, which I hoped might lead to less prejudice and divisive hateful expression.  Obviously that isn't working.

            It doesn't matter whether it's culture, religion, gender, sexuality, or skin color, prejudice divides our societies and causes conflict within them, and internationally.  It's ignorant and unnecessary.

            If you want to modify the beliefs or lifestyle of any sort of people, hostility is the worst sort of approach.

             
             33 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
            0 points
             
            •  Midianlord: 
               

              Oh, really.

              And what "knowledge" am I missing, exactly?

              No, self-rightoeusly lecturing appeals to expertise/authority --that you have yet to prove is in any way legitimate-- used to dress up ad hominem attacks simply won't do. (Reza Aslan is just another craven little apologist --come on already, it's so bloody obvious.)

              (Have you no inductive reasoning skills/abilities? Like none, at all?)

              Sorry 'boot that, eh.

               
               32 days ago 
              0 points
               
  •  SecretCorners: 
     

    The problem is that you think Islam is about sticking your arse in the air five times a day praying to some magical deity.  Islam is not a religion, it is an ideology; a very barbaric and dangerous ideology that has no place in Western Civilisation.

     
     36 days ago 
    1 point
     
  •  SecretCorners: 
     

    It is not every Muslim's responsibility to disavow, nor to apoligize for acts by other Muslims.

    No, apparently that is the responsibility of the left.

     
     36 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
    0 points
     
    •  cosmicrat: 
       

      No one on the left is apologizing for anyone's violent act.  Understanding the motivations for them is not at all the same thing.  Correcting our own country's behavior is something we MIGHT be able to affect.  That doesn't imply approval of  or an excuse for an attack.

       
       36 days ago 
      0 points
       
  •  SecretCorners: 
     

     
     36 days ago 
    0 points
     
  •  SecretCorners: 
     

     
     36 days ago 
    0 points
     
1
Don't Blame the Innocent