Freedom of Speech.

[Nick_i_am]

Could these same passeages also be reasnibly open to interpritation in such a way that men could use them as an excuse to oppress women? (in other words that, again, it's not the text which is 'fundimentally' wrong, as much as the people who use it).

[Moose]

Ermm... thus proving my point? 

 

If she was a repressed piece of furniture then I very much doubt she would've even thought such a thing nevermind said that 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You've completely missed the point, but whatever.

[213374U]

plus, you've clearly never met or known a muslim woman before 

As a matter of fact, I have. She was repressed, and always concerned of her family rejecting her if she stepped out of tradition by, for example, taking the veil off.

 

Make no blind assumptions about me, and I won't assume you're trolling, m'kay?

 

 

Well, considering I've read the Qu'ran in the original language and context it was written, I think you'll find I'm well aware of what it says about women... it seems your source is incorrect... such a shame... nice try though 

Aside from game design you are versed in ancient middle eastern languages?

 

I'm impressed.

 

 

If she was a repressed piece of furniture then I very much doubt she would've even thought such a thing nevermind said that 

How does that make any sense? Being repressed socially does not equal being repressed mentally. But, at any rate, you are right. In some places of the ME, or Afghanistan, lots of women are perfectly happy with their degradation. They are convinced it's the role assigned to them by God.

 

That's called brainwashing.

 

 

Oh... and just a little point here... middle eastern law does NOT equal Islamic law 

That's pretty rich. Lots of imams and people who have dedicated their lives to the study of that religion disagree with you.

Also, you've got to be the first person I meet that claims men are more opressed by Islam than women. There's always got to be a first time for everything, I suppose.

[Atreides]

I dunno. A dude told me the reason women can't drive in Saudi Arabia is that they only deserve to be chauffered around.

[Nick_i_am]

But is that 'lack of opression' or is it just somthing else equally stupid?

 

Whatever words given to it as explaination, they STILL can't drive.

[Volourn]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20060207/ca..._iran_holocaust

 

Hahaha! Hilaritty abounds by that honourable land known as Iran.

 

Anyways, they have the right to make any pictures they want; but their hypocrisy is loud, and clear.

 

 

R00fles!

Edited February 7, 2006 by Volourn

[Nick_i_am]

ROFLASKFASJHFASHFAS

 

If this goes forth, and ANY Muslim complains about the Mohammed cartoon, then yeah, there really is somthing wrong here.

 

...like there wasn't before.

[kumquatq3]

^ I agree, pretty witty of them.

 

 

Can we threaten to kill them and burn down their embassies when they do run it? Been awhile since there was a good embassy burning around here.

Edited February 7, 2006 by kumquatq3

[213374U]

Can we threaten to kill them and burn down their embassies when they do run it? Been awhile since there was a good embassy burning around here.

No need for that.

 

I say we make a Muhammad cartoon contest ourselves!

[kumquatq3]

No need for that.

 

I say we make a Muhammad cartoon contest ourselves!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

<--Muhammad

[Nick_i_am]

Incidently, havn't the 'people of the middle east' been publicly making fun of jews for ages anyway?

[213374U]

Yep. Only now they can openly air their anti-semitism under the pretense of freedom of press.

 

That must be the only freedom they are interested in expanding.

 

Hooray for hipocrisy!

[Nick_i_am]

Yes, the same examples that pop up everytime. The difference is that those examples are part of the past. So distant a past, in fact, that nobody who participated in the crusades still lives. There are no Spanish Inquisitors still around. Those were other times, marked by different mindsets.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Just to clarify, yeah, this was my point. The RELIGION hasn't fundimentally changed since then, just the worshippers and the society around it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Case in point: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4690224.stm

 

'Guilty of 6 charges of soliciting to murder

Guilty of 3 charges related to "stirring up racial hatred"

Guilty of 1 charge of owning recordings related to "stirring up racial hatred"

Guilty of 1 charge of possessing "terrorist encyclopaedia"'

Edited February 7, 2006 by Nick_i_am

[Darth Launch]

Could these same passeages also be reasnibly open to interpritation in such a way that men could use them as an excuse to oppress women? (in other words that, again, it's not the text which is 'fundimentally' wrong, as much as the people who use it).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not in my opinion

You've completely missed the point, but whatever.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If that's the case feel free to clarify things for me instead of saying "whatever"

As a matter of fact, I have. She was repressed, and always concerned of her family rejecting her if she stepped out of tradition by, for example, taking the veil off.

 

Make no blind assumptions about me, and I won't assume you're trolling, m'kay?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Unfortunately, that's a case of repression stemming from culture as opposed to religion... which are two different things... I know plenty of muslim girls here in the UK who have chosen to wear whatever they wish... whether they decide on a personal level to wear headscarves or not

 

And I'm not the type to troll so please don't assume that I was

Aside from game design you are versed in ancient middle eastern languages?

 

I'm impressed. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why are you assuming that I'm versed in game design? Please point out a post here in this forum that states that I am... and yes, as a matter of fact, I am versed in anicent arabic... why is that such a surprise? Is that because you assumed that I wasn't capable of such? Please clarify that for me

 

How does that make any sense? Being repressed socially does not equal being repressed mentally. But, at any rate, you are right. In some places of the ME, or Afghanistan, lots of women are perfectly happy with their degradation. They are convinced it's the role assigned to them by God.

 

That's called brainwashing. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly, your unfortunate friend is repressed culturally and socially... not religiously... it's shame when people like to mistake them for one another

 

And I've been to the Middle East and know people (both men and women) who either lived there or continue to... and I must say that from my own observations (not from what the media has told me) there are equal opportunities for both men and women... so the women are capable of learning what is right and wrong for themselves

 

That's pretty rich. Lots of imams and people who have dedicated their lives to the study of that religion disagree with you.

Also, you've got to be the first person I meet that claims men are more opressed by Islam than women. There's always got to be a first time for everything, I suppose.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How would they disagree with me? Please feel free to provide support for that statement, as I know a lot of religious people (from most religions) and I'm well aware of their opinions and they often reflect my own

 

And just because I'm the "first" to claim such a thing... which I didn't... I think I said on a general level they're actually consider equal... you know, things balancing out and whatnot... doesn't mean I'm necessarily wrong

[Nick_i_am]

Could these same passeages also be reasnibly open to interpritation in such a way that men could use them as an excuse to oppress women? (in other words that, again, it's not the text which is 'fundimentally' wrong, as much as the people who use it).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not in my opinion

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So any instance of this happening (because it cirtainly seems to, unforchantly) is a case of social/cultural factors using religion as an excuse, rather than the religion itself?

[Darth Launch]

So any instance of this happening (because it cirtainly seems to, unforchantly) is a case of social/cultural factors using religion as an excuse, rather than the religion itself?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeh and it's really sad... ...I assume and believe that this happens with most religions... but since I'm only fairly well versed in Islam and Buddhism I couldn't really say for sure

[213374U]

Unfortunately, that's a case of repression stemming from culture as opposed to religion... which are two different things...

No. That would imply that muslims have completely made up all of that, instead of it being a tenet of their religion. Is that what you are trying to say?

 

 

I know plenty of muslim girls here in the UK who have chosen to wear whatever they wish... whether they decide on a personal level to wear headscarves or not 

And I don't go to Church in Sundays. So what?

 

 

Why are you assuming that I'm versed in game design?   Please point out a post here in this forum that states that I am... and yes, as a matter of fact, I am versed in anicent arabic... why is that such a surprise? Is that because you assumed that I wasn't capable of such? Please clarify that for me 

Whatever. I don't even know why I bother to argue with alts. Must be some pathological thing.

 

 

Exactly, your unfortunate friend is repressed culturally and socially... not religiously... it's shame when people like to mistake them for one another

A culture strongly influenced by and whose roots stem from Islamic tradition. A shame when people can't see the relation.

 

 

And I've been to the Middle East and know people (both men and women) who either lived there or continue to... and I must say that from my own observations (not from what the media has told me) there are equal opportunities for both men and women... so the women are capable of learning what is right and wrong for themselves

You tell that to blind Afghan women.

 

 

How would they disagree with me? Please feel free to provide support for that statement, as I know a lot of religious people (from most religions) and I'm well aware of their opinions and they often reflect my own

I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence to support your stance. Your claims are the most unconventional, and seem to contradict social reality in more than a few places. Your ludicrous claims require much more proof than my "mainstream" views to be accepted.

Surely you don't expect me to change my views just because you say Islam is actually a wonderful thing and muslims are just misunderstood, right?

 

Also, I already said I was arguing from prejudice. This is one of my many shortcomings in this matter. I'll gladly trade my current ideas for more enlightened ones, but I expect them to adhere to the conventional mechanisms of critical thought.

 

 

And just because I'm the "first" to claim such a thing... which I didn't... I think I said on a general level they're actually consider equal... you know, things balancing out and whatnot... doesn't mean I'm necessarily wrong

No, it doesn't mean you are wrong, and I didn't say you are. However, history is full of people that were right, and yet, failed to present compelling evidence supporting their theories.

I hope you don't expect me to believe you as an act of faith, because I'm fresh out.

[Walsingham]

^ I agree, pretty witty of them.

 

 

Can we threaten to kill them and burn down their embassies when they do run it? Been awhile since there was a good embassy burning around here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I for one am starting to think it may be more fun than it looks.

 

Seriously though, I am glad I voiced my concerns with you chaps, because it's allowed me to stop them going gangrenous. It was a dark day, but then equally we have reactions by UK muslims to the conviction today of Abu Hamza.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4690132.stm

 

A much brighter day, showing that muslims in more advanced countries are equally more advanced. I think the demon here may not be Islam so much as ignorant rednecks.

[Nick_i_am]

The point that 213374U seems to be getting at though, is that, while the worshippers are obviously shaped by the culture they live in, which in turn may or may not be shaped by the religion, the religion itself may not be helping by its very nature.

 

I can't comment on this directly since I am just trying to summerise what I think he is saying.

 

Incidently dont many muslim states have very close ties between state and church, such that saying that someone has been 'culturally brainwashed' when the religion is such a fundimental part of the culture is almost as good as saying 'religiously brainwashed', since the main differance of the 'advanced countaries' is that they don't have the same continuity between state and church. Would this be in any way accurate, or have I gained a completely incorrect impression?

[Darth Launch]

No. That would imply that muslims have completely made up all of that, instead of it being a tenet of their religion. Is that what you are trying to say?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Made all of what up? Repressing women? I'm stating that it is not in the Islamic doctrines to repress anyone... not even women... if you choose to believe me or not then that is your prerogative...

And I don't go to Church in Sundays. So what?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But am I stating that you are repressed in any way because of it? I don't believe I was...

Whatever. I don't even know why I bother to argue with alts. Must be some pathological thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There's that "whatever" thrown at me again... and eep... we were arguing? And here I was thinking we were engaged in some sort of friendly debate ^_^

 

And I'm not an alt (who's did you think I was?)

A culture strongly influenced by and whose roots stem from Islamic tradition. A shame when people can't see the relation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeh... and it's shame that people see them as one and the same

You tell that to blind Afghan women.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Eh?

I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence to support your stance. Your claims are the most unconventional, and seem to contradict social reality in more than a few places. Your ludicrous claims require much more proof than my "mainstream" views to be accepted.

Surely you don't expect me to change my views just because you say Islam is actually a wonderful thing and muslims are just misunderstood, right?

 

Also, I already said I was arguing from prejudice. This is one of my many shortcomings in this matter. I'll gladly trade my current ideas for more enlightened ones, but I expect them to adhere to the conventional mechanisms of critical thought.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Most people are prejudice... and argue in that respect too... so you're nothing special

 

I can't exactly provide numerous conversations that have occurred over the years with people in a form that is suitable for you to pass judgement on... it is a shame, but I can only provide the general conclusions we came to as a result of them... perhaps, if you truly wanted to be enlightened you would perhaps seek out similar discussions with religious clerics and such

 

No, it doesn't mean you are wrong, and I didn't say you are. However, history is full of people that were right, and yet, failed to present compelling evidence supporting their theories.

I hope you don't expect me to believe you as an act of faith, because I'm fresh out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

An act of faith? When did I make such a claim... I am merely expressing my opinion and beliefs that I have come to make on a personal level... I'm in no way asking you to convert or revert to my way of thinking... why are you and others allowed to state their biased and prejudice opinion and I'm not? Is that because I don't necessarily agree with them?

[Cantousent]

A world without bias is a world without the possibility of sin or freedom. A world without the possiblity of sin renders religion pointless.

 

At any rate, I've been following this thread more closely than I've been participating in it. However, I'm curious, Miss Launch, what is your point of view regarding the papers printing the cartoons? I have not really known a lot of Muslims, I admit. I think, as a group, they are over-represented by extremists, but I agree with both you and Walsh that these extremists are born out of a culture rather than religion.

 

On one hand, I see Muslims worldwide acting in a way that I see virtually the members of no other mainstream religion acting. Is there religious strife and sometimes violence in other religions? Certainly. ...But Islam provides a source of violence unheard of in other religions today. Before someone cites the exceptions, no matter the instigation, and there have been many such instigations, has an insult against any other religion spurred such an outpouring of hatred? Not by individuals, but by entire communities.

 

On the other hand, I don't want to believe that Islam is violent or that the people of the Middle East are innately violent. In fact, I don't believe it. You are an eloquent defender, Miss Launch. Between you and Julian, Islam has a tempered and reasoned voice in the debate. At least here.

 

...But, like Walsh, I'm worried about Islam. I'm worried because, at the end of the day, the best way to combat the prejudice of offensive religion-baiting is to prove that it is unfounded. Extremists acting out in the ways we've seen over the past couple of weeks do not help to settle that issue. If extremists are the minority in Islam, they look to be a more sizeable minority than in other religions. We can debate that point, but it's a harder sell every day that protesters advocate or enact violence and in such numbers.

 

Islam is lucky to have both you and julian as a defender. I'm just unsure that it is worthy of you. ...But I've taken for granted that every word you've spoken is true.

 

I'll always believe that it is Denmarks right, as a sovereign nation, to restrict free speech in whatever way it deems fit. Nevertheless, your words do not fall entirely on deaf ears.

[metadigital]

A world without bias is a world without the possibility of sin or freedom.  A world without the possiblity of sin renders religion pointless.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a left-field assertion, Eldar! What's the rationale there (first sentence) ?

At any rate, I've been following this thread more closely than I've been participating in it.  However, I'm curious, Miss Launch, what is your point of view regarding the papers printing the cartoons?  I have not really known a lot of Muslims, I admit.  I think, as a group, they are over-represented by extremists, but I agree with both you and Walsh that these extremists are born out of a culture rather than religion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with Launchie.

 

I've done a small amount on research on theology in various forms and, although I'm far from an expert, I have learned more than a little about Sharia and the Islamic continuation of the Arabic disciple of continual critical thought between scholars (in particular interpretation of the Qu'ran).

 

Sharia, much like the Jewish Rabbi, is the accumulated wisdom of previous trial and error experience in the host culture, which helps to feedback into the interpretation of the scriptures by scholars.

On one hand, I see Muslims worldwide acting in a way that I see virtually the members of no other mainstream religion acting.  Is there religious strife and sometimes violence in other religions?  Certainly.  ...But Islam provides a source of violence unheard of in other religions today.  Before someone cites the exceptions, no matter the instigation, and there have been many such instigations, has an insult against any other religion spurred such an outpouring of hatred?  Not by individuals, but by entire communities.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well I think there is a gordian knot of the repression of the Arabic peoples by the colonial powers in the M.E. and their broken promises (Laurence of Arabia, King of the Arabs, etc) gives a big taint to the whole analysis. Sort of like how it's a bit difficult to analyse the commonalities of the Protestant Christian faith with Catholics in Northern Ireland. I doubt that anyone would suggest that Christianity is basically a violent repressive dogmatic misogynistic religion because of the troubles in N.I.

On the other hand, I don't want to believe that Islam is violent or that the people of the Middle East are innately violent.  In fact, I don't believe it.  You are an eloquent defender, Miss Launch.  Between you and Julian, Islam has a tempered and reasoned voice in the debate.  At least here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Further to the points asserted by Launchie, I can agree that the provision for women in Islam actually stacks up pretty well against the fundamental Christian tenets embedded in the male-dominated WASP cultures stradling the Atlantic, especially with regard to wealth (proxy for power) i.e. the right to work and divorce.

 

In Islam, the woman is catered for with marriage containing contractually binding divorce pre-nuptual agreement (what was hers before the marriage is still hers) in addition to half of what the man has.

 

The oft-cited polygamy of Mohammud neglects to put it in context, too. His additional wives were not concubines, they were widows / pecuniarily-challenged / vulnerable / etc women.

 

The veil that is worn by choice in the progressive Islamic cultures, like Turkey or Britain, by willing women who wish to make a preventative effort to prevent men from having the salacious thoughts in the first place. (My partner, for one, is ALWAYS complaining about men AND WOMEN looking at her. Islamic women who share her displeasure at this experience may take the burka.) Out of sight out of mind. So don't just assume it is a symbol of patriarchal misogynistic oppression, it is just as easily used to enhance the freedom of women. It is a tool, like a pistol. (Pistols aren't evil: they don't kill people, people do.)

... But, like Walsh, I'm worried about Islam.  I'm worried because, at the end of the day, the best way to combat the prejudice of offensive religion-baiting is to prove that it is unfounded.  Extremists acting out in the ways we've seen over the past couple of weeks do not help to settle that issue.  If extremists are the minority in Islam, they look to be a more sizeable minority than in other religions.  We can debate that point, but it's a harder sell every day that protesters advocate or enact violence and in such numbers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Look at the fundamental lunatics in the US who kill doctors who have families, merely because their moral compass places this as a lesser evil than the many foetuses that he helped to abort. In particular I recall the guy who got the death penalty was convinced, as were all his like minded people, that he was on his way to sit on the right hand side of God. (Let's not get me started on the bigoted use of "left" and "right" that us left-handed people have had to suffer since the dawn of time! )

Islam is lucky to have both you and julian as a defender.  I'm just unsure that it is worthy of you.  ...But I've taken for granted that every word you've spoken is true.

 

I'll always believe that it is Denmarks right, as a sovereign nation, to restrict free speech in whatever way it deems fit.  Nevertheless, your words do not fall entirely on deaf ears.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As has been said before ad nauseam: the true enemy here is FUNDAMENTALISM.

[213374U]

The point that 213374U seems to be getting at though, is that, while the worshippers are obviously shaped by the culture they live in, which in turn may or may not be shaped by the religion, the religion itself may not be helping by its very nature.

 

I can't comment on this directly since I am just trying to summerise what I think he is saying.

 

Incidently dont many muslim states have very close ties between state and church, such that saying that someone has been 'culturally brainwashed' when the religion is such a fundimental part of the culture is almost as good as saying 'religiously brainwashed', since the main differance of the 'advanced countaries' is that they don't have the same continuity between state and church. Would this be in any way accurate, or have I gained a completely incorrect impression?

 

 

I'm stating that it is not in the Islamic doctrines to repress anyone... not even women...

HA!

 

Once again, you fail to produce any kind of support for your claims. Weak as it may be, even Jack's evidence is more solid than yours.

 

 

But am I stating that you are repressed in any way because of it? I don't believe I was...

Is it so difficult to follow the flow of conversation? You said you know lots of women in the UK that are free to choose whether or not to wear a headscarf. That doesn't mean their religion doesn't require them to do so, just like my religion (or the religion I was baptised into) requires me to go to church on sundays. The difference is that over here, our culture evolved to leave behind the trappings of religion, while theirs didn't. Our rulers no longer rule By The Grace Of God, and all that stuff.

 

 

and eep... we were arguing? And here I was thinking we were engaged in some sort of friendly debate ^_^

From Dictionary.com; "argue": To put forth reasons for or against; debate.

 

 

Yeh... and it's shame that people see them as one and the same

It's not a black or white issue. It's not either religion or culture. In this instance, religion is effectively embedded into their culture, to the extent that women actually accept the inequalities, as they are pressured and indoctrinated to do so as soon as they are able to understand. "Islamic state" is not a random expression.

 

 

I can't exactly provide numerous conversations that have occurred over the years with people in a form that is suitable for you to pass judgement on... it is a shame, but I can only provide the general conclusions we came to as a result of them... perhaps, if you truly wanted to be enlightened you would perhaps seek out similar discussions with religious clerics and such 

Of course, you may claim that things are actually not as they seem, that broadly accepted perspectives are fabrications, and that your personal contact with and impressions gained from muslims here and in the ME actually prove it. But for all we know, you could have had contact only with atypical individuals. "I saw a pig fly" is just not good enough to revise current laws of physics to accomodate the possibility that pigs may actually fly.

 

And yes, I'd actually like to broaden my views on this matter, but unfortunately I don't have the time to go on an investigative journey of Islam right now. I have a muslim friend that pretty much confirms what you say. But he was born here, not in the ME, and therefore he's not part of that culture, so he's not representative or relevant to the discussion. I suspect the examples you are using are very similar.

 

 

I am merely expressing my opinion and beliefs that I have come to make on a personal level... I'm in no way asking you to convert or revert to my way of thinking... why are you and others allowed to state their biased and prejudice opinion and I'm not? Is that because I don't necessarily agree with them?

Who said you aren't allowed to express your opinion? Don't assume that just because I'm attacking your views I'd like you to shut up.

You addressed me to begin with, and made a blind assumption that does not mach reality, thus starting a debate with me.

 

Also, that's how debates work, you see. It's not like you can state your opinion and then be on your merry way. Well, you can do that, but if you can't or don't care to defend your claims (especially ones so controversial such as these) don't expect anyone to take you seriously. And if you don't care whether or not you are taken seriously, why express your opinion to begin with?

[Surreptishus]

...But, like Walsh, I'm worried about Islam.  I'm worried because, at the end of the day, the best way to combat the prejudice of offensive religion-baiting is to prove that it is unfounded.  Extremists acting out in the ways we've seen over the past couple of weeks do not help to settle that issue.  If extremists are the minority in Islam, they look to be a more sizeable minority than in other religions.  We can debate that point, but it's a harder sell every day that protesters advocate or enact violence and in such numbers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Is that not a futile exercise? I think those who offensively bait religion (in this case Islam) would be predisposed to that behaviour in order to fulfill their agenda. For example, there are Hindus and Sikhs who are quick to disparage Muslims because of oppression under the Moghuls. There are Jews that are quick to disparage Muslims due to what is happening today in the Middle East. There are women

Edited February 7, 2006 by Surreptishus

[Cantousent]

Islam is lucky here. In meta, it has another eloquent defender who brings sound arguments to the table.

 

I won't say I agree with your post so much as I found it informative. I take you at your word and it is reassuring.

 

However, I must make two points. They are not so much in disagreement with your statements as disagreement with the implication. Yes, Christianity has extremist and some have committed murder for the sake of their beliefs. However, in our age, similar acts or statements that have targeted Christianity have not resulted in multi-national calls for violence by the Christian community. For example, I thought "Piss Christ" was in poor taste and I certainly wasn't happy that the government funded the project through the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities. However, I don't recall a widespread movement demanding violence by Christians in this country, let alone around the world.

 

I don't make this argument because it's important to defend Christianity. Whatever you think of Christianity, you're going to be hard put to put it in the same category of extremist violence as Islam. We can argue the reasons, but there are more Christians clamoring for less violence. That means that there must be a greater minority (if not majority) of Muslims who advocate or resort to violence.

 

Sure, we can argue the reasons for it, but citing counter examples of doctors killed or taken hostage in the US just doesn't work.

 

We're better off trying to see why extremist are such a powerful force in Islam in comparison to other religions than trying to say that all have an equal percentage (if not number) of extremists calling for violence as does Islam.

 

Making this a politically correct issue dosn't help at all. Saying, "well, Islam has extremists but so does everyone else" doesn't change the fact that priests and ministers in the United States don't call for this sort of activity. Sure, you can cite the isolated exceptions, but violence as a response looks increasingly like an acceptable choice to a large number of Muslims. Why is that? If we cannot accept that terrorism is far more the choice of Islam than Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, or Buddhism, then we have hit an impasse. Don't tell me that there are examples of Buddhist violence and so the violence is somehow comparable to the spontaneous uprisings of Muslims in countries throughout the region and beyond. Hell, my experience and understanding is that Buddhism is less violent than Christianity, but neither approach what we see today in Islam. Is it simply unreasonable to express such observations?

 

Finally, Fundamentalism is not the cause of this. It is extremism. Fundamentalism does not equate to a call for violence. When someone takes a fundamental belief and uses it as a springboard to advocate violence, they are an extremist.