Rant on Islam comments

[Terrie]

No. but I thought it was interesting. The conversation does not always have to be on edge, does it?

I'm just baffled why you posted it in response to my comment. If it has nothing to do with it, don't link the two together. Otherwise, you look like you're dodging the question.

[latraviata]

I'm just baffled why you posted it in response to my comment. If it has nothing to do with it, don't link the two together. Otherwise, you look like you're dodging the question.

The discussion wasn't limited to what you brought up in your latest post. I read and posted it. In compliance with what you said, that's exactly why I would not vote for an extreme right party, they are too loud and not come up with a solution. Having a firm stance on Islam in a debate is not the same as voting or daily recalcitrant behaviour.

[FundieFarmer]

I don't mean to be a Hateful Bitch [TM], but would everyone mind trying to snip a bit more? This conversation is nearly impossible to follow on Tapa.

Thank you!! :worship:

[latraviata]

I don't mean to be a Hateful Bitch [TM], but would everyone mind trying to snip a bit more? This conversation is nearly impossible to follow on Tapa.

Thank you!! :worship:

I don't know how to do that.

[nausicaa]

The problem with the time article and multiple other sources trying to oppress Ayaan's voice is that she is someone who came from within. She is talking about really important things that do need reform. Misogyny and oppression are commonplace for many Muslim women. At the very least in "Muslim majority nations" if that phrase suits you better. She is risking her life by doing so and needs constant security. She isn't a stranger to death threats so trying to silence her or disregard her is bowing down to radicals who want her to shut up.

.

Slightly off topic, but I notice you refer to Hirsi Ali as "Ayaan." It is odd because you haven't referred to Sam Harris as "Sam" or Richard Dawkins as "Rich." I notice people often do this with prominent women but not men.

[OkToBeTakei]

The problem with the time article and multiple other sources trying to oppress Ayaan's voice is that she is someone who came from within. She is talking about really important things that do need reform. Misogyny and oppression are commonplace for many Muslim women. At the very least in "Muslim majority nations" if that phrase suits you better. She is risking her life by doing so and needs constant security. She isn't a stranger to death threats so trying to silence her or disregard her is bowing down to radicals who want her to shut up.

Also, you seemed to agree with her article and accused me of not reading it...because she "demonstrated reform is actually happening."

When I called you out on the fact that I have actually read it and suggested you check her (not him) out, you come back with an opinion piece that is attacking HER opinion. Attacking the very thing she is advocating, and that is reform and speaking out and opinions. The author does this by having an opinion.

I really am flummoxed by either your reading comprehension or lack of actually reading the articles you are posting.

The link you posted WAS an opinion piece. It err said it in the title. The article I posted merely expanded on that opinion. They were both interesting. Just because you WANT one opinion to be more 'right' unfortunately does not make it so.

[OkToBeTakei]

I don't mean to be a Hateful Bitch [TM], but would everyone mind trying to snip a bit more? This conversation is nearly impossible to follow on Tapa.

Thank you!! :worship:

Sorry! I noticed it on my phone. Not sure how to address it. Because certain posters tend to ignore questions I carried on the quotes in the hope they would.

[latraviata]

Slightly off topic, but I notice you refer to Hirsi Ali as "Ayaan." It is odd because you haven't referred to Sam Harris as "Sam" or Richard Dawkins as "Rich." I notice people often do this with prominent women but not men.

In the Netherlands we talk about Ayaan, the people who like her that is. Some people talk about Elvis....

[PregnantPornStar]

In the Netherlands we talk about Ayaan, the people who like her that is. Some people talk about Elvis....

Yeah, that and we all probably know who I am referring to when we say Ayaan. Sam and Richard would be a bit more questionable? I refer to Hilary Clinton as "Clinton" and Sarah Palin as "Palin". Yet I call Tom Brady "Tom" :) because I want to be on a first name basis with him. [emoji12] maybe I do it with people I really like? Who knows. Sorry if it offended you.

[browncoatslytherin]

Agreed. I have never, and will never, say that Muslim extremists aren't dangerous. However, by dumping all Muslims into one group of condemnation and acting like Muslim extremists are "uniquely" dangerous (I was at the Atlanta Olympics. My family cut things short after the bombing), we're not making people safer. We're giving non-Muslim extremists a pass and we're putting non-extremist Muslims at risk of being victims of hate crimes. I've seen that much too often, and that's one reason I find the broad strokes of people who characterize the issues of extremism as issues of Islam to be such a big issue.

and, unfortunately, even non-muslims are at risk. in the states, there have been quite a few attacks on sikhs by people who thought they were muslim (because turban + beard = muslim, apparently :roll: ). so, this is yet another reason why it is so important to separate and differentiate between extremists in islam (and any religion, really) and those who have nothing to do with the actions of the extremists, because innocent people who are not even muslim (but look "close enough") are subject to hate crimes against muslims.

[nausicaa]

Yeah, that and we all probably know who I am referring to when we say Ayaan. Sam and Richard would be a bit more questionable? I refer to Hilary Clinton as "Clinton" and Sarah Palin as "Palin". Yet I call Tom Brady "Tom" :) because I want to be on a first name basis with him. [emoji12] maybe I do it with people I really like? Who knows. Sorry if it offended you.

Didn't offend me (you're talking to the woman who managed to get through the 45 minute David Duke video yesterday), just something that's interesting to me. I just remember grading papers once and noticed several students would refer to Emily Dickinson as "Emily" but never Yeats as "William" or Thoreau as "Henry."

As to the Elvis comparison, I haven't heard of Ayaan being someone who really goes by one name, like Beyonce or Cher. Typically that's reserved for pop figures. I'm not a Hirsi Ali expert by any means, so maybe it's a thing I've missed.

[PregnantPornStar]

I would really like to know if you are as disturbed about the high number of American Christians who believe in "voting the Bible" and that biblical law should trump the will of the people? Why do you find fundamental Christians less scary? I sure as hell don't. I know you are tired of this, but I'm tired of people making sweeping generalizations about any religion. I got called out a great many times for doing that about Christianity, so it isn't just Islam that people will get called out on for doing this to.

Of course I am disturbed by Americans who want to "vote the bible". However, one thing to remember is there are an estimated 285,480,000 evangelicals in the entire world, or 90-100 million evangelicals in the U.S. Much like making generalizations about those that are Muslim, evangelicals even vary in their beliefs.

It should also be noted that Christians are seeing decrease, while Islam is growing. These studies show how that is happening in the U.S. Many U.S. Muslims are refugees, but it should be noted that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world. Being that Christianity is on the decline, there is evidence that more people are moving away from it and therefor I don't see "biblical law" as being a huge threat. If some crazy fundie came into power and started calling for floggings and public executions, that would be horrible. However, the only Christian Theocracy is Vatican City. The legal system is rooted in canon law, but The Pope has the final say, and I am pretty sure he isn't calling for women to be stoned. The same cannot be said for Islamic States.

http://www.pewforum.org/2008/06/01/chap ... practices/

Relatively few adults (14%) cite their religious beliefs as the main influence on their political thinking – about the same number as cite their education as being most important (13%). Far more cite their personal experience (34%) as being most important in shaping their political views. An additional 19% identify what they see or read in the media as the most important influence in shaping their political views.

But despite Americans’ general reliance on practical experience in shaping their political thinking, the Landscape Survey confirms that there are strong links between Americans’ views on political issues and their religious affiliation, beliefs and practices. In fact, religion may be playing a more powerful, albeit indirect, role in shaping people’s thinking than most Americans recognize.

I can clearly see Christianity influences political thinking, however, it seems to be in a more indirect way.

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/amer ... landscape/

These lump Muslims in one group, but does separate evangelicals. There is reason for this and it is a large part of why I making "sweeping statements". I am also oversimplifying and was also not separating Christians. It is in no way to be bigoted or to state I am discriminating against individuals. Individuals who are fundie/extremists. Yes. Otherwise, I do not think I am capable of being anything but kind and "accepting" of the average person. Regardless of their faith. I don't see a woman in a hijab and assume she is being beat by her husband who is standing with her. In fact, I am probably quicker to assume a family in frumpers is blanket training and fucking their kids education up. I have also brought up those who speak out and are seeking reform. I am coming at this from a "hard" atheist POV. I realize not everyone feels this way, and certainly no in their own faith, but I am horrified by many teachings of religions, especially major world religions. While I think it would be lovely if the world could be willfully and happily religious free, I know that is unrealistic and that I am not the only person in the world. Still, when I see extremism, I think it is absolutely crucial that people speak out, especially those from within. People can do this within Christianity. In America, it isn't rare to hear of liberal Christians who support marriage equality, women's choices and/or equality. That happens much less within Islam.

You have stated multiple times on this thread that 50% of Muslims believe in Sharia law and used this as an example of why Islam is more scary, but the study showed:

the survey reveals divergent opinions about the precise application of Islamic law.

and

In most regions, fewer favor other specific aspects of sharia, such as cutting off the hands of thieves and executing people who convert from Islam to another faith.

and

Overall, Muslims who pray several times a day are more likely to believe that sharia is the revealed word of God than are those who pray less frequently

http://www.pewforum.org/2008/06/01/chap ... practices/

The survey finds that most Muslims believe sharia is the revealed word of God rather than a body of law developed by men based on the word of God. Muslims also tend to believe sharia has only one, true understanding, but this opinion is far from universal; in some countries, substantial minorities of Muslims believe sharia should be open to multiple interpretations. Religious commitment is closely linked to views about sharia: Muslims who pray several times a day are more likely to say sharia is the revealed word of God, to say that it has only one interpretation and to support the implementation of Islamic law in their country.

Although many Muslims around the world say sharia should be the law of the land in their country, the survey reveals divergent opinions about the precise application of Islamic law.14 Generally, supporters of sharia are most comfortable with its application in cases of family or property disputes. In most regions, fewer favor other specific aspects of sharia, such as cutting off the hands of thieves and executing people who convert from Islam to another faith.

And

In 10 of 20 countries where there are adequate samples for analysis, at least half of Muslims who favor making sharia the law of the land also favor stoning unfaithful spouses.18

This is referring to stoning. [emoji53]

So, from where I'm sitting being raised in and around Christian fundamentalist, there isn't a huge difference here because it isn't like all 50% are in favor of the most extreme version of Sharia law. You seem to want to paint Islam as being less evolved, but that just isn't true. If Christian fundamentalist were able to take over America today it would be scary as fuck. If they could legally get away with stoning people and forcing women to cover up, they would. It is one thing to comment about particular problems in a religion, it is another thing to act like everyone in that religion shares the most extreme beliefs, which you have done in this thread. Perhaps not on purpose, but you have. You have also come across as very dismissive about the idea that the fundamentalist in other religions also cause a great deal of harm.

I will simply leave this with Bill Maher "talking points" but Christians are not killing over cartoons and could a show "The Book of Islam" been done instead of "The Book of Mormon"?

I am not saying there are not tons of issues within Christianity. Or Judaism. And so on.

One example that always gets under my skin...possibly this seems trivial in comparison to stoning women, I would agree, but I would also agree that it is harmful.

http://www.beliefnet.com/Love-Family/Re ... s.aspx?p=1

If you can show me studies that show a large number of Christian Fundamentalist who would condone stoning a woman, I would be shocked. I will admit defeat and bow down.

This is a very interesting study.

Results from MANOS and the General Social Surveys reveal that the general American population holds nearly identical levels of fundamentalist beliefs as Muslims, if not slightly more. Just over 57 percent of the general American population believes that “right and wrong in U.S. law should be based on God’s laws,â€

The rest of this paragraph says

compared to 49.3 percent of U.S.-born Muslims and 45.6 of foreign-born Muslims. About a third of each group believes that society should not be the one to determine right and wrong in U.S. law. Such numbers reveal that the general American population is more fundamentalist than the average European, and that Muslim Americans are lessfundamentalist than European Muslims, according to the Koopmans study.

Limiting the sample to those who either identify as Christian or Muslim, figure 2 displays the percentages of Americans who believe that the Bible/Koran should be taken literally, word for word. Making up the largest percentage of Christians in Pew’s U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, 59 percent of evangelical protestants agree that the Bible should be taken literally.

And the rest of this paragraph

This compares to 22 percent of mainline protestants, 62 percent of black protestants and 23 percent of Catholics. Sixty-seven percent of foreign-born Muslims express literalist views towards the Koran, as do a similar number of African American Muslims. Half of U.S.-born Muslims (who do not identify as black) believe the Koran should be taken literally.

the more fundamentalist, general American population is significantly more likely to believe that Islam encourages violence, compared to native Europeans. Similarly, European Muslims are 15 percent more likely to believe that the West is out to destroy Islam compared to American Muslims.

Altogether, these findings suggest that levels of religious fundamentalism can be found equally among Muslim and Christian adherents in the United States

And lastly, the eliminated portion of this paragraph.

Issues of out-group fears may be of less a concern however in the U.S. case due to the stronger socioeconomic position of American Muslims and more successful integration.

.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2013/12/16/no-difference-in-religious-fundamentalism-between-american-muslims-and-christians/

So, a lot can be taken from this, but why are Muslims better assimilated in America than in Europe?

This high-skilled migration flow to the U.S. stands in contrast to the low-skilled labor immigration that Western Europe attracted following World War II to help rebuilding efforts. More immigrants were later admitted into European countries to meet rapid economic growth, allow family reunification and provide asylum. Muslims in Western Europe have had significant issues with poverty and integration, making up around 20 percent of the low-income population, compared to 2 percent among U.S. Muslims.

Possibly this ^

[latraviata]

[Didn't offend me (you're talking to the woman who managed to get through the 45 minute David Duke video yesterday), just something that's interesting to me. I just remember grading papers once and noticed several students would refer to Emily Dickinson as "Emily" but never Yeats as "William" or Thoreau as "Henry."

As to the Elvis comparison, I haven't heard of Ayaan being someone who really goes by one name, like Beyonce or Cher. Typically that's reserved for pop figures. I'm not a Hirsi Ali expert by any means, so maybe it's a thing I've missed.*]

What are you talking about?

I never heard of that video until it was posted here on the thread. I posted an article from his blog and I really regret that. After the video I realised that posting the article wasn't a very good idea after all.

I didn't even bother to watch it, when it became clear what it is all about.

[nausicaa]

[Didn't offend me (you're talking to the woman who managed to get through the 45 minute David Duke video yesterday), just something that's interesting to me. I just remember grading papers once and noticed several students would refer to Emily Dickinson as "Emily" but never Yeats as "William" or Thoreau as "Henry."

As to the Elvis comparison, I haven't heard of Ayaan being someone who really goes by one name, like Beyonce or Cher. Typically that's reserved for pop figures. I'm not a Hirsi Ali expert by any means, so maybe it's a thing I've missed.*]

What are you talking about?

I never heard of that video until it was posted here on the thread. I posted an article from his blog and I really regret that. After the video I realised that posting the article wasn't a very good idea after all.

I didn't even bother to watch it, when it became clear what it is all about.

"The woman" is referring to myself. While I was working yesterday, I listened to the David Duke/Alfred Vierling interview. It was pretty terrible.

I'm assuming this is a language barrier issue? Otherwise, I'm really confused. :?

[FakePigtails]

[Didn't offend me (you're talking to the woman who managed to get through the 45 minute David Duke video yesterday), just something that's interesting to me. I just remember grading papers once and noticed several students would refer to Emily Dickinson as "Emily" but never Yeats as "William" or Thoreau as "Henry."

As to the Elvis comparison, I haven't heard of Ayaan being someone who really goes by one name, like Beyonce or Cher. Typically that's reserved for pop figures. I'm not a Hirsi Ali expert by any means, so maybe it's a thing I've missed.*]

What are you talking about?

I never heard of that video until it was posted here on the thread. I posted an article from his blog and I really regret that. After the video I realised that posting the article wasn't a very good idea after all.

I didn't even bother to watch it, when it became clear what it is all about.

It really bothers me that the anti-Semitism posted there and the video didn't upset you enough - it was only after finding out the man was the one doing the interview in the video that you began changing your mind on the site's worth. You also say you apologized for it but I only saw hand-wringing and references to senility. Perhaps it's a cultural issue, but here in the US stating regret is not the same as an apology to those who found the site's content - blatant hate speech - disturbing.

[formergothardite]

So you aren't going to lump all Christians who believe in biblical laws in with the extremist who do things like torture people and make them dig their own graves(here in American. Got a light sentence too. One year for torturing a child for Jesus!) because they influence laws indirectly and are finally shrinking in numbers, but you are going to lump all Muslims who believe in Sharia law in with the extremist?

There was a political candidate who advocating making it legal to stone gay people because that was in the Bible. There were actually two other people who got less votes than he did. So here in America you can openly say you want to stone gay people and not be the candidate that gets the least votes. :shock: Can you imagine the outrage if it had been a Muslim candidate? A lawyer in California tried to introduce a bill to allow gay people to be murdered because of the Bible and yeah, from my internet stalking of fundies I grew up with I found that he does have supporters. But you are going to have a hell of a hard time prying that information out of them for any survey because they are typically paranoid and don't trust surveys or polls. I think it would be hard to get a really good idea of what fundamental Christians believe because many are so secretive about it.

I have found that the fundamentalist in my area are getting more extreme than they used to be. People know not to say things like "let's stone gay people", so IMO it is hard to get a poll showing that sort of thing. People believe these things, but only admit it around people they view as safe. Before I blocked most of the fundies I know from my FB page there were people writing shocking things about what they wanted to do to gay people because the Bible says they are an abomination. And what they wanted to do to Muslim people was even worse. They loved when they read things that put all Muslims in with extremists because it just gave them more fuel for their hatred. That is why I think it is important to not making sweeping generalizations and attempt and clarifying when speaking about things like religious fundamentalist. The politician here in NC who said he would throw a Muslim person out before treating him equally to a Christian because he has no use for "those people" got lots of support and people saying things like "Well he is just saying what we are all thinking."

ETA: Insisting on generalizing and lumping all Muslims with the extremist just fuels hate and hurts people, so I can't really think of any excuse for doing that. Another example of fundamental Christian hatred that most likely won't show up on a poll or survey comes from my mother's FB page. She has deleted her FB page because this upset her so much, but one of her fundie friends posted a picture of the little Syrian boy who drowned and said "good riddance to bad rubbish. One less Muslim to worry about." It got 117 likes and every single one of those likes came from Christians.

[latraviata]

It really bothers me that the anti-Semitism posted there and the video didn't upset you enough - it was only after finding out the man was the one doing the interview in the video that you began changing your mind on the site's worth. You also say you apologized for it but I only saw hand-wringing and references to senility. Perhaps it's a cultural issue, but here in the US stating regret is not the same as an apology to those who found the site's content - blatant hate speech - disturbing.

After I heard about the content of the video, I lost interest, because it sounded appalling. What do you want? Blood? Whatever you do in the USA is fine by me, how many times are you going to grill me over this and what do you hope to achieve? That I commit suicide? If you question my sincerity, then there isn't much I can do.

[FakePigtails]

After I heard about the content of the video, I lost interest, because it sounded appalling. What do you want? Blood? Whatever you do in the USA is fine by me, how many times are you going to grill me over this and what do you hope to achieve? That I commit suicide? If you question my sincerity, then there isn't much I can do.

I want you to recognize that the content revealed even before you found out the author was in that video was enough to consider the website to be an unreliable, vile and biased hate site and apologize for pointing people on FJ to a hate site.

That's it. Only words.

[PregnantPornStar]

So you aren't going to lump all Christians who believe in biblical laws in with the extremist who do things like torture people and make them dig their own graves(here in American. Got a light sentence too. One year for torturing a child for Jesus!) because they influence laws indirectly and are finally shrinking in numbers, but you are going to lump all Muslims who believe in Sharia law in with the extremist?

There was a political candidate who advocating making it legal to stone gay people because that was in the Bible. There were actually two other people who got less votes than he did. So here in America you can openly say you want to stone gay people and not be the candidate that gets the least votes. :shock: Can you imagine the outrage if it had been a Muslim candidate? A lawyer in California tried to introduce a bill to allow gay people to be murdered because of the Bible and yeah, from my internet stalking of fundies I grew up with I found that he does have supporters. But you are going to have a hell of a hard time prying that information out of them for any survey because they are typically paranoid and don't trust surveys or polls. I think it would be hard to get a really good idea of what fundamental Christians believe because many are so secretive about it.

I have found that the fundamentalist in my area are getting more extreme than they used to be. People know not to say things like "let's stone gay people", so IMO it is hard to get a poll showing that sort of thing. People believe these things, but only admit it around people they view as safe. Before I blocked most of the fundies I know from my FB page there were people writing shocking things about what they wanted to do to gay people because the Bible says they are an abomination. And what they wanted to do to Muslim people was even worse. They loved when they read things that put all Muslims in with extremists because it just gave them more fuel for their hatred. That is why I think it is important to not making sweeping generalizations and attempt and clarifying when speaking about things like religious fundamentalist. The politician here in NC who said he would throw a Muslim person out before treating him equally to a Christian because he has no use for "those people" got lots of support and people saying things like "Well he is just saying what we are all thinking."

ETA: Insisting on generalizing and lumping all Muslims with the extremist just fuels hate and hurts people, so I can't really think of any excuse for doing that. Another example of fundamental Christian hatred that most likely won't show up on a poll or survey comes from my mother's FB page. She has deleted her FB page because this upset her so much, but one of her fundie friends posted a picture of the little Syrian boy who drowned and said "good riddance to bad rubbish. One less Muslim to worry about." It got 117 likes and every single one of those likes came from Christians.

Umm, no. Pew lumped Muslims together. Did you actually look at the study that your article linked to?

However, you do seem to have things figured out better than any form of research.

[formergothardite]

No I don't. I don't think that most Christians, even fundamental Christians are that extreme, but I think the numbers are probably higher than revealed on polls and surveys just because the people I know who hold these beliefs aren't going to be honest when it comes to a survey.

Perhaps we are talking over each other here. But do you think that lumping all Muslims together and including them with the extremist fuels hatred towards Muslims? And like it was pointed out earlier in this thread, it isn't even just Muslims who are hurt by this. People who start believing all Muslims are extremist have gone after non-Muslims who just happened to look Muslim.

You have said things like this:

Better said, Sharia Law doesn't cherry pick. I wish it would, because honestly, while it may have negative connotations to the believers, I am not sure that we would even be having this conversation if it did. "Oh, my wife disobeyed me and the Qua'an and hadith say I should hit her? That is absurd. My wife doesn't need to obey me and hitting her is wrong. That is outdated and I am going to ditch that" is better than the husband actually following through. No?

Mmking it seem like you believe all Muslims who say they follow Sharia law would hit their wives, when that is simply not true. The Muslims I know would never do this and yet they say they follow Sharia law, except they cherry pick, something you claim here doesn't happen. And you aren't the only one, lots of people want to lump them in with extremist even though they are less extreme in their beliefs than most Christians in this area and they get horrible stuff said to them.

ETA: You also said it was alarming that 50% of Muslims believe in Sharia law which makes it seem like you believe all of them are following the most extreme version of it, when that also isn't true. There is diversity in how it is followed. So not all 50% are chopping off hands and beating their wives. Is it helpful to lump all of them in with the extremist?

[Fascinated]

I've been tempted to comment on this for a couple of days but haven't because it is both obvious and an oversimplification. But I think many people feel this way about Islam because there hasn't really been a united stand by the Muslim community as a whole against the atrocities committed on 9/11, the videotaped beheadings by Isis, the attacks on Charlie Hebdo and the Australian cafe, etc. I think many people associate these barbaric acts with Islam, even though they were committed by extremists.

The lack of PUBLIC outrage by mainstream Muslims perpetuates the notion that they all condone these acts. And, for those who realize that this is simply is not the case, the absence of such an outcry proves that individual, peaceful Muslims are too afraid of retribution to speak out, which, again, reinforces the negative stereotypes. Add to this the idea that Muslims are intent on creating a global Islamic society and you've got a perfect storm. Fear. And ignorance. But mostly fear. Which breeds hatred.

[PregnantPornStar]

No I don't. I don't think that most Christians, even fundamental Christians are that extreme, but I think the numbers are probably higher than revealed on polls and surveys just because the people I know who hold these beliefs aren't going to be honest when it comes to a survey.

Perhaps we are talking over each other here. But do you think that lumping all Muslims together and including them with the extremist fuels hatred towards Muslims? And like it was pointed out earlier in this thread, it isn't even just Muslims who are hurt by this. People who start believing all Muslims are extremist have gone after non-Muslims who just happened to look Muslim.

You have said things like this:

Mmking it seem like you believe all Muslims who say they follow Sharia law would hit their wives, when that is simply not true. The Muslims I know would never do this and yet they say they follow Sharia law, except they cherry pick, something you claim here doesn't happen. And you aren't the only one, lots of people want to lump them in with extremist even though they are less extreme in their beliefs than most Christians in this area and they get horrible stuff said to them.

ETA: You also said it was alarming that 50% of Muslims believe in Sharia law which makes it seem like you believe all of them are following the most extreme version of it, when that also isn't true. There is diversity in how it is followed. So not all 50% are chopping off hands and beating their wives. Is it helpful to lump all of them in with the extremist?

Well, quite frankly, I think any version of Sharia is a bit, um, disturbing. (I mean, I think it is alarming when friends give up wine for lent. Maybe I am too harsh)

I didn't do the study. I would be absolutely fascinated to see a study breaking down different sects and extremists. The pew research doesn't really do that. I think that would be incredibly helpful to all of us. I understand WHY the U.S. Studies refer to Muslims as "Muslims" due to population, some being refugees and so on. Complicated.

I did find it interesting that "Muslims" had the largest percentage of young people, while I am seeing more and more young people become secular now. I am sure refugee status has a lot to do with it....

[PregnantPornStar]

I've been tempted to comment on this for a couple of days but haven't because it is both obvious and an oversimplification. But I think many people feel this way about Islam because there hasn't really been a united stand by the Muslim community as a whole against the atrocities committed on 9/11, the videotaped beheadings by Isis, the attacks on Charlie Hebdo and the Australian cafe, etc. I think many people associate these barbaric acts with Islam, even though they were committed by extremists.

The lack of PUBLIC outrage by mainstream Muslims perpetuates the notion that they all condone these acts. And, for those who realize that this is simply is not the case, the absence of such an outcry proves that individual, peaceful Muslims are too afraid of retribution to speak out, which, again, reinforces the negative stereotypes. Add to this the idea that Muslims are intent on creating a global Islamic society and you've got a perfect storm. Fear. And ignorance. But mostly fear. Which breeds hatred.

I don't know if "hatred" is directed at all Muslims. Certainly ISIS.

But you are correct. I think the problem is that a lot of Muslim fear speaking out. I realize that and I certainly hope others do. Things like having a "Million Muslim March" on 9/11 probably are not helpful (I realize that the event wasn't exactly loved by anyone, including Muslims, but still, things like that are ignorant and hurtful.

[PregnantPornStar]

No I don't. I don't think that most Christians, even fundamental Christians are that extreme, but I think the numbers are probably higher than revealed on polls and surveys just because the people I know who hold these beliefs aren't going to be honest when it comes to a survey.

Perhaps we are talking over each other here. But do you think that lumping all Muslims together and including them with the extremist fuels hatred towards Muslims? And like it was pointed out earlier in this thread, it isn't even just Muslims who are hurt by this. People who start believing all Muslims are extremist have gone after non-Muslims who just happened to look Muslim.

You have said things like this:

Mmking it seem like you believe all Muslims who say they follow Sharia law would hit their wives, when that is simply not true. The Muslims I know would never do this and yet they say they follow Sharia law, except they cherry pick, something you claim here doesn't happen. And you aren't the only one, lots of people want to lump them in with extremist even though they are less extreme in their beliefs than most Christians in this area and they get horrible stuff said to them.

ETA: You also said it was alarming that 50% of Muslims believe in Sharia law which makes it seem like you believe all of them are following the most extreme version of it, when that also isn't true. There is diversity in how it is followed. So not all 50% are chopping off hands and beating their wives. Is it helpful to lump all of them in with the extremist?

Bolded point. Hurting people, physically or verbally, isn't okay. It simply isn't. There absolutely are bigots out there who are ignorant simply awful. Some of these people aren't even religious. Thinking someone is Muslim and hurting said person is unacceptable.

A story. A friend of mine walked her kids too and from school everyday. There was a Muslim boy who walked and was teased and bullied.

Even kids are assholes. Poor kid. He is a KID. Shit like that makes me feel absolute rage. I would be horrified and stunned if any of my kids behaved in such a way. I would not know wtf to do.

But I expect my kids to treat everyone well. Bullying is never okay. Ever.

I also felt rage when my son, who always had long hair, came home from Kindergarten this year asking to have his haircut. Some kid was calling him "tutu" which, first, is a weak name, but second, I was heartbroken that he felt he needed to do something to impress this kid. He obviously didn't like being treated poorly.

My point is, treating anyone poorly is obviously problematic. What if the poor boy turns to radical Islam as his way to "deal" with being bullied? Or if he kills himself? Or if he just cries everyday. :(

[browncoatslytherin]

I don't know if "hatred" is directed at all Muslims. Certainly ISIS.

But you are correct. I think the problem is that a lot of Muslim fear speaking out. I realize that and I certainly hope others do. Things like having a "Million Muslim March" on 9/11 probably are not helpful (I realize that the event wasn't exactly loved by anyone, including Muslims, but still, things like that are ignorant and hurtful.

when sikhs are being beaten and even killed because people think they're muslims, i would personally classify that as "hatred", along with "ignorance" as sikhism has nothing to do with islam, the men just happen to wear turbans and have beards and the women cover their hair.

i wish there was a way that muslims could have a louder voice to help differentiate them from the extremists, but i think one of the biggest hindrances (at least in america) is people don't really know much about islam and how non-extremist muslims practice it, and therefore the difference between extremists and non-extremists. i think if more people could become more educated on things like that (which is why i really appreciate this thread, as i honestly don't know a whole lot about islam) they would be more open to listening to muslims and how they feel about the extremists in their religion. unfortunately, i personally know some people who would refuse any education and continue to hate just because of their prejudices.