Brian Ross wrote on Nov 16
th, 2014 at 11:33pm:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Nov 16
th, 2014 at 9:12pm:
No matter how many times I tell you I don't have a problem with Muslims, only Islam, yet you continually fail to differentiate between the two.
As Soren suggests, Islam is made up of Muslims. You attack "Islam" but which Islam do you attack? You, like Soren seem to have erected this strawman view of Islam as being monolithic and all Muslims have the same interpretation of their religion. I know you're too intelligent to do that with say, Christianity yet you do it with Islam, Lionel, why?
Hang on a minute! You yourself have repeatedly dragged out the Phelps as being an example of extremist Christian views, yet you also repeatedly avoid mentioning the Patriot Guard Riders who defy and deny the protestations of the Phelps extremists. Assuming they are Christian (they appear to be veterans), I don't know whether these Riders should be considered an extremist Christian group because they ride motorcycles and oppose another Christian group who are very much extremist Christians.
All I see is the freedom of both groups to express their own quite different interpretations of Christianity without blood being shed.
And there, right there, is the difference between extremist collisions when we compare Christians and Muslims (Islam).
I'll quite readily admit that Christianity could be considered monolithic, but the differences between the various 'sects' rarely resort to the violence exhibited by the followers of the Islamic 'sects' (Muslims).
Basically, I could break down Christianity into the observance of the Ten Commandments.
Can you do the same with Islam?
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 16
th, 2014 at 11:33pm:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Nov 16
th, 2014 at 9:12pm:
I have no problem with such a differentiation. Why should you?
I find it artificial, like trying divorce Christianity from Christians. In the end, Islam is Muslims, Lionel. When you attack "Islam" in general, you are effectively attacking Muslims, just if someone was to rail against Christianity, then they would be attacking the believers in that religion.
And I find it disturbing that Islam promotes violence - capitulation, slavery or death to non-believers and apostates. And in recent times, followers of Islam (Muslims), have united across the world to engage in the barbarity currently sweeping the Middle East - as the Islamic creed demands (or as is interpreted by some).
Has it escaped your notice that it is not only Christians uniting against this threat? The Saudis are walking a very fine line.
Brian Ross wrote on Nov 16
th, 2014 at 11:33pm:
Lionel Edriess wrote on Nov 16
th, 2014 at 9:12pm:
You rarely even mention Islam in these discussions - it's all about Muslims.
Why is that?
How clever of you to notice, Lionel. I always considered you more intelligent (when you want to be) than the likes of the simplistic Islamophobes of the likes of Moses, Yadda, Soren and FD.
Perhaps the reason why I don't defend Islam is because there are many aspects of Islam I don't agree with but I recognise that I, as an outsider no matter how much I or any other outsider rails against it, I am completely powerless to change it. Change must come from within. Instead of attacking it in general, we need to encourage the interpretations which promote modernisation and change and moderation. As long as people keep attacking Muslims and Islam in general, making no effort to differentiate between the moderate, mainstream interpretations and the extremist, Muslims will feel persecuted and alienated. People who are alienated tend to end up being attracted to extremism. Capeche?
OK, I can get that. You won't defend Islam but you will defend Muslims. Earlier you stated that Muslims are Islam.
So what exactly are you defending?
There appears to be a discrepancy between our interpretations of radical Islam.
Here's yours:
And here's mine:
See the difference?
BTW, it's capisce.
Forum
Pages: 
It’s easy to grow Muslim-hatred these days. (Read 13610 times)
