Every religion has a few whackos.
That's my whole point. As for proportion, as I said before - just because something hasn't happened doesn't mean it either couldn't or won't.
Only Islam has an organized political movement within itself that supports terrorism...
Oh yeah? Look up the Christian Identity movement, for starters.
As you said, echoing my original posts: every religion has its' wackos. And, in terms of "organized political movements," while the political part might be sketchy, you can bet that however small a group they are, and whatever religion they're an offshoot of, the fundamentalists will tend to cling together.
...and is supported by as many as 15% of the religion's adherents.
LOL! Have you got a link supporting that statistic? Any evidence of the gargantuan poll that was apparently taken among the poorest nations of the world?
The Christians (or for that matter, the Hindus or the Sikhs or the Jews) have not shown an equal propensity to violence.
You said yourself that every religion has a few wackos. That is, as I said, my point as well. And that would include Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, and virtually every other religion out there; now, whether you or I can name those splinter groups or not is another story entirely.
"Propensity." As for having a propensity toward violence, well, I believe that essentially all religious fundamentalists have it (that's what makes them fundamentalists, for the most part, isn't it?), but whether or not they've actually undertaken such is another story.
To the extent that "propensity" means an inclination, whether institutionally or in the minds of key personnel, would you profess to being able to read their minds?
I, personally, would attribute the lack of violence among some fundamentalist groups not as a sign of some innate altruism...or some inherent villainy on the part of others...but more likely as a sign that either high payoff opportunities have not presented themselves or that the trade off (in terms of bargaining chips with political and mainstream religious figures) in terms of what would be lost as a result of undertaking violent action is skewed against them - again, whether they're Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, etc. Take your pick.
More, for most of them, a question of when, than if, IMO. And personally, I wouldn't wait to find out. Whether they've never killed anyone, have killed a few people or thousands, I think that religious extremism, whether demonstrated or spoken of, is dangerous.
In fact, the few fundamentalist groups that actually have undertaken violent acts make me further suspicious of the jawboning and saber rattling among the rest of them.
LP. |
