Regarding the Catholic priests, do you mean 30 years after the fact?
Please. You ought to at least establish the locus of the argument before you cock off here about anything. Whether it is 30 years or a thousand is quite irrelevant. Once the Catholic atrocity became known, Catholics across the entire world stood firmly against it, ultimately to end it. That is just not happening in muslim countries. Murders are happening daily with muslims, sins against humanity happen openly and daily and have been happening thusly for decades on end, and yet muslims are not providing any sort of substantial front against it. They never have. Had we not entered Afghanistan, muslims still would be putting bullets into women’s heads in stadiums literally filled with cheering muslims, and other muslims would largely be doing precisely as they have always done in the presence of this sort of utter barbarism, namely, nothing – except support it at least tacitly. Indeed, north-African muslims are right now, today, brutally assaulting, murdering and raping black muslims and even here the outcry comes predominantly from Christians and other non-muslims.
The point is, rather than denying a problem in one religion, while magnifying problems in other religions, the common denominator is, there are problems regardless of the type of religion, and these are more endemic of environmental poverty and oppressiveness.
This is ridiculous. Some of the greatest concentrations of wealth are found in muslim nations and yet the savagery still persists in these muslim nations. Contrariwise, countries like Ethiopia and, in less recent times, India, are some of the poorest. Yet, we just do not see from them the sort of exporting of religious murder we have seen in Islam for ages.
This is why religion is suppose to be separate from government.
Well this claim certainly does not follow your prior claim. Your argument is that the common denominator of the barbarity now under discussion is poverty and oppression, and that that is why religion should be separate from government. It is a nonsensical argument.
Even so, you should know religion is inescapable. The very moment you compel another person toward a certain system of belief, you enforce religion. Government is just religion by another name. When you wish to “separate” the two, you really wish only to impose philosophical secularism as law, rather than philosophical theism. And that is just fine. Everyone has a religion, even godless heathens. But so many of you are so clueless, you mistake godlessness for open-mindedness when you are more fundamentalist than most.
Isolated incidents apparently aren't a big deal, unless an Arab did it, in which case the broad brush comes out?
You mischaracterize the circumstances. There is virtually no country on earth that is not being threatened or hit by muslims. You simply cannot legitimately make anything like this claim about any other religion on earth. With this world-wide islamic sword of Damocles hanging openly, in broad view, above the heads of the world, there is no substantial muslim force to counter it, to establish itself as definitive islam that seeks to police the religion. We are talking life and death here, madam. There is no room for experimentation and wishful thinking when the evidence is all around us and as clear as it can possibly be.
Where's the consistency here.
I am being as consistent as any human can be on this issue. Were I able to clearly descry good islam from the bad I would do it. But because muslims are not roundly denouncing the evil in their midst, I have no choice but to assume they agree with it. It is a matter of life and death here. It is entirely consistent to take my view.
What is inconsistent is to see islamic barbarity in every muslim nation, even in the more moderate nations, the suppression of speech, religious oppression, polygamy, female genital mutilation, oppression of women, even slavery, not to mention worldwide terrorism wherein innocent people are murdered all across the world in the name of islam, I say what is terribly inconsistent, is to see this and then claim it is merely “isolated.”
Is this how you respond to individuals?
It depends upon the individual, of course. |
