Muslims kill more Christians, this time in Pakistan

[derspiess]

Those Muslims, never condemning terrorism.

http://unitedhumanists.com/2016/03/27/70000-muslim-clerics-issue-fatwa-against-isis-the-taliban-al-qaeda-and-others/

Yeah, Indian Muslims are generally cool.

[Norgy]

I think it's a little strange that Muslims on the whole are expected to apologise for the actions of other Muslims, but when it comes to lone, white gunmen, it's not about religion or ideology, but an unhappy childhood.

[Eddie Teach]

I don't think they need to apologize, it's enough to condemn. But keeping quiet leaves the vocal minority of their coreligionists who celebrate the attacks as the only word.

[LaCroix]

I don't think they need to apologize, it's enough to condemn. But keeping quiet leaves the vocal minority of their coreligionists who celebrate the attacks as the only word.

why should I have to condemn or apologize or do anything re: the actions of some random person who just happens to have one or two things in common with me?

[Berkut]

I don't think they need to apologize, it's enough to condemn. But keeping quiet leaves the vocal minority of their coreligionists who celebrate the attacks as the only word.

why should I have to condemn or apologize or do anything re: the actions of some random person who just happens to have one or two things in common with me?

*You* do not.

But if you were the leader of a defined ideological or religious movement, and claimed to have the right and responsibility to speak for and to the followers of said ideology, then I do think you have a responsibility to respond to the actions of those who claim to do thing in the name of that ideology.

If there were crazed white people murdering people in the name of Catholicism, I think it would very much behoove the Pope to make it clear where he stands on their actions, and it is very much the responsibility of church leaders, right down to the local priests and bishops to preach and speak to their followers about what is appropriate and acceptable. All this depending, of course, on the scale and pervasiveness of such activities.


If there were a consistent and significant issue with white, overweight men killing people in the name of being white and a bit plump, I would have no problem pointing out that as a member of that class, I categorically reject the idea that the terrorists actions are part of my class, or representative of what it means to be a chubby white guy.

[The Brain]

I'm not an expert on the inner workings of Islam, but aren't many terror groups acting in the name of an Islam that isn't part of one of the great Muslim organizations? Maybe the Pope analogy would work better with terrorists acting in the name of Christianity rather than Catholicism? NB I may be completely wrong.

[Berkut]

I'm not an expert on the inner workings of Islam, but aren't many terror groups acting in the name of an Islam that isn't part of one of the great Muslim organizations? Maybe the Pope analogy would work better with terrorists acting in the name of Christianity rather than Catholicism? NB I may be completely wrong.

It may very well - I used Catholicism just because it is in fact a more concise ideology with a clearly defined leader. But the principle is the same.

I was thinking a good way to tie me up would be to have some religious group declare violence and/or political Islam a crime against Allah, define followers of such (especially jihadists) as apostates, and sentence them to death.

That would be a tough one...

[LaCroix]

*You* do not.

But if you were the leader of a defined ideological or religious movement, and claimed to have the right and responsibility to speak for and to the followers of said ideology, then I do think you have a responsibility to respond to the actions of those who claim to do thing in the name of that ideology.

I don't know of any north dakota bishop who has spoken out against, say, lebanese christian violence. I don't think it makes much sense to ask that all (most? half?) imams publicly denounce the actions of muslim extremists who operate in an entirely different country/part of the world. that's just not going to happen, because people are generally pretty provincial

[Norgy]

Nobody's ever demanded an apology from the Pope for the IRA's mass-murdering rampage. Or asked say, the American Irish to take a stand against terrorism in the way Muslims are being told to do.

I think, while Islam literally interpreted have the same issues with women and gays as most of Christianity, it's also a religion that spread with the sword. Not that Judaism didn't too. But you have millions of perfectly integrated Muslims in Europe.
On the other hand, you also have those who have no future, because they are high school dropouts and whatnot, or feel unappreciated by society at large. Back when punk was big it was called "youth revolt", and after 1968 it was "race riots" or new, violent leftism in the case of the Brigado Rosso and the Rote Armee Fraktion. Islam may have an inherent problem in the way jihad can be interpreted. But if I was a brown person scorned by society and vilified by people like Geert Wilders I might want to seek the comradeship of my fellow men too. This is basically a self-fulfilling prophesy.

[Berkut]

*You* do not.

But if you were the leader of a defined ideological or religious movement, and claimed to have the right and responsibility to speak for and to the followers of said ideology, then I do think you have a responsibility to respond to the actions of those who claim to do thing in the name of that ideology.

I don't know of any north dakota bishop who has spoken out against, say, lebanese christian violence. I don't think it makes much sense to ask that all (most? half?) imams publicly denounce the actions of muslim extremists who operate in an entirely different country/part of the world. that's just not going to happen, because people are generally pretty provincial

If Christian violence becomes anywhere near the level of Islamic violence, then perhaps it might be appropriate for North Dakota Christians to speak about it. At the moment, it is simply not an issue that I suspect most North Dakota Christians are even aware of, so I don't know what utility them speaking out about it would serve anyway.

[LaCroix]

If Christian violence becomes anywhere near the level of Islamic violence, then perhaps it might be appropriate for North Dakota Christians to speak about it. At the moment, it is simply not an issue that I suspect most North Dakota Christians are even aware of, so I don't know what utility them speaking out about it would serve anyway.

why would it be appropriate for ND christians to speak about it? it's not caused by ND christians, nor do they have anything to do with it. say there was a neo knights hospitaller state crusading against infidels, what would a ND priest do? tell his practitioners every sunday that violence is wrong, despite his practitioners already knowing that? seems condescending

[Berkut]

Nobody's ever demanded an apology from the Pope for the IRA's mass-murdering rampage.

Since the Pope didn't murder anyone, an apology would be an odd thing to demand.

But I think the Pope did a times speak out against violence in Northern Ireland, and I think people did and do in fact expect the Pope to take some kind of stand on the issue. I think you are wrong about the idea that the Pope (and Catholocism in general) would not be seen as having a part in influencing the actions of Catholics, for better or worse.

Or asked say, the American Irish to take a stand against terrorism in the way Muslims are being told to do.

You are simply wrong. American Irish were in fact slammed in the press for supporting the IRA, and people did in fact at times weigh in on whether or not the IRA was justified in their actions. American support for the IRA was a definite topic for debate within the US.

[Razgovory]

I think the Brits kinda blamed the Pope for the Irish.

[Berkut]

If Christian violence becomes anywhere near the level of Islamic violence, then perhaps it might be appropriate for North Dakota Christians to speak about it. At the moment, it is simply not an issue that I suspect most North Dakota Christians are even aware of, so I don't know what utility them speaking out about it would serve anyway.

why would it be appropriate for ND christians to speak about it? it's not caused by ND christians, nor do they have anything to do with it. say there was a neo knights hospitaller state crusading against infidels, what would a ND priest do? tell his practitioners every sunday that violence is wrong, despite his practitioners already knowing that? seems condescending

Again, it depends. If there were thousands of people dying every year as a result of Christians butchering people, then when someone asks ND Christians what they think about that, what would you expect them to say?

If ND Christians were being recruited by radical elements to go fight, then I think it would very much be completely irresponsible for ND Christian religious leaders to NOT speak out about it.

I don't understand your objection here - religious leaders speak out against things their parishioners already know full well they should not do all the time. You think every Sunday's sermon is covering fresh new moral and ethical ground the people listening have never heard before?

[Norgy]

You are simply wrong. American Irish were in fact slammed in the press for supporting the IRA, and people did in fact at times weigh in on whether or not the IRA was justified in their actions. American support for the IRA was a definite topic for debate within the US.

On further research, I realise I was very wrong about that.

On the other hand, the whole of the new European left were painted as terrorist supporters and fifth columnists for the RAF and the Brigado Rosso.

I think the point I failed to convey, is that the IRA still is the organisation that has killed the most Europeans in terrorist actions since 1945. The Muslims don't even come close. The Bologna train station bombing in 1980 (which eventually led to the unveiling of several so-called Stay Behind organisations) killed 85 and wounded around 200, and was conducted by Italian neo-fascists.
I, like you, think it's great that clerics speak out and condemn terrorism.

The bottom line, anyway, is that we can't just live in fear. There's always some random mishap around the next corner. Fear breeds witch hunts and in the end more violence.