No one is defending terrorists. Refusing to slander more than a billion people is not defending terrorists or terrorism.
Hillary Clinton actually struck exactly the right note. She is quite willing to say, “Islamic terrorism” and “radical Islam”, but doesn’t need to make it a mantra.
She keeps on reminding me why despite her moral flaws, she knows what she’s doing. She has a great sense of what the public demands. Either that or the focus group must have been very interesting.
so its slandering Muslims, rather than mentioning facts, to point the hateful views prevalent among them?
That was in response to this lament from me:
The “group of people” to which I was referring there was not “terrorists”, but Muslims.
Ah, okay, we thought you meant Republicans. 
We defend them because they are human and entitled to one of the most basic of all human rights, to practice the religion of their choice. Those who want to deny Muslims the same rights as anyone else obviously don’t love the Constitution as much as they proclaim.
It is still tho, a constitutional right, and a right of a nation state, for a nation to control its own borders and own culture. Safety and security are also constitutional rights.
Listen, I, and I doubt Slacker, are into the more extreme elements of what Trump is saying about databases, banning new mosques, etc. But even for the wrongs of what Trump says, its still the truth that Muslims are indeed one of the most, if not THE most, anti-feminist, anti-LGBT, anti-freethinking group of people on the planet.
That Pew link is especially interesting (as Pew surveys tend to be). Particularly relevant to the Orlando atrocity:
Meanwhile, in none of the 23 countries polled was the percentage unwilling to rule out honor killings of women who have pre- or extra-marital sex that low. It ranged from 18% in Azerbaijan and Indonesia to 78% in Iraq, and it was >40% in 14 of the 23 countries.
Interesting to learn too that there is such overwhelming antiabortion sentiment. I hadn’t known that before, but I shouldn’t be surprised given the misogynistic tenor of the belief system (the overwhelming majority of Muslims say “a wife should always obey her husband” except in Europe, where nearly half say so).
I wish they would have asked about belief in evolution. The U.S. is of course embarrassingly low among Western nations in its level of belief; however, Turkey is the only country surveyed that is lower (and by a good bit). It’s also the only predominantly Muslim nation on the list.
ETA:
Why is that “one of the most basic of all human rights”? To believe, and practice, a bunch of hateful, ignorant nonsense? (And I’m not just talking about Islam here.) It looks like madness from my atheist POV. If it didn’t have this gauzy cover of “religion” that is just assumed to be literally sacrosanct, we’d call it insanity and throw its practitioners in the nuthouse to protect them and everyone else.
If a government controlled culture we’d never have rock and roll. Your right to safety doesn’t trump another’s right to practice his religion.
Muslims don’t have anything on fundamentalist Christians who deny evolution, believe the flood actually happened, or the Republican orthodoxy that denies global warming.
And this is a bigoted and counterproductive generalization – just as saying “why would anyone want to defend black people – the most criminal people in America?” would be.
Not necessarily – it’s very different to say “some Muslims believe X”, or “a troublingly high percentage of Muslims believe Y, according to this poll”… but to continue to make sweeping negative generalizations about billions is the most basic form of bigotry.
And it’s so easy to avoid. Criticize the specific people who do bad things, or advocate for bad things, and all Muslims don’t fit either category. Some Muslims do – so criticize those Muslims, not all of them. Saying all of them believe this is slander. Advocating for policy that restricts the rights of all of them because of the actions of some of them is advocating for bigoted policy.
From the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
how many concert halls have been blown up to shouts of “Jesus Akbar?” Nightclubs to “Jesus Akbar?” Military bases shot up to shours of “Jesus Akbar?” Planes flown into buildings to shouts of “Jesus Akbar?” Beheadings, boulder drops on heads, acid pool drops, etc. to “Jesus Akbar?”
How portion of non-Muslim majority countries execute homosexuals vs. portion of Muslim majority countries that do? Execute people who convert away from the dominant religion?
And no, I don’t give a rats ass about the Crusades.
Nope, this does not fly. Without even getting into the weeds of the differences between them, you are making a category error. Being Muslim is not racial or ethnic. I have nothing but the greatest admiration for brave ex-Muslims who speak out against their former belief system, like Ayaan Hirsi Ali. There is no equivalent in your analogy. Even Clarence Thomas is still a black man!
ETA:
I thought I made it clear that I *know *it is extremely widely believed that “freedom of religion” is a fundamental and crucial right. Quoting the UN language at me doesn’t tell me anything I didn’t already know. My question was why. Why does everyone believe that bullshit? Mostly because they were indoctrinated from a young age, I think.
I have great admiration for Ali too, even if we might disagree on some things. But it’s entirely possible to be bigoted against a religion, and if you continue to lump in all the peaceful Muslims with the violent and radical ones, then you are being bigoted.
Maybe you don’t care. I think it’s, in fact, far more effective in the fight against radicalism to be nuanced in a way that minimizes the chance that Muslim individuals who might be on the fence will tip over to the side of supporting the radicals.
This is the real world – and in the real world, some otherwise peaceful Muslims will have some negative feelings about the West. You might be fine with throwing away a chance of bridging the gap with them, but I’m not – I want them to see that America and Western values are not their enemy – that they can be Muslim, and not be a target of our ire. When we generalize about all Muslims, it makes it easier for the radicals to tell these fence-sitters that the West is their natural enemy.
Hmmmm… if only there was an example of a Christian majority country that persecuted a religious minority and killed gee, I don’t know, six million of them. If only these Christians marched into non-Christian neighborhoods and fired machine guns into homes in case any religious minorities were hiding inside. Maybe I’ll think of one later…
And you don’t think that’s seriously fucked up that they’re even *on *the fence? How would you feel if you were cautioned that you’d better stop making fun of Drumpf (Trump, if you prefer), and try to embrace his followers, because they are ticking time bombs who might otherwise go nuts and start shooting all the Democrats they can find?
Of course it’s fucked up. But why would I want to take an action that could tip them over the fence, further against us, when this action does no good in the struggle anyway?
The Nazis and their followers did not do what they did to advance or spread Christianity. In fact, its well established that the Nazis slowly but ultimately sought to destroy the church and replace it with occultism. Nazis and their fellow travelers’ across the continent motives were based in conspiracy theory.
This isn’t about what religion anyone happens to be. Its about motivations for terror.
PS: While I’m aware they initially co-opted the church, they quickly first corrupted it in the first 4 years, and then started quickly gutting it as the war approached. So stop insulting the memory of the Jews. Radical Islamists, BTW, are very fond of Mein Kampf and Protocols of Elders of Zion.
I’ll never challenge you in any way for criticizing radical Islamists. Criticize and insult those assholes to your heart’s content.