woooooooooosh!
I thought you were a werewolf.
And you should want to keep it that way. (You’re grandiloquent persecution complex aside.) Or would you really be happier if the Southern Baptist danger to you (fantastical as it is) remained the same but was relegated to Fear #2 status because there were more Muslim-majority populations for you to be persecuted by?
You’re not thinking this through.
Also: BEARS! Bears want to eat you! DAMN YOU, BEARS!
We define them as much as we can. Though I might be missing your point.
I’m a Muslim werewolf. Its part of the liberal-ness. Or maybe its the “Islam” bit that turns me into a rabid werewolf. Obsession with the Moon in both cases and all that. 
(Directed to no one in particular) Oh and please don’t make the mistake of assuming that “Liberal” means non-practicing!
And if you are backpacking in Alaska, it would do you well to adopt that mindset. So, good point! (Unintended as it was.)
Am I not mistaking you for a non-practicing lycanthrope, or for a non-practicing Muslim? It makes a difference, you know.
Why? Because in one scenario I want to blow you up, and the other I just want to rip you jugular out with my claws?
Psssssst. Islam isn’t a race, you dummy.
The point is this;
You seem to be saying that, on one hand, there are some Muslims who are dangerous and worthy of our concern. There are some who aren’t. We have no foolproof way of determining which is which, so it is only wise to treat *all *Muslims with some level of suspicion, some level of wariness.
On the other hand, there are some Americans who are dangerous and worthy of our concern, and some who aren’t. Again, we have no foolproof way of determining which is which - but in this instance, it is wise not to be suspicious of all American, but rather, as you say, “define them as much as we can”.
My point is that your standards seem to be different. To differentiate Muslims, we need a foolproof standard - otherwise all Muslims are worthy of suspicion. But to differentiate Americans, we can accept an imperfect standard, and not be wary of your average American.
If we can only accept differentiation methods that are foolproof, then you should be more wary of your fellow citizens in general than Muslims in general. If we don’t require perfection, if we can “define them as much as we can”, then it follows that we should accept some standards of differentiating Muslims, and that we should not be wary or suspicious of “the whole lot”.
Yes.
Well, that, and just in case I ever cook for you I needed to know if I have to pick up halal shredded man-flesh.
The second scenario is preferable. If you survive a werewolf attack you become one. Doesn’t work that way with religion.
Here in America? Fundie Christians, mostly.
That man-flesh better be halal… And raw!!
See, jayjay, if you were a proper breeder you could already be busily reproducing and popping out sprogs which would hold your worldview. DAMMIT PEOPLE, WE MUST WIN THIS RACE TO OUTPOPULATE THE FILTHY FOREIGNERS AND THUS PRESERVE OUR WAY OF LIFE!
Well, sometimes it does.
There’s a flaw in your reasoning.
Muslims are different from Us. They’re Them. Therefore suspicion is the only prudent course of action.
Muslims are giant ants?! OK, now that’s scary. Especially when the ants are also werewolves.
Yeah, you don’t want to mess with giant ant werewolf Muslims…