# The many benefits of keeping Muslims out of Europe **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 24, 2014, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068 "2014-02-24T05:32:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/141 "2014-03-05T14:06:08Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > The “blindly-targeted” refinement I put in is really the whole point of my complaint of how you spun the point by pretending to juxtapose “similar” questions. Yet you are the one who is “spinning” the statement, here: > [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > But the distinction drawn between **Muslim populations as a whole** and other broad groups (be they politically or religiously bounded) is the relatively high degree of support within the Islamic world for attacks targeted blindly with no consideration at all as to whether or not the target contains an enemy combatant. An example would be a bomb attack in a public place or a Twin Tower sort of attack. bolding mine Your “Muslim populations as a whole” includes the populations of Palestine, Iran Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, India, northern Sudan and all the other countries where extremist views are either dominant or very prevalent. The whole point of this discussion is that those who have immigrated to Europe or North America, (or whose parents immigrated and they have, themselves, grown up in Europe or North America), differ from people of the same religion who live in the M.E.N.A. region, yet you choose to lump them together and make broad claims about what “Muslims” want. And you continue: > [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > When polls such as the Pew poll you cited look at that question **in the Muslim world** , the degree of support for that is astonishing. bolding mine Then: > [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > On the other hand, polls (such as the Gallup poll a few years back) that look at support for sometimes attacking civilians are conflating the notion of targeted versus untargeted attacks. Actually, they do not appear to be. Where is your support for your claim that the non-Muslims polled were only talking about collateral damage? > [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > To juxtapose the two as “similar questions” as you did earlier is disingenuous and presents a pollyannish view of Islam not supported by reality. A remarkable number of Muslims do in fact support “blindly targeted violence against non-combatant innocents.” It’s difficult to even find polls getting at that specific issue in any general population, because the numbers would be so trivial. And of course most large polling organizations are very careful not to offend, so their eagerness to juxtapose that exact question in the same exact poll to Muslims and non-Muslims is understandably absent. You are now back to lumping all Muslims together, regardless of where they live and then asserting your speculation as to the motives behind any given poll based on your own world view and not based on evidence. > [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > If you can give me the number 77 supporting reference from the Esposito book you cited, perhaps I can understand more precisely what his and your data point is. The “77” was the footnote in Doug Saunders’s The Myth of the Muslim Tide: Do Immigrants Threaten the West?. It followed the statement regarding the Pew poll and then pointed to page 95 of Espositio’s book. In the next paragraph Saunders goes on to say, citing _[The Gallup Coexist Index 2009: A Global Study of Interfaith Relations](http://www.gallup.com/strategicconsulting/153578/REPORT-Gallup-Coexist-Index-2009.aspx)_, pp 40-41: > [@](#): > > When a large scale survey asked if “attacks on civilians are morally justified,” 1% of the French public, 1% of the German public, and 3% of the British public answered yes; among Muslims in the capital cities of those countries, the responses were a statistically indistinguishable 2%, 0.5%, and 2%. Asked if it is “justifiable to use violence for a noble cause,” 7% of the French public agreed, along with 8% of the French Muslims, 10% of the German public and fewer than 2% of German Muslims; 10% of the British public and 8% of British Muslims. The majority who said it was “not justifiable” was usually somewhat higher among Muslims than among non-Muslims. These are numbers generated by asking the exact same question of various groups. > [@](#): > > There are many acts some people may do in life. I will read out to you a number of these acts, and I would like > you to indicate to what extent it can be morally justified. > Other attacks in which civilians are the target and > [@](#): > > There are many acts some people may do in life. I will read out to you a number of these acts, > and I would like you to indicate to what extent it can be morally justified. > Use of violence for a noble cause The “Muslim” numbers among Muslims living in Europe are very close to the numbers for their non-Muslim neighbors, which is the point of this thread. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/142 "2014-03-05T17:05:11Z")
> [@IMfez](#): > > **The many benefits of keeping Muslims out of Europe** Shorter lines at EuroDisney. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/143 "2014-03-05T17:09:17Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Shorter lines at EuroDisney. But who will work in the EuroDisney fast food joints to feed us white people? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/144 "2014-03-05T18:42:20Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > But who will work in the EuroDisney fast food joints to feed us white people? Be patient; the Jew-cloning project is under way. (That Adolf :rolleyes: . . . some people just can’t think in the long term.) ---
**Author:** ![ANT\_Pogo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@ANT\_Pogo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ANT_Pogo)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/145 "2014-03-05T18:59:24Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > On the other hand, polls (such as the Gallup poll a few years back) that look at support for sometimes attacking civilians are conflating the notion of targeted versus untargeted attacks. [No it wasn’t.](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/a-fascinating-look-at-the-political-views-of-muslim-americans/242975/) Gallup asked Muslims, Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Mormons, and Atheists/Agnostics in America the same two questions: “Some people think that for the military to target and kill civilians is sometimes justified, while others think that kind of violence is never justified. Which is your opinion?” and “Some people think that for an individual person or a small group of persons to target and kill civilians is sometimes justified, while others think that kind of violence is never justified. Which is your opinion?” For _both_ questions, Muslims had both the highest percentage of respondents answering “Never”, _and_ the lowest percentage of respondents answering “Sometimes” than any other group (even the atheists). ---
**Author:** ![bldysabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@bldysabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bldysabba)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/146 "2014-03-05T19:07:15Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > First of all, people generally don’t feel a pressing need to distance themselves from opinions they don’t hold and actions they didn’t approve being committed by people they don’t know. > > Second, is there a “systematic effort to reform or combat” Ugandan gay stoners and head-hunting militias in Central Republic or north-east India within Christian society ? Is there one about those churches and Christian groups that encourage people to attack abortion doctors or throw molotovs at Planned Parenthoods, such as the infamous Army of God ? Was there one against the IRA ? What have \*you \*done to stop or reform those idiots lately ? > (BTW, the answer you’re looking for is “hell no, there’s even material support”) > > Lastly, what are American Muslims supposed to be doing about screaming fanatics in Syria or Bangladesh, exactly ? Send them a strongly worded letter ? Even local moderates would have a hard time - walk with your Bible to the Phelps compound to explain, with cites, how wrong they are about Christianity ; see where that gets you. > Which is why moderates in fanatic-dominated countries tend to… _emigrate_. Or get killed, whichever happens first. Eh? None of this has anything to do with me, I’m an atheist Hindu from India. And I do plenty to sort out the problems of that group. Devote my life to it in fact. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/147 "2014-03-05T19:33:01Z")
> [@bldysabba](#): > > Eh? None of this has anything to do with me, I’m an atheist Hindu from India. And I do plenty to sort out the problems of that group. Devote my life to it in fact. Well, apologies then - I tend to assume every speaker on this forum is a god-fearing Merkin from Merka, saves time :). But the Christian-related questions still apply, even if you personally are no Christian. What separates Islam from Christianity, from your P.O.V ? I know for a fact there’s at least one very active Christian terrorist group in India (Nagaland, to be specific), so there you go. Wiki also tells me about a “National Liberation Front of Tripura” (wherever that is), and further religious-inspired violence in Odisha and Manipur. Is there “systematic effort to reform or combat” them throughout Christendom ? And, again, what are moderate American or European Muslims supposed to do about e.g. Pakistani fanatics or what’s taught at Indonesian madrasas, exactly ? ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/148 "2014-03-05T21:00:57Z")
> [@ANT\_Pogo](#): > > [No it wasn’t.](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/a-fascinating-look-at-the-political-views-of-muslim-americans/242975/) > > Gallup asked Muslims, Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Mormons, and Atheists/Agnostics in America the same two questions: “Some people think that for the military to target and kill civilians is sometimes justified, while others think that kind of violence is never justified. Which is your opinion?” and “Some people think that for an individual person or a small group of persons to target and kill civilians is sometimes justified, while others think that kind of violence is never justified. Which is your opinion?” > > For _both_ questions, Muslims had both the highest percentage of respondents answering “Never”, _and_ the lowest percentage of respondents answering “Sometimes” than any other group (even the atheists). But the question to be parsed out is blind targeting, and not in the name of formal political systems (such as a national military). In that (UAE based?) Gallup poll, as I recall, the support for “sometimes justified” for the question as worded was about 24% in the general Protestant population. Ummm…sure… I submit that 24% of the general US population does not hold support for the idea of blowing up a marketplace–i.e. blind targeting. There is no parallel between the degree of support within the Islamic community–immigrant or national–and any other large-scale community (as defined by political boundary or large religious grouping) for what is loosely termed “extremism-type violence.” Support for blindly-targeted violence in the name of a cause (such as a perception that it helps protect one’s religion) is substantially higher in every Muslim community than every other community. Within the Muslim community it varies substantially by political state, but in all cases it is much higher than within non-Muslim communities. More than any other single factor (other than perhaps the subjugation of women and the desire to combine religious and state law) this is the reason so much of the general public in any western country retains a xenophobia against Muslims. While the number is a relatively small percent of all Muslims, support for blindly-targeted “terrorism” ad hoc organizations (i.e. non Military) is much much higher in Islamic groups than any other groupings (i.e. all atheists or all Hindus or all Christians or all US citizens, etc). ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/149 "2014-03-05T21:10:10Z")
S/b “24% of the general US Protestant population…” I did not meant to imply that the US population is all Protestant. My internet is slower than I am today, which is pretty darn slow, and I have to wait 4 1/2 minutes to get an edit window up. ---
**Author:** ![ANT\_Pogo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@ANT\_Pogo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ANT_Pogo)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/150 "2014-03-05T21:17:46Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > But the question to be parsed out is blind targeting, and not in the name of formal political systems (such as a national military). tomndebb has already asked you you justify your claim that more Muslims support “blindly targeted” violence against civilians as opposed to targeted systems. Your “parsing” makes no sense, especially when the questions asked already separate out violence against civilians carried out in the name of formal political systems (such as a national military), and violence against civilians carried out by an individual person or small groups of persons. What kind of tageting and killing of civilians by individual person or a small group of persons do you think the respondents to the survey were thinking of, if not the kind of “blind targeting” characteristic of terror attacks? > [@](#): > > In that (UAE based?) Gallup poll, as I recall, the support for “sometimes justified” for the question as worded was about 24% in the general Protestant population. Ummm…sure… 26%, actually (28% if you include the two percent who said "it depends’). And that’s support for targeting and killing civilians done by an individual person or small groups of persons. If the US military does it, support rises to 58%. And if you have a robust critque of the survey’s methodology, by all means feel free to present it. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2014, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/151 "2014-03-05T21:28:55Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > But the question to be parsed out is blind targeting, and not in the name of formal political systems (such as a national military). No it is not. The actual questions asked and answers provided are in the link ANT Pogo provided. You appear to be creating an artificial distinction that does not exist. The second question was > [@](#): > > Some people think that for an individual or a small group of persons to target and kill civilians is sometimes justified, while others think that that kind of violence is never justified. Which is your opinion? The responses from U.S. Muslims: 89% said “Never” and 11% said “Sometimes.” Among every other group in the U.S., Christians, Jews, or no belief, no other group reached even 80% for "“Never” and only Mormons, at 19% got below 20% for “Sometimes.” The Poll to which I linked from Europe asked whether it was OK to target civilians or employ violence with no reference to collateral damage. You are trying to parse a distinction without a difference. > [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > Support for blindly-targeted violence in the name of a cause (such as a perception that it helps protect one’s religion) is substantially higher in every Muslim community than every other community. Within the Muslim community it varies substantially by political state, but in all cases it is much higher than within non-Muslim communities. Absolutely not accurate as demonstrated by the two polls just cited. > [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > More than any other single factor (other than perhaps the subjugation of women and the desire to combine religious and state law) this is the reason so much of the general public in any western country retains a xenophobia against Muslims. More accurately, this false impression, promoted by people who refuse to look at actual figures, is what stirs up the most fear of immigrant Muslims within Western nations. (At least you admit that it is xenophobia and not a rational response to this false perception.) ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/152 "2014-03-06T00:03:39Z")
“I am so not racist that in fact I think Muslims are NICER than us!!” Lol. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/153 "2014-03-06T00:25:11Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > “I am so not racist that in fact I think Muslims are NICER than us!!” Lol. Hey, it’s affirmative action. ---
**Author:** ![bldysabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@bldysabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bldysabba)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/154 "2014-03-06T00:49:13Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Well, apologies then - I tend to assume every speaker on this forum is a god-fearing Merkin from Merka, saves time :). > But the Christian-related questions still apply, even if you personally are no Christian. What separates Islam from Christianity, from your P.O.V ? I know for a fact there’s at least one very active Christian terrorist group in India (Nagaland, to be specific), so there you go. Wiki also tells me about a “National Liberation Front of Tripura” (wherever that is), and further religious-inspired violence in Odisha and Manipur. Is there “systematic effort to reform or combat” them throughout Christendom ? It’s like I said - what distinguishes Islam from other religions is that it has large and growing extremist strains. Every religion has its loonies. I don’t disagree with that. Do you disagree that Islam’s are more numerous(as a proportion and in absolute numbers) and more dangerous? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/155 "2014-03-06T04:52:09Z")
> [@bldysabba](#): > > It’s like I said - what distinguishes Islam from other religions is that it has large and growing extremist strains. Every religion has its loonies. I don’t disagree with that. Do you disagree that Islam’s are more numerous(as a proportion and in absolute numbers) and more dangerous? I would certainly agree that, world wide, the numbers of Fundamentalist and radicalized Muslims is greater than threatening groups in other religions at this time. However, the point of this thread was that those numbers (that generally occur in the M.E.N.A. region and other Asian locales) were indicative of a threat to Europe by Muslim immigrants. The evidence so far presented has indicated the opposite: that immigrant Muslims to Europe and North America are overwhelmingly good citizens with attitudes similar to the attitudes of the non-Muslims who already live in those lands. This is not to say that there are no individual Muslims who are threats in Europe and North America. However, there is no basis for the idea put forth by the OP that any actions should be undertaken in support of the OP’s xenophobia. In fact, when Rep. Peter King (R-NY) decided to hold grandstanding hearings on the threat that Muslims pose by sheltering the radicals in their midst, his claims were shot down by members of the Homeland Security Agency and various police departments who pointed out that most “radicals” have been identified to police agencies by their Muslim neighbors and that several major terrorist plots had been foiled by information provided by Muslim groups. Similar to every other despised immigrant group that has suffered slanderous claims of disloyalty, refusal to assimilate, and related accusations, the evidence indicates that Muslim immigrants are assimilating at about the same rates as previous groups and pose no threat to their host nations. ---
**Author:** ![bldysabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@bldysabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bldysabba)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/156 "2014-03-06T06:28:36Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I would certainly agree that, world wide, the numbers of Fundamentalist and radicalized Muslims is greater than threatening groups in other religions at this time. > > However, the point of this thread was that those numbers (that generally occur in the M.E.N.A. region and other Asian locales) were indicative of a threat to Europe by Muslim immigrants. The evidence so far presented has indicated the opposite: that immigrant Muslims to Europe and North America are overwhelmingly good citizens with attitudes similar to the attitudes of the non-Muslims who already live in those lands. This is not to say that there are no individual Muslims who are threats in Europe and North America. However, there is no basis for the idea put forth by the OP that any actions should be undertaken in support of the OP’s xenophobia. In fact, when Rep. Peter King (R-NY) decided to hold grandstanding hearings on the threat that Muslims pose by sheltering the radicals in their midst, his claims were shot down by members of the Homeland Security Agency and various police departments who pointed out that most “radicals” have been identified to police agencies by their Muslim neighbors and that several major terrorist plots had been foiled by information provided by Muslim groups. > > Similar to every other despised immigrant group that has suffered slanderous claims of disloyalty, refusal to assimilate, and related accusations, the evidence indicates that Muslim immigrants are assimilating at about the same rates as previous groups and pose no threat to their host nations. Yeah ok, I haven’t examined the evidence for assimilation of Muslim groups in Western countries too closely. I’m willing to believe that they’re not significantly different from others, although this survey > **[Attitudes to Living in Britain](https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/attitudes-to-living-in-britain/259042)** > > Attitudes to Living in Britain - Download as a PDF or view online for free of British Muslims gives me pause. Specifically the fact that the younger Muslims are the ones that are giving the more ‘retrograde’ responses - more willing to withdraw girls from school if the Hijab were disallowed, higher preference for living under sharia law, want people to be punished for ‘insulting’ Islam etc. Maybe Britain is a special case, I know there have been cases of some preachers there that have been connected with radicalisation. I jumped into this thread because the Pew group finding that 13% of Muslims sometimes approve of bombing civilians in defence of Islam strikes me as high, and because it is approving of violence in defence of an optional ideology, it is less justifiable to me than in pursuit of other aims like national defence or something along those lines. The Gallup poll that you’ve used to try and make that point may or may not be comparable, simply because it is a separate poll. Their sampling methodology, question and frame could be wildly different. I still agree that 13% approving of suicide strikes in defence of Islam is not necessarily something to fret about, and I would definitely not agree with any discrimination against extant immigrant groups. But I may agree with immigration policy that has the end effect, though probably not the stated goal, of reducing/monitoring immigration rates from Muslim countries to ensure greater assimilation and movement away from the aspects of Islam that are unpleasant. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/157 "2014-03-06T09:47:55Z")
> [@bldysabba](#): > > Yeah ok, I haven’t examined the evidence for assimilation of Muslim groups in Western countries too closely. I’m willing to believe that they’re not significantly different from others, although this survey > > [Attitudes to Living in Britain | PPT](http://www.slideshare.net/brighteyes/attitudes-to-living-in-britain) > > of British Muslims gives me pause. Specifically the fact that the younger Muslims are the ones that are giving the more ‘retrograde’ responses - more willing to withdraw girls from school if the Hijab were disallowed, higher preference for living under sharia law, want people to be punished for ‘insulting’ Islam etc. Maybe Britain is a special case, I know there have been cases of some preachers there that have been connected with radicalisation. No, youth is a special case. Young people are more likely to be hotheads isn’t exactly news. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 10:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/158 "2014-03-06T10:52:49Z")
> [@bldysabba](#): > > It’s like I said - what distinguishes Islam from other religions is that it has large and growing extremist strains. Every religion has its loonies. I don’t disagree with that. Do you disagree that Islam’s are more numerous(as a proportion and in absolute numbers) and more dangerous? Worldwide ? Sure. In India ? Maybe, I dunno - though I suppose it’d be difficult to separate religious nuts from nationalist/regionalist nuts. In Europe and the US ? No, absolutely not. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/159 "2014-03-06T10:55:25Z")
> [@bldysabba](#): > > I’m willing to believe that they’re not significantly different from others, although this survey > > [Attitudes to Living in Britain | PPT](http://www.slideshare.net/brighteyes/attitudes-to-living-in-britain) > > of British Muslims gives me pause. […]Maybe Britain is a special case, . In fact I believe it is, based on previous polls made in various European countries and showing that British muslims are much more poorly integrated than muslims in other European countries like France or Germany (for instance they self-identify much less as British than French muslims self-identify as French) This might be related to different policies (like the prevalence of communautarism in the UK, viewed as a very bad thing in France), but my suspicion is that it’s related at least in part to the origin of most muslim immigrants. Pakistan isn’t the same at all as Algeria (France), Turkey (Germany) or Morroco (Spain). There are youth “reverting” to a form of strict Islam that was unknown to their immigrant parents (hence the problem with extremist preachers) but I would assume that most are unlikely to begin supporting a brand of Islam or muslim “traditions”, or adopt views about the relative importance of religion vs law that would be foreign even to those of their relatives still living in their country of origin. ---
**Author:** ![bldysabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@bldysabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bldysabba)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068/160 "2014-03-06T16:13:02Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > In India ? Maybe, I dunno - though I suppose it’d be difficult to separate religious nuts from nationalist/regionalist nuts. Eh. It’s quite simple to separate them in the case of Islam and Hinduism. The Christian group that you pointed to earlier, yes probably regionalist. Also previous Sikh separationist groups in the 80’s could be looked at as regionalist. I think Islamic fundamentalism in India is particularly dangerous in that it has had the unfortunate effect of increasing Hindu fundamentalism as a response. Right from the Muslim league in pre independence India and partition, to modern India in cases like Shah Bano(a 62-year-old Muslim, divorced by her husband in 1978 but even after winning the case at the Supreme court of India was subsequently denied alimony because the Indian Parliament reversed the judgement under pressure of Islamic orthodoxy [Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohd._Ahmed_Khan_v._Shah_Bano_Begum)) and banning of the Satanic verses, the evident success of Muslim groups in getting their way in India has inspired an attempt to introduce similarly aggressive and intolerant elements to Hinduism, which is a pity, because Hinduism is otherwise quite divergent from Islam. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-many-benefits-of-keeping-muslims-out-of-europe/682068.md?page=9)