You probably could have picked a better example than that, since that’s the one where God kills nearly everybody on the planet.
They are indeed. So appalling, in fact, that I refused to believe what you posted until I clicked your link and read the first 39 pages. It’s… I just don’t know.
No one said “all” of Islam is a violent.
The question in the OP was “why do people call Islamic civilization a violent civilization?”, not “IS Islamic civilization a violent civilization?” The first question refers to the PERCEPTION while the other refers to the REALITY.
And the perception of Islam is that it is a violent civilization. That perception, rightly or wrongly, is based on over 30 years of violent attacks directed at the West by Islamic groups. These attacks are often followed up by media images of crowds of masked and cheering Muslims burning American flags and effigies of Western leaders and firing their AK-47s in the air. So if Islam doesn’t want to be perceived of as violent, I suggest they get better PR representation.
That perception is independent of the actions of other countries or civilizations. Citing acts of violence by the United States or any other country is not relevent to our perceptions of Islamic violence. They may provide reasons or justifications but that is all.
Besides, you don’t get to selectively choose what is the product of a civilization. Coke and McDonalds are a product of Western civilization. Would you say that they weren’t simply because every single citizen isn’t an employee or shareholder of Coca-Cola or McDonalds or a consumer of that product?
I would just like to point out that George Kaplin’s post #79 was quoted from The End of Faifth by Sam Harris.
The stats were from Pew. I read them.
I’m interested to see in the OP that the Soviet Union’s conquest of central Asia made the list of “Western” violence. During the Cold War, Soviet oppression in Siberia would not have been considered “Western,” I would argue.
Is/should Soviet action in central Asia be considered part of Western civilzation, or is the OP casting too wide a net in order to make a laundry list of “Western” violence?
Note that I am not hereby claiming that either the Soviet Union or Western nations are nonviolent…I’m merely surprised to see the conflation I described above.
Sailboat
I would never call Islamic Civilization violent. Mainly because I’m afraid someone might cut my head off. Oh, I kid the Muslim world. Sort of. I was born in the late 70’s and grew up with news of bombings, hijackings, and murder perpetrated by those from the mid-east region of the world. So, from a very young age I had come to associate those from the mid-east with violence, and Islam is the predominant religion of the area, so I put two and two together.
Of course this is all about perception not fact. I do perceive Islamic civilization as being violent. Part of the reason is because of the seemingly widespread support for terrorist actions as well as a lack of moderating voices within the Islamic world. Maybe I’m misinformed about the widespread support of terrorist or the lack of moderating voices in the mid-east. I hope so.
Marc
[shrug] If you polled Americans on how many support bombing abortion clinics, or how many sympathize with Timothy McVeigh’s agenda, you might get more than 1%. Considerably more.
Then I assume you also believe that America has no claim to an inch of the American Southwest, which was seized in a war started with much less justification than the six day war.
After all, it would never do to take a balanced view of Islam as a grouping, like any other, of people that contains some lunatics as well as a majority of good, decent people. Because if that were the case, then it wouldn’t excuse bombing them and being prejudiced against them. So long as you can create a good enough story to ‘prove’ to yourself that these really are Bad People, then it’ll be ok to kill 'em off.
:rolleyes:
Right, and there were plenty of “good Germans” in Germany during the war, who may not have been foaming-at-the-mouth Nazis, but more or less went with the program. At what point can you assign collective responsibility to a group for the actions of a violent and active minority? Especially when that minority receives sympathy and support from a large segment of the parent population, and state support by some governments?
If I can’t walk the streets in certain places without justifiable fear of being beaten, kidnapped, or murdered, because of my religion or ethnicity, do you expect me to make fine distinctions between the thugs and their more civilized brethren?
Not comparable. It is now illegal to incorporate territory gained by conquest. Or colonise it for that matter.
Bullshit. Double bullshit. Bullshit for using mere speculation to counter actual data, and bullshit for attempting to trivialize the point the poster made. You may imagine whatever numbers for the US you like, but unless you project them into the double digits, they are still less than the numbers from half of the Middle Eastern countries in that poll.
[sigh] Or you might get less…considerably less. Of course, if you poll American’s about the possibility of monkeys flying out of your ass, you might get more than 1% as well…or perhaps it will be less. Or maybe dead on 1%.
You see, pulling numbers from your ass, like monkeys, does nothing much toward making your point. Now, if you HAVE such a poll showing American’s support bombing abortion clinics or Timothy McVeigh’s agenda in double digits…and in fact think that we need much more radical steps…well, then you will have something a bit more interesting to look over. Or, if you have some numbers to back up your 1% speculation, that might be interesting…though doesn’t really get to the point you were supposedly talking too, ehe? Other wise, your post is what is generally refered to as ‘hand waving’.
-XT