Thread: Islam: The religion of peace????

Making my point, that not all terrorists were muslim. That's all.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Please do not include me in your personal American guilt trip when you say "us Americans"
Honestly that guilt is the easiest thing in the world to shed too, it is so simple it's scary... You only have to renounce your citizenship, and you shed that guilt....Then figure out what country will take you in, it really is rather simple... BTW what country would you chose...

For me it would be Norway .... If I had to chose to leave the USA

Excellent!

Please do not include all muslims when making broad generalizations about the actions of one in particular.




That was the point I was trying to make.

Sylvester Matushka wasn't muslim either. The list of "terrorists" is endless and full of color

Originally Posted by JohnnyCakeDC

Sylvester Matushka wasn't muslim either. The list of "terrorists" is endless and full of color

And what about those radicals who dressed up as indians, and threw all of King George's tea into Boston Harbor back in the day?

I don't believe I was including "All" Muslims...

I realize that some were, but I don't think I did...

But I will say that unless the Moderate Muslims stand up and make them selves heard just as loud a the fanatics then I will see only the angry face of Islam...

When I see the Iman's preaching and speaking to tolerance, then I will be put at ease... But I don't see that, I see Death death death....

We are just now starting to see the emergence of peaceful Muslim's

I've got your point Glen, And I agree. Religious nuts need to be addressed by members of that religion. And It's not happining. I personally think that All nations should be Secular, and there are no such things as jesus or allan akbar.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I have to ask the same question of you two also??? Why did you both only name American "Terrorists"


When you have 100's of groups to name you only named American ones????

I can think of many reasons, such as
(1) To demonstrate that statement being false, it is necessary to provide a single example, not a comprehensive list of terrorists that are exception to that generalization
(2) The example is very high profile especially in US and thus accessible to most people who read the forum (the americans being a majority)

Just a little test - can you tell off the top of your head approximately what and when did the following terrorists do, as well as their nationality and religion - Chizuo Matsumoto, Sante Geronimo Caserio, Gavrilo Princip, Haruo Wakō, Savvas Xiros. None of them was muslim, so I could have just easy use any of them in my post.

Originally Posted by JohnnyCakeDC

I've got your point Glen, And I agree. Religious nuts need to be addressed by members of that religion. And It's not happining. I personally think that All nations should be Secular, and there are no such things as jesus or allan akbar.

I am not sure that could ever happen, that Religion was regulated to the home and "church" that any and all Religion in public would be illegal...
It is an interesting thought...
The Communists tried it, but isn't strict Communism almost a religion also???

It would be interesting to see the Religious laws too, like you said make them self policing...
Interesting thought

Nope, I can't tell, guess I fail the test. If I could guess, um were they members of the Lighted Path from Peru?

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I am not sure that could ever happen, that Religion was regulated to the home and "church" that any and all Religion in public would be illegal...
It is an interesting thought...
The Communists tried it, but isn't strict Communism almost a religion also???

It would be interesting to see the Religious laws too, like you said make them self policing...
Interesting thought

Well we have HATE CRIMES, how about holding someone or nation accountible for Religious Hate crimes?