Based on your first paragraph there it doesn’t seem like you’re interested in a genuine conversation at all.
I get a similar sense from you ignoring the rest of what I said to be an ass about what was obviously a joke. Maybe we’ll both be surprised.
27% of British Muslims had sympathy towards the motivations behind the Charlie Hedbo (12 dead I believe) attack.
The idea that this supports that these people are capable of terrorist acts is a bridge too far for me. This thread of conversation started when I took issue with a tweet from some Kiwi pol who was sympathizing with a motivation for this attack and the people agreeing with him? I don’t consider them to be a threat to anyone’s safety or to be capable of violence.
Another 78% believed Hedbo should’ve been prosecuted for his cartoon.
So, basically, “The government should intervene to restrict ideas/groups that I find offensive?” Same response. You see this daily on here.
As a side note, Charlie Hedbo is not a “him” it’s a magazine. It is an interesting example, though. After a 2006 cartoon, a number of European Muslims expressed outrage at being equated with Islamic extremists. The magazine was actually sued over it. Afterwards, they continued to lampoon the religion and I get the sense it was similar to Trumpists with CNN or liberals and Fox. French Muslim clerics denounced the attack on their offices after the fact. (Most of this was sourced from Wikipedia, some of it I knew.)
Your numbers show that a majority of Muslims in the UK were deeply offended by Charlie Hedbo’s cartoons. Yet, for 9 years, the overwhelming majority of those people felt bound by some force, either the law, their conscience, or religious teachings, not to act out violently. I believe France, where the attack occurred, has the largest Muslim population in Europe and two French Muslims, out of more than a million, attacked the Charlie Hedbo offices.
The same, or a similar poll around the same time, found that 95% of British Muslims felt loyalty to the UK. 93% felt they should obey British laws. 85% felt no sympathy for those fighting against western values. 68% agreed violence against persons publishing images of Muhammad was
never justifiable, so extrapolate that out and that’s 1.36 billion people?
BBC Radio 4 Today Muslim Poll « ComRes
I thought that last question was somewhat unsatisfying (because opinion polls are largely worthless) and that I’d like to see the question answered a bit more thoroughly, so I spent about 2 minutes on Google after I finished in the yard and I found dozens of English language Islamic religious websites stating that terrorism was absolutely not sanctioned by their scripture. So, again, the concept is subject to varied interpretations. Here’s an example that links to some theological essays:
Terrorism and Jihad in Islam | Islam Ahmadiyya
In an effort to find common ground, I 100% agree with you that terrorism is a significant problem in the Muslim faith. I understand that the Quran contains passages that can be read as a call to violence. This undoubtedly a huge source of the problem. It requires some degree of prudent security measures.
However, I don’t agree that every or even most practice their faith in this way. I don’t see it as a significant enough number to justify condemning, restricting, or judging anyone because they’re a Muslim. I don’t think that any such number exists for me, outside of “all.” I’ll judge people based on the things they say or the things they do as individuals with the assumption that they’re abiding by the social contract, until they prove otherwise. My reasons for this have probably been stated more than is necessary. Our government is bound to do the same, at least with respect to citizens and to some extent legal residents. I doubt anything on the internet will change this for me.[/quote][/QUOTE]
