Go flinging a faggot of a roof!

[Derec]

1. No I don't. You didn't.

You made the false equivalence with Christianity. So you would have to do the work. Since Muslims are 1% or US population, and Christians are 70%, you'd need 70 Oliver Martins shooting up gat nightclubs to balance one Omar Mateen doing the same. Good luck with that!

2. So what?

Shows that he wasn't just a criminal who happened to be Muslim, but that the motivation for his crime was Islamic terrorism.

3. Does it matter?

Yes, motives matter.

4. Given that his misgivings against her are the result of his religious teachings, yes.

How do you know that? But more on that when we consider the cases you provided.

5. Take your pick from a random allotment. Notice how no two cases at the same and that the killers are different in each case. But all of them are horrible people. You're choosing to focus on one single event in an effort to single out Muslims despite that gay and trans violence and murders come from suspects of all shapes and sizes and beliefs.

Again, Muslims are only 1% of the population, yet commit the bulk of terrorism. That is widely disproportionate to their numbers. That is a reality that should not be ignored just to be politically correct.

http://gothamist.com/2013/12/06/lawyer_argues_transgender_murder_vi.php

How do you know this guy was even a Christian? His name is Rasheen Everett, and Rasheen sounds Arabic. So he might be a Muslim or it might just be gratuitous Arabic name common among US blacks for some weird reason. In any case, his religion is not identified.
Also, motive is unclear, but we know he previously choked an ex-girlfriend and she is (presumably) a cis-female.

http://wisconsingazette.com/2010/12/30/larkins-killer-gets-18-years/

This one seems to be a result of "gay panic" where a prostitute was picked up and then the guy discovers there is more than he bargained for. Not to excuse it, but it is a far cry from a premeditated act like the Pulse shooting, and there is no indication religion was the motive. Not that we are told his religion, if he has any.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...capitol-hill-nightclub-sentenced-to-10-years/

I am baffled you included this case. Not only did nobody die (fortunately), but the perp also has an Islamic name and definitely appears to be a Muslim, listing Quran as is favorite book on his Facebook page.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/...ling-of-transgender-woman-in-philippines.html

This is a case similar to the Seattle one. It seems that the killing was done due to "gay panic", i.e. discovering that who he thought was a real woman actually had a penis. While killing her was unacceptable, it is understandable that somebody would feel violated if that is not what they were looking for. I think shemale prostitutes should disclose their status before any sexual activity for their own safety if nothing else.
In any case, here again there is no indication that religion played any role in the killing, or even what religion the lance corporal identified with.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/04/22/transgender.slaying.trial/#cnnSTCText

Again, no indication that religion motivated the crime or even what religion he is. But this is the only case among the trans-killing cases you posted where there is any real evidence of actual hostility toward gay/trans people. So I guess congratulations on that.

So, all these cases fail to make your case that somehow Christianity-motivated anti-gay violence is equivalent to Islam-inspired anti-gay violence. Again, Mateen clearly identified as doing this because of his Islamist views. The guys who wanted to throw gays off the Willis tower identify as Islamist followers of ISIS.

Oh, and since you included the case from Philipines, here's one from Germany.
North African men suspected of stoning transgender women in German City
Charming, these Nafri "refugees" ...

 

[fromderinside]

Derec did you ever come across Ring of Saturn effect? Looks like you did then turned around and make up reasons for such to be meaningful. Grab a number of, say, Christians in a place where killing is organized and slot a Muslim who is a definite random variable. Point out how great his effect is compared with Christians without taking a moment to understand murder is a singular event coming from most any reason from the view of outsiders and you have all the makings of a Ring of Saturn situation. Murder, including self murder takes about 50,000 lives a year by gun alone in the US. Good luck building a case for anything that changes baseline numbers like murder rates.*

* it would take 15 Muslims each killing 50 people to mach the Christian rate of killing in the US by gun.

 

[Lion IRC]

The murder rate in Saudi Arabia is lower than secular Holland, Belgium, France, etc etc

 

[Juma]

The murder rate in Saudi Arabia is lower than secular Holland, Belgium, France, etc etc

not if you include official killing.

 

[Lion IRC]

Oh well in that case we shall factor in abortions in the Netherlands which apparently aren't classed as murder.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

The murder rate in Saudi Arabia is lower than secular Holland, Belgium, France, etc etc

I have two questions:
1. What's your source?
According to the Wikipedia entry ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate ), the rate of intentional homicide is 0.8 in Saudi Arabia, 0.7 in the Netherlands. and I'm not sure which countries go in your "etc., etc." is. While "murder" is not the same as "intentional homicide", I'm not sure what source of murder rates you might be using, so I'm asking.

2. What's your point? (i.e., how would the murder rate be relevant to any of the matters at hand?).

 

[Lion IRC]

The murder rate in Saudi Arabia is lower than secular Holland, Belgium, France, etc etc

I have two questions:
1. What's your source?

The same as yours. Oracle of Delphi.

2. What's your point? (i.e., how would the murder rate be relevant to any of the matters at hand?).

The matter at hand is;

...baseline numbers like murder rates.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

The same as yours.

But your link does not compare the murder rate in Saudi Arabia with that of other countries. What I'd like to ask is where you got the comparison, and also what countries go in the "etc., etc.".

The matter at hand is;

That is not the matter at hand. What you quote is just a part of sentence in a fromderinside's post, and you're missing the context (even granting that the post in question addresses one of the points Derec is trying to make). If the matter at hand where "...baseline numbers like murder rates.", I might as well point out that the rate of intentional homicide in Japan is lower than in Argentina. Sure, it is far lower, but it's unrelated to anything under discussion.

 

[Lion IRC]

If the Wikipedia data is presented as murders per 100,000 - it can be compared with any other per capita murder stat.
What difference does it make that it's on two different Wikipedia pages?
You asked for a link and I gave it to you. Now you want to quibble?
And if murders per capita isn't relevant don't blame me. I didn't raise the matter at hand.

Go ahead and post murder stats from secular countries like Japan if you want and we will see how they compare with (arguably) the most 'Islamic' country in the world Saudi Arabia.
Or don't. It's up to you.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

If the Wikipedia data is presented as murders per 100,000 - it can be compared with any other per capita murder stat.
What difference does it make that it's on two different Wikipedia pages?
You asked for a link and I gave it to you. Now you want to quibble?

No, I'm not quibbling at all. I'm asking for a source.
I asked for a link that would be the source of your claims. Your link provides only some information about Saudi Arabia. It does not provide any information about any of the other countries that you mentioned. Nor does it explain which countries go into your "etc.". So, I would like to know which countries are those, and where you got your information about countries other than Saudi Arabia.
If you are saying that any Wikipedia page will do, that's fine. Could you please point to a page on Wikipedia in which the murder rate in Holland is claimed to be higher than it is in Saudi Arabia? (i.e., a page that supports that part of your claim).
I already posted a link to a Wikipedia page that compares the rate of intentional homicide in many countries, and it says that the rate in Saudi Arabia is higher than the rate in the Netherlands. Perhaps, you meant something else by "murder", or you're talking about a different year? If so, I will ask you to provide a link that supports your claim that the murder rate in Saudi Arabia is lower than the murder rate in Holland. Do you have any evidence in support of that claim?

And if murders per capita isn't relevant don't blame me. I didn't raise the matter at hand.

Yes, you did. fromderinside's post was not a post about murder rates in general, or murder rates in Saudi Arabia vs. Holland, France, Belgium, and whatever goes into your "etc." If someone mentions "murder rate" in a thread, that does not imply that the matter at hand is, say, whether the murder rate in Japan is lower than the murder rate in Argentina, or whether the murder rate in Holland is lower than it is in Saudi Arabia. There are plenty of things that people may be talking about. In this case, your bringing up the murder rate in Saudi Arabia, Holland, France, Belgium and whatever country goes into your "etc." seems disconnected from the previous discussion. So, I wasn't blaming you, but I was asking what your point was. I still don't know why you brought up the murder rate in those particular countries.

Go ahead and post murder stats from secular countries like Japan if you want and we will see how they compare with (arguably) the most 'Islamic' country in the world Saudi Arabia.
Or don't. It's up to you.

First, I already posted a link that compares statistics for intentional homicide. The rate in Japan is lower than in any predominantly Muslim country. However, that does not have anything to do with the previous discussion. The reason I posted the link was to challenge the claim you made.

 

[Lion IRC]

For someone who claims the per capita murder rate of one country versus another isn't relevant to the discussion you sure are making a big deal about it.
I gave you the link which includes a per capita murder stat for Saudi Arabia 0.011 per 100,000.
That's much lower than Holland. Agreed?

WAIT - don't answer that. According to you such comparisons are irrelevant.
That's fine. Just don't cut into a discussion disputing the stats and querying the sources.
How about you perhaps stick to posting what you think is relevant to the "matter at hand"?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The murder rate in Saudi Arabia is lower than secular Holland, Belgium, France, etc etc

http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Violent-crime/Murder-rate

France and Saudi Arabia are very close.

And how many murders of servants go unreported in Saudi Arabia?

 

[Lion IRC]

I'm confused.
Are we going to talk about Saudi Arabian murder rates or not?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

For someone who claims the per capita murder rate of one country versus another isn't relevant to the discussion you sure are making a big deal about it.

No, I'm not making a big deal about that. I merely asked a couple of questions, in a civil manner. What I'm now interested in is defending my position because you insist on making claims against me/my behavior, suggesting that I want to quibble, generally that I behave or behaved in a way I didn't, etc.

I gave you the link which includes a per capita murder stat for Saudi Arabia 0.011 per 100,000.
That's much lower than Holland. Agreed?

Actually, that's a claim without a source, and for the year 1988.
Your link also makes a claim for 2006 (0.01) without a source. Given I do not have a source, it's difficult to compare. What is your source for the claim about Holland? And what countries go into the "etc."?
Still, there is an obvious and huge error in your source. Let's take a look:

In 1988, the "reported" murder rate in Saudi Arabia was .011 per 100,000 population, sexual offenses were .059 per 100,000 population, and thefts were .005 per 100,000.[23] In 2002, a total of 599 crimes were reported in Saudi Arabia, or .06 crimes for every 100,000 people. By 2006 those numbers had gone down[dubious ] with murder at .010 per 100,000 population, sexual offenses at .046 per 100,000, and thefts offenses at .04[dubious ] per 100,000.

The total number of "crimes" (which seem to include murder, sexual offenses, and theft) is 599 in 2002. They claim that that is 0.06 crimes for every 100,000 people. This is false. If that were the case, then the population of Saudi Arabia in 2002 would have been (599*100000/0.06)=998333333
In other words, your source implies that the population of Saudi Arabia in 2002 was almost 1 billion people. Obviously, that makes no sense. Clearly, they're not doing the math right. There is no good reason to trust the rest of their statistics.
The link I provided gives a source: http://www.unodc.org/documents/gsh/pdfs/2014_GLOBAL_HOMICIDE_BOOK_web.pdf
The 0.8 rate is for the year 2012.

WAIT - don't answer that. According to you such comparisons are irrelevant.

They are irrelevant to the previous discussion. They are relevant to the one you started (and more importantly to me, now to my defense, given the way you treat me. My questions were civil.).

That's fine. Just don't cut into a discussion disputing the stats and querying the sources.
How about you perhaps stick to posting what you think is relevant to the "matter at hand"?

Actually, you did cut into a discussion making claims that were irrelevant to it.
However, I wasn't sure what point you were trying to make, so I asked, in case you were obscurely bringing up a point relevant to the previous discussion. It turns out, on the basis of your replies, that you were not. You were starting an entirely different one.
Now, replying to your points is relevant to what is now the matter at hand, or at least one of them. But I'm not really interested in the issue. I was interested in knowing what your point was ( I still don't), but now I'm just defending myself, by the way. I may have to repeatedly debunk one or more of your claims in the process, expose the weakness of your sources, etc., but that's not my concern - it's a means to an end, namely I want to defend myself. (Originally, I just wanted to ask what your point was, and what your source was)

 

[Lion IRC]

I posted my source and it was about the matter at hand.

Competing truth claims on Wikipedia are nothing new. And if the murder rate is subject to dispute/revision no matter to me.

It might be that no source can be trusted - in which case ????? Fedeism? Intuition?
Also see my earlier point about abortion being excluded from the 'murder' rates of secular countries. (If we put scare quotes around 'official' Saudi govt definitions of 'crimes' that kind of cancels out the same thing being done by governments which don't regard adultery as a 'crime') Then who gets bragging rights? Muslim Saudi Arabia or secular countries like the Republic of ETC.

And if the murder rate in (muslim) Saudi Arabia is both unknown AND irrelevant to the matter at hand then lets dispense with the tropes and get back to the real heart of the matter. Which was....

Derec did you ever come across Ring of Saturn effect? Looks like you did then turned around and make up reasons for such to be meaningful. Grab a number of, say, Christians in a place where killing is organized and slot a Muslim who is a definite random variable. Point out how great his effect is compared with Christians without taking a moment to understand murder is a singular event coming from most any reason from the view of outsiders and you have all the makings of a Ring of Saturn situation. Murder, including self murder takes about 50,000 lives a year by gun alone in the US. Good luck building a case for anything that changes baseline numbers like murder rates.*

* it would take 15 Muslims each killing 50 people to mach the Christian rate of killing in the US by gun.

 

[repoman]

I am disappointed, I thought this was going to be a thread on the virtues of throwing gays off buildings. Too much sarcasm here.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

I posted my source and it was about the matter at hand.

I have already explained why your claim and your source were not about any previous matter under consideration. You jumped in and started a new debate. It seems you didn't do that deliberately (you apparently thought it was about the matter at hand), but you did.

Competing truth claims on Wikipedia are nothing new. And if the murder rate is subject to dispute/revision no matter to me.

I already showed that your source has the math very wrong. It implies the population of Saudi Arabia was almost 1 billion in 2002, which is obviously not even close to the truth. The numbers for the other years it mentions are in line with that one. In short, that source is useless. On the other hand, you have presented nothing against my source.

It might be that no source can be trusted - in which case ????? Fedeism? Intuition?

If no source can be trusted, then the rational course of action is of course to realize one does not know the answer. But I gave a source, and you gave nothing against that source.

Also see my earlier point about abortion being excluded from the 'murder' rates of secular countries.

That's another discussion altogether, but abortion is not murder.

(If we put scare quotes around 'official' Saudi govt definitions of 'crimes' that kind of cancels out the same thing being done by governments which don't regard adultery as a 'crime') Then who gets bragging rights? Muslim Saudi Arabia or secular countries like the Republic of ETC.

I'm not sure what you're talking about, but I'm not interested in that debate.

And if the murder rate in (muslim) Saudi Arabia is both unknown AND irrelevant to the matter at hand then lets dispense with the tropes and get back to the real heart of the matter. Which was....

It's not unknown - I provided a source that seems reliable, and you have nothing against it -, and it's relevant to the matter at hand that you introduced - not to the previous ones.

 

[Rhea]

Would-be terrorists who wanted to throw gays off Sears Tower arrested in Chicago
Now what kind of terrorist might they be? You've got three guesses. Could it be ....
...

I know the answer to this one!


Men. They are Men.

 

[fromderinside]

I posted my source and it was about the matter at hand.

Competing truth claims on Wikipedia are nothing new. And if the murder rate is subject to dispute/revision no matter to me.

It might be that no source can be trusted - in which case ????? Fedeism? Intuition?
Also see my earlier point about abortion being excluded from the 'murder' rates of secular countries. (If we put scare quotes around 'official' Saudi govt definitions of 'crimes' that kind of cancels out the same thing being done by governments which don't regard adultery as a 'crime') Then who gets bragging rights? Muslim Saudi Arabia or secular countries like the Republic of ETC.

And if the murder rate in (muslim) Saudi Arabia is both unknown AND irrelevant to the matter at hand then lets dispense with the tropes and get back to the real heart of the matter. Which was....

Derec did you ever come across Ring of Saturn effect? Looks like you did then turned around and make up reasons for such to be meaningful. Grab a number of, say, Christians in a place where killing is organized and slot a Muslim who is a definite random variable. Point out how great his effect is compared with Christians without taking a moment to understand murder is a singular event coming from most any reason from the view of outsiders and you have all the makings of a Ring of Saturn situation. Murder, including self murder takes about 50,000 lives a year by gun alone in the US. Good luck building a case for anything that changes baseline numbers like murder rates.*

* it would take 15 Muslims each killing 50 people to mach the Christian rate of killing in the US by gun.

Added enough irrelevant variables yet?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Would-be terrorists who wanted to throw gays off Sears Tower arrested in Chicago
Now what kind of terrorist might they be? You've got three guesses. Could it be ....
...

I know the answer to this one!


Men. They are Men.

Is it male culture or male genetics? I mean, testosterone is a big variable and associated to more violence but is it machoism that causes this, or maybe both?