• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

The boundary between prejudice and legitimate criticism of Islam?

I think the problems arise because not many Muslims speak out against Islamic atrocities.

They speak out against Islamic atrocities more often than Christians speak out against Christian atrocities, or Atheists speak out against atheist atrocities. What atrocities do you speak out against?
 
Last edited:
Should we hold a catholic accountable that goes to church, sides with the catholic papacy on most if not all matters, defends the doctrine, and supports them with their money and time, even if they've never molested a child?
 
I would consider these sorts of issues to be questions of fact. Once one has defined "terrorism", I don't see anything wrong with calling an act of terrorism an act of terrorism if it's true. I don't see anything wrong with saying a given act of terrorism appears to have been motivated by religious belief if it's true. I don't see anything wrong with saying there are more terrorist acts committed by people invoking Religion X than Religion Y if it's true.

If media say things that aren't true then there is a problem, which may or may not be related to "bias".

The problem is not the use of the word terrorism, but the lack of consistency in using the term, and the inconsistency is based on ethnicity.

Do you have examples ?
 
I think the problems arise because not many Muslims speak out against Islamic atrocities.

Conservatives never speak out against atrocities committed by conservatives, yet we don't accuse all conservatives of being terrorists, do we?

- - - Updated - - -

The problem is not the use of the word terrorism, but the lack of consistency in using the term, and the inconsistency is based on ethnicity.

Do you have examples ?

You have got to be kidding me.
 
After all these years I still have that image of Palestinians dancing in the streets of Gaza after the 9/11 atrocity. I
 
Back
Top Bottom