(no subject)
I think it's not only silly, but also dangerous to blindly accept anything that seems to agree with your internal worldview. One must be reasonably suspicious of facts, even if they confirm what one believes. Especially if they confirm what one believes.
Making up data is immoral and harmful. The world is scary enough without the additional fear mongering. That said, here's what I think about the question of Muslim religions and terrorism:
-- the absolute majority of the US Muslims are not terrorists and would never become terrorists
-- there are terrorists (and would-be terrorists) among the Muslims and among the members of other religions
-- fanatics of all religions can be quite dangerous
-- no, all religions are not "equal" in terms of their incitement of extremism, violence and terrorism. Some are much more overall peaceful than others. The differences are very profound and can't be waved away by pointing to particular examples of terrorists from the relatively more peaceful religions.
-- Modern Muslim religions are far ahead from many other religions in their incitement, sponsorship and condoning of violence and terrorism.
-- The incitement, sponsorship and condoning of violence and terrorism is more of a "cultural" issue than a purely "religious" issue in the sense that the overall level of such terrorism-inducement either doesn't depend at all or depends very little on what's actually written in that religion's Holy Texts. It's the culture of the religious leaders and their supporters that define the overall level of violence conducted by the members of that religion at any given period in history. [1]
So, given the above, there's a very real question of how to respond to terrorist acts and how to prevent terrorist acts, taking all the facts (and _real_ statistics) into the account. In making up statistics and in believing fake statistics just because that's what someone wants to believe, we are actually worsening our position and are increasing chances of terrorism, not decreasing them. A man who willfully closes his eyes and doesn't look ahead is unlikely to make wise decisions about where to step.
--------
[1] e.g. The Crusades were incredibly violent, yet the "Holy Texts" were basically the same as in the modern branches of Christianity. And there's a difference in violence-inducement even among the modern branches of Christianity that is completely unrelated to the potential difference in their Holy Texts.
Making up data is immoral and harmful. The world is scary enough without the additional fear mongering. That said, here's what I think about the question of Muslim religions and terrorism:
-- the absolute majority of the US Muslims are not terrorists and would never become terrorists
-- there are terrorists (and would-be terrorists) among the Muslims and among the members of other religions
-- fanatics of all religions can be quite dangerous
-- no, all religions are not "equal" in terms of their incitement of extremism, violence and terrorism. Some are much more overall peaceful than others. The differences are very profound and can't be waved away by pointing to particular examples of terrorists from the relatively more peaceful religions.
-- Modern Muslim religions are far ahead from many other religions in their incitement, sponsorship and condoning of violence and terrorism.
-- The incitement, sponsorship and condoning of violence and terrorism is more of a "cultural" issue than a purely "religious" issue in the sense that the overall level of such terrorism-inducement either doesn't depend at all or depends very little on what's actually written in that religion's Holy Texts. It's the culture of the religious leaders and their supporters that define the overall level of violence conducted by the members of that religion at any given period in history. [1]
So, given the above, there's a very real question of how to respond to terrorist acts and how to prevent terrorist acts, taking all the facts (and _real_ statistics) into the account. In making up statistics and in believing fake statistics just because that's what someone wants to believe, we are actually worsening our position and are increasing chances of terrorism, not decreasing them. A man who willfully closes his eyes and doesn't look ahead is unlikely to make wise decisions about where to step.
--------
[1] e.g. The Crusades were incredibly violent, yet the "Holy Texts" were basically the same as in the modern branches of Christianity. And there's a difference in violence-inducement even among the modern branches of Christianity that is completely unrelated to the potential difference in their Holy Texts.