You're so right about Saudi Arabia being the main problem. The moderate Turks only killed one to two million Armenians, and the moderate Indonesians (who are fighting extremists in the west) have only killed half a million West Papuans. The reality of Islam is that most of it is this peaceful and it is no threat to anyone who is regarded as human.

You sound extremely naive. Have you read the Qur'an? It demands a literal interpretation, and while lax followers can try to ignore that, they can always be whipped into line by fanatics who lay the law down as it's written. There are some apparently moderate countries with Muslim majorities, but only where they depend for a lot of their income on non-Muslims, and they see tolerating them and posing as peaceful as a temporary necessary evil. The text demands that they kill Yazidis, which is why the Yazidis have suffered repeated genocides since the start of Islam - that won't end until they're all gone. Islam is bigotry in the extreme - a Nazism tied to a God and given a special licence to propagate vicious hate as a result. Muslim "extremists" are merely doing their religion by the book, just as any judge does law by the book without being accused of being extreme. Christianity is not a good parallel because Jesus allows people to reject bad religious laws, replacing them with a relatively kind philosophy. That still wasn't enough to stop the slaughter of countless people for being experts in herbal medicine though, so it isn't a safe system of bigotry either. All of these bigoted texts need to be modified to remove the dangerous hate from them. Islam could be reformed to make it safe, but the scissors need to be applied to do that. God needs to be told by religious people to shove his holy hate up his arse, and if there was a God, that's exactly what he'd want them to tell him, so this kind of modification is possible. Until it happens though, Islam remains one of the most lethal ideologies on the planet and it should not be tolerated.

@David_Cooper Nothing you say contradicts any of my points. I never said the text wasn't extreme. So which of my statemements is naive?

@OwlInASack I'm not a hater, darling - I campaign against all the primary hate on all sides, unlike people like you who defend some of it. You can't even read - what the f did you think I said about Christianity - did I endorse it or did I refer to its capacity to drive mass-murder too? You are naive and ignorant - you don't understand what Islam is and why it's so vicious. Terrorists come out of moderate populations because anyone who takes it upon himself to do his religion by the book is guided by that book to act on its actual instructions which automatically lead to them seeking to kill innocent people. You haven't got a clue what I stand for because you don't read - you just attach labels to me that you take from other people without noticing that those haters are in my sights too. I stand right in the middle calling out all the hate, but extremists like you don't see that - to you, people like me are Nazis because we refuse to endorse the hate that you're an apologist for.You are a major part of the problem because you actively drive hate.

@OwlInASack Read the Qur'an and educate yourself. You're endorsing hate and you haven't a clue that you're doing so because you're an ignoramus of the first order. I read the damned thing cover to cover at the time of Rushdie's Satanic Verses after reading his vile book, and while it was bore no comparison to his shoddy attack on it, it was still very clear how dangerous Islam is because of it's vicious message driven home again and again as it spells out how you should live your life by the book. The moderates you speak of are lax - they aren't seen as proper Muslims by people who live by the book in the way they're instructed to, and they're right: most people who call themselves Muslims are not Muslims, but because they endorse Islam, the serve as a reservoir from which genocidal maniacs repeatedly emerge. That will continue so long as that hate is tolerated and propagated. I want there to be a new Islam and new Qur'an with all the hate stripped out, and I want the same for every other religion and ideology so that they stop driving conflict. I stand up against all the hate, but you stupidly attack me for being the most moral person on the planet - precisely in the middle and with no bias. If Nazism had a god, would you suddenly see yourself as a hater for attacking Nazism on the basis that it's suddenly a benign ideology whose hate can be brushed under the carpet? No, because you're biased to the point that you can't see that the two cases then become directly equivalent - both have caused enormous genocides which are driven by ideological hate, but you think one of them's just fine while the other's vile. You have no judgement - you're blind.

@OwlInASack If you've read the Qur'an, you should be fully aware of how heavily it demonises and dehumanises me. I don't take kindly to death threats or to people who endorse them in any way shape or form. The same applies to a host of other vile religions and ideologies which employ the same tactics and make equivalent threats. I oppose them all in direct proportion to their viciousness. I'm the principled person here who refuses to brush hate under the carpet - I call all of it out. You're an apologist for hate and you are responsible for all the genocides carried out in its name.

@OwlInASack "I really am tired of this: you do not get to define all Muslims. End of."

The Qur'an defines Muslims, darling.

"There are many moderate Muslims following moderate forms of Islam. Denying that is just - I can't use other word - ignorant."

There are many lax Muslims who are decent people who have made the mistake of endorsing something vicious that contains copious amounts of hate that generates genocide, but they are not real Muslims because they are merely playing at Islam. However, out of these peaceful populations come dangerous fanatics who read the Qur'an and take it upon themselves to do what it tells them to do. That terrorism will never end so long as that protected hate goes on generating it. The cure is to strip out all of that hate so that it cannot do so any more. The same applies to the hate in other holy texts and the manifestos and associated works of other ideologies.

"And it's part of a hate narrative which is being perpetuated to traumatise and stigmatise a whole religion. And yu are part of that."

No - you're just displaying a fascist approach where as soon as someone attacks this particular hate you accuse them of hate. I attack all the primary hate from all religions and ideologies that contain it. I don't condemn the secondary hate that the primary hate generates in the people targeted by the primary hate, but I strongly advise people to avoid it as it's harmful to hate anyone - it's far better to condemn the primary hate itself and recognise the people who propagate it as hapless victims of it who need to be helped to fight against it.

"I hate all religions."

Many religions are positive things, and even the ones with hate in them have a positive side that doesn't need to be thrown out with the bathwater. The key to a peaceful world is to keep the good stuff and strip out the bad.

"But this idea that Islam is a single thing is useful to the hard right haters but far from truth as 2 nano seconds of thought would tell you. SOme forms of Islam are more repugnant than others."

Islam is a single thing defined by the Qur'an - it tells you exactly what Islam is, and some of that is vile. That vile part could be deleted though, and given that so many lax Muslims don't care for the vile content (or deny it exists), it should be possible to get rid of it. Unfortunately though, the fanatics are the ones that pick up the guns and take power, bulling the rest to make them fall into line. That is why even peaceful Muslim countries can go through episodes of genocide.

"Really? Which 'genocides' are you talking about specifically. Name them please. That's quite a big accusation. I've backed my carefully. You...not so much."

You are retrospectively making yourself "responsible" for every past genocide committed by people acting on the hate in the Qur'an because you're failing to condemn the hate that drove it, and you're responsible (along with billions of other people) for every future genocide driven by that hate because of your continued endorsement of it. Here's the thing you're missing in all this - I'm not condemning Muslims for being victims of a vicious mind virus, and I'm not condemning all of Islam and the Qur'an. I'm condemning the hate that drives genocides and other atrocities, and every decent person on the planet should be doing exactly the same. All decent people do this with Nazism, but it's easier to do there because there's no positive side to Nazism to care about preserving and there are no good Nazis (although there were some dim ones early on before they understood exactly what it is).

The key to being decent is to condemn all the primary hate and not to be biased by endorsing some of it and giving some groups a special licence to propagate it. It has to be stamped out, and if they are decent people, they should be capable of standing up to their God and telling him to shove his hate where it belongs. I believe in the power of decent people to reform religions and eliminate the hate. Why don't you?

@OwlInASack "Only in your hate filed world."

I'm not the one filling it with hate - I'm trying to remove the hate to create a world in which people can live in peace without arseholes protecting the hate that keeps on generating conflict again and again forever.

"Do you think the 'darling' hides the fact that you know you're wrong?"

The "darling" represents the fact that I'm conversing with simple person who needs to be protected like a child.

"The twisting, turning and misrepresentation you're engaged in betray you pretty badly."

I haven't twisted a damned thing - you're endorsing vicious hate and condemning me for condemning that hate. You're the one who looks bad (and who is bad).

"Does the Bible 'define' Christianity?"

The Qur'an is a very different kind of book - God telling everyone in clear terms what's what rather than a rambling set of short memoirs of followers followed by a massive bloat of homophobic rants from someone who never even met Jesus.

"Actually a religion's adherents get to define their religion. Each individual gets to define their religion."

You clearly don't understand Islam. It doesn't matter how many people call themselves Muslims while paying scant regard to the Qur'an's instructions - those instructions are Islam, and if people grow up in lax communities thinking they're Muslims and then take it upon themselves to do Islam properly, that's were terrorists emerge.

"It's utterly stupid to say otherwise given the evidence is all around us. You want to be able to pursue that line because then you get to determine who is and who is not a real Muslim - and then you get to say it's all evil."

It doesn't matter whether they're technically Muslims (by the Qur'an's rules) or not, darling - what matters is that they think of themselves as Muslims, and that's all it takes for the vile hate in that book to have some hold over them.

"Well fuck you and your denial of normal peoples experience, and your shitting down the space for every day, non-violent, no jihadi Muslims."

Fuck you for attacking me instead of going after the haters. The normal people you talk of are people I want to defend from the genocide you're helping to set up for them. China's ready to go for it. So's Russia. A Trump dictatorship wouldn't hesitate either, and the EU's lurching to the right. How are you going to guarantee the safety of the people you're encouraging to settle amongst Nazis?

"Again - fuck you: you do not get to determine who is a good and who a lax Muslim!"

A Muslim is what the Qur'an says a Muslim is and not someone who merely thinks he or she is a Muslim. It's clear that your so thick that you don't understand technical definitions. A lax Muslim is someone who doesn't follow the rules of the religion they claim (and genuinely believe) themselves to be a part of.

"Your arrogance is beyond belief. Actually - your hard right mates are all at the same game. This is the very stuff that ends up with people trying to murder Muslims!"

You're a right piece of work! I condemn Nazis at every opportunity, calling for them all to be put in jail before they murder people instead of waiting until afterwards. What do you do though? You call me a Nazi on the basis that I call out your pet hate too.

"Yawn. You're like a particularly crap school yard bully who accuses everyone around them of being a bully. By attempting to make Islam a single thing, you are 100% aligned to the hard right and their hate narrative."

You are simply not reading and understanding what I'm saying because you're still running on your own preconceptions based on your idiotic assumption that because I attack your pet hate I must be a Nazi. You're the bully here, calling me a Nazi for attacking all the primary hate in proportion to its viciousness. The people you call Muslims and who think they are Muslims but who are actually lax in the extreme are hapless victims of a mind virus which has led them to make the mistake of endorsing something vile, and the result of that is that they are inadvertently fuelling terrorism and genocide. If they were able to understand what they are doing, most of them would hopefully stop endorsing it and would recognise the need to remove that hate to detoxify Islam and make it benign. That said though, all the ones I've discussed this with refuse point blank to contemplate removing the hate.

"Let's get this straight: because I won't allow you to tar all Muslims with the hatred you ascribe to them, or tell them they aren't proper Muslims because they don't fulfill your grotesque hate-filled view of Islam, I am responsible for the bad things done by some Muslims - over all time?"

I'm using the Qur'an's grotesque hate-filled view of Islam, darling. As I have pointed out, most of the people who call themselves Muslims do not qualify as such, but they still believe that they do, and that's precisely why terrorists keep emerging out of their midst. That is the mechanism. By endorsing Islam (as it's defined in no uncertain terms by the Qur'an), you are endorsing the hate that generates genocide.

"Blimey! That's some serious responsibility you're throwing at me."

Someone needs to tell you what you're doing.

"Here's a thing. Nuance and perspective are helpful when looking at complex and nuanced situations. That's it. understanding the complexity and nuance will help us to deal with the situations better."

And when you understand all the nuances and see the mechanism by which terrorists emerge from peaceful families because of vicious primary hate which those peaceful people have unwittingly endorsed, then you begin to see the big picture.

"And will help to stop the hate narratives that you and your hard right wing mates push which end up with people shooting Joe Cox or driving cars into crowds outside Mosques."

I put a lot of time into criticising the US and its CIA for propping up mass-murdering dictatorships all round the world, doubtless getting myself listed as a dangerous communist in their register, but you think I'm right wing! Joe Cox was a brilliant talent who was cut down by a hater of the standard kind who is attracted to ideological hate that's propagated by fellow haters. It's the same as with Islamic hate and their terrorists, except that it's much harder for Nazis to come out of peaceful families because there's nothing positive whatsoever about Nazism to tie them to it. I don't push or possess a hate narrative, but you are following one which leads you to attack me for calling out hate and pinning a lot of the blame on the people who endorse that hate and give it a high status that it does not deserve. Those people should know better - they need to be educated so that they understand the mechanism by which they help drive genocides, but fools like you stand in the way of that. Your actions will certainly contribute to future genocides.

"The all Islam is evil story is crass and stupid. Would be great if you just stopped it. You won't of course - presumably because it keeps you warm and that victim mantle is comforting, I'm sure."

The story I tell is about the primary hate of all ideologies that propagate it and how that hate generates conflict and genocide. I will not let any individual ideology have a special licence to propagate its hate while condemning the rest, and you shouldn't either because to do so is to be a hypocrite. If you insist on endorsing the hate in Islam, you have no right to condemn the hate of other ideologies, including Nazism. You are inadvertently defending Nazi hate by defending people's right to propagate hate.

"Quote me. Really quote me. Show me where I have endorsed hate. Show me. Really - show me."

You endorse hate by defending Islam and by attacking me.

"Let's see if you have any integrity at all. Show me. Come on - show me."

You've shown it all yourself over and over again. You refuse to condemn the vicious primary hate in the Qur'an and condemn me instead for condemning that hate. The only thing I condemn is the primary hate in all ideologies that contain it. Beyond that, I simply tell people what the mechanism is by which it generates genocide and other atrocities and alert people to their own personal role in driving those genocides by failing to call out and condemn the primary hate. And everything that I'm doing, unbiased AGI systems will do exactly the same regardless of which team programs them - my position comes out of deep, rational, unbiased analysis. We have a host of ideologies which propagate lethal levels of hate - demonstrably lethal and attested by hundreds of recorded genocides. We also have people who should know better making the mistake of endorsing some of those ideologies, and that multiplies the scale of the genocides by magnitudes. You are one of an army of fools standing in the way of progress towards a peaceful, safe world by defending people's right to propagate some of the most lethal hate on the planet. You condemn Nazism, and that's a good first step - I'm with you on that 100%. If you want to do the same with Maoism and Stalinism, that's great too - I do so without hesitation, despite being a communist. But tying a fairy to the top of an ideology should not give it immunity from prosecution - religious hate needs to be condemned by all decent people just as strongly as any other ideological hate. Your failure to condemn it does not speak well about you. Remember too that there is no need to extend that condemnation to the people who inadvertently endorse and propagate that hate - the task is to educate them so that they understand the harm they're doing, because that's the only way the nightmare can be brought to an end. Humanity should not be held ransom by the hate of lying philosophers for the rest of eternity - we have to stamp out their hate, and that means banning possession and propagation of that hate. There is, as I've said before, no need to throw anything else out - the rest of the Qur'an can continue in place of the old version, and the only thing lost will be the hate that drives genocide, the hate which none of the peaceful people who call themselves Muslims care about.

Am I really asking too much by asking everyone to bin the hate? No. You're the one who's got this badly wrong by defending hate instead of condemning it, and you've made things worse for yourself by trying to pin the hate label to me, calling me a Nazi for condemning hate. In doing so, you have made yourself an extreme hater of a very perverse kind, and the psychology of that is fascinating.

@OwlInASack You're the hater here, condemning those who want to eliminate the hate. You abused me and continue to do so, and the arguments I push are radically different from the fascists whom I attack with equal vigour. I'm against all hate, but you defend some of the worst hate.

@OwlInASack You're the hater here; not me. You simply don't read and misrepresent me every single time because your tiny little mind can't get past the idea that anyone who condemns your pet hate must be a Nazi. No - you are the Nazi here. You are the one endorsing hate while I condemn it. By attacking my condemnation of hate, you are necessarily defending some of the hate that I condemn, and that hate has a track record of generating genocide after genocide of demonised and dehumanised people, exactly as Nazi hate generates genocide. You are a tool of the haters.

@OwlInASack I've told you exactly what my position is and you keep misrepresenting it in a disgusting manner which reveals you to be the Nazi here. I condemn all the primary hate instead of agreeing with you that some of it is acceptable even though it generates genocides. With Nazis, when they deny a genocide driven by Nazi hate, we call them Holocaust deniers and we condemn them outright. There are lots of other genocide deniers though who are just as disgusting - defending them is as wrong as defending Nazis.

There is only one Islam and it's defined by the Qur'an. Anyone who calls themselves a Muslim is automatically endorsing the Qur'an and the vicious primary hate which it contains which generates genocides. It doesn't matter how lax they are - that doesn't excuse their endorsement of the hate (or failure to condemn it and disassociate themselves from it). Imagine a religion whose holy text is filled almost entirely with benign stuff like "bless the jewel in the lotus", but where there's one sentence saying kill all Muslims. If lots of peaceful people endorsed that religion and ignored that little piece of vile hate, would you defend their endorsement and witter on about there being many kinds of follower of that religion as if that justifies their failure to call out the hate which they've signed their names to? There are hosts of morons out there just like you who allow people to get away with endorsing hate, and the result is conflict after conflict after conflict without end. The cure is to get rid of the sources of primary hate and stop its proliferation, and that means ALL the sources. With that hate removed from the world, there will be no secondary hate generated by it. Peace will win out and everyone will be able to get on together without that hate which you want to preserve. I remind you again that you are the Nazi here because you are the one defending hate.

@OwlInASack You're the one with the fascist playbook. You appear to have written it. All you've done is call a neutral a Nazi and you've turned yourself into a Nazi in the process. I've simply reflected your insults back at you, but I'm the one who actually has real justification for pinning the Nazi label to you because you're the one who behaves like one. Your behaviour here has been disgusting in the extreme. All I've done is condemn all the primary hate and criticise people for endorsing some of it. You're exactly the kind of person that becomes a terrorist because of your unrestrained hate.

@OwlInASack You're the simplistic fascist here and it's your hate that's been on display throughout. I condemn the hate, but you defend some of it and accuse me of being a fascist for opposing that hate and criticising the people who endorse it. The reason you're so angry is that you've been shown up for what you are - an accessory to genocide and a genocide denier. The Nazis are in my line of fire too, but you don't see that. You don't see my calls for part of Myanmar to be taken over by the UN and handed over to the Rohingya - when a country goes in for genocide and ethnic cleansing, it loses the right to hold all its own territory. All the evidence is here showing precisely what I have said, and none of it fits with the way you're trying to portray it. You are an extremist, and by now you're doubtless on a list of them held by the security services. You outed yourself by attacking me, and they know exactly what I stand for because they read all my posts everywhere.

@OwlInASack Either you pretend not to read them (because you can see that I'm right) or you already suspect you've been wrong throughout and you'd rather not find out. Meanwhile, I continue to develop software used to identify extremists so that the world can be made a safer place with would-be terrorists like you taken off the streets before they kill.

@OwlInASack Twice a day? I look in here once a day at about the same time, so I don't know where you're getting that idea from. You are not a liberal or supporter of nuance and facts - if you were, you'd be siding with me and you'd be opposing all the hate instead of endorsing some of it. I don't support any of the hate, but you do - that's what makes you a potentially dangerous extremist, likely leading to you being listed as such with the CIA and GCHQ. I have told no lies about Islam or anything else, and while you're spending your Christmas hating Nazis because of their primary hate (which is as bad as the hate in Islam), I won't be hating anyone - I just feel pity for all the haters like you.

@OwlInASack The only clan I work with is one that's dedicated to the business of stamping out all the primary hate from all sides, but there are very few members because most people in the world are hypocrites like you - bigots harbouring their own primary hate and who are too emotionally attached to it to contemplate letting it go. I threw off the vile religion I was brought up in, but I'm not asking anyone else to do that - I simply ask them to reform their religions and other ideologies that they cling to in order to remove the primary hate from them and render them benign. You think that's too much to ask and think it's fascist to ask it, but I disagree - I see it as fascist for people to go on endorsing and propagating the primary hate that generates genocides. That's the big difference between us - you're too thick to understand the morality tied up in all this, so you side with some of the hate while howling at the rest and calling other people fascists for not backing your pet hate.

@OwlInASack You're the hater here, darling. You're also a subject of study now with a whole team of experts in moronics (the study of NGS - natural general stupidity) analysing your behaviour. Thank you for your contribution to science.

@OwlInASack You'll likely meet some of them some day when you're taken off the street during a counter-terrorism operation.

@OwlInASack You're the one posting hate here. I don't have a big problem with your hatred of Nazis and the Klan, but when you extend that hate to people who condemn them on the basis that they also condemn primary hate that you endorse, you reveal yourself to be a danger to the public. That's why your name will stay on a list of potential terrorists who need to be kept an eye on. All those who endorse primary hate will end up on the list as soon as AGI identifies them. Our job is to keep bigots apart so that we can put an end to the unnecessary genocides driven by the hate that you defend.

@OwlInASack I don't lump anyone into a hate basket. I simply put people into two main categories of endorsers of hate (those who generate genocides) and condemners of hate (who don't cause any trouble). You are in the first camp, and you're a hater.

@OwlInASack You're the one who'se delusional. You're a Nazi who calls good people Nazis while you defend some of the worst primary hate on the planet. Go and get yourself a shrink and sort yourself out before you kill someone.

I don't care who you class as Muslims and who you don't - it's an irrelevance. All that matters is that people who class themselves as Muslims are automatically endorsing the primary hate in the Qur'an that drives genocides just as anyone who calls himself a Nazi is automatically endorsing all the primary hate of that ideology which likewise drives genocides (and which does so by the self-same mechanisms).

No amount of calling me a fascist will turn me into one, darling. You're the one who endorses fascists while I condemn all fascisms with equal vigour. It's you that needs to stop being a neo fascist. Stop endorsing the hate. I condemn the lot of it, which is why I want all you Nazis put under house arrest until you stop proliferating hate.

@OwlInASack You and all your fascist-Nazi friends clearly belong together. It's never too late for you to stop being so poisonous though. Give up the hate and you'll be welcomed back into humanity.

I don't put anyone in a hate bucket. I simply call out haters when I see them, and you are one, as well as being an endorser of some of the most vicious hate on the planet. You're the one accusing a non-hater of being a Nazi.

I tell Muslims exactly what I think and ask them if they condemn the primary hate in their holy texts. They all go silent.

Incorrect. Please re-read the introduction, or learn English.

Not necessarily. By its very nature, Islam demands obedience to itself. This means Islam is the ''end all...be all'' which means that the ''moderate'' Muslims are merely interpreting it to suit themselves.

@LucyLoohoo LOL, yerp, got it, a billion people are all alike because they follow one of thousands of branches of the same religion. Just like Christians.

@Druvius
As an ex-Muslim, please allow me to clarify a number of things. The important thing to remember about Islam is that almost all Muslims believe that the Quran is the literal verbatim word of God. So, unlike mainstream Christianity, there is rarely any room for symbolic or allegorica​l interpretations in situations​ of need. Also, there is no disagreement among the different denominations of Islam regarding the central precepts of Islam: that the Quran is the literal word of God and that Mohammad was his messenger. So, the "moderate" Muslims that you often hear about are essentially those that have ignored the barbaric teachings of the Quran in favor of their intrinsic moral values. I believe the statement "there is no moderate Islam" is true in and of itself.

@OwlInASack I have no idea what these hard right's narratives on Islam that you're taking about are, nor have I read any of them. Also, I don't know why you put the word ex-Muslim in quotation marks. Do you think I'm lying about being an ex-Muslim? Because my profile clearly states that I'm from Iran and I'm sure, being such an expert on Islam, you know that the majority of Iranians are Shia Muslims. The fact that I'm here on this website should also tell you you that the probability of me being a believer is extremely slim. I would appreciate it if you point to anything in my previous post that even remotely qualifies as "hate" speech.

Stating that one is an ex-Muslim is not an appeal to authority in and of itself. If you think an ex-Muslim or an ex-Catholic does not know more about Islam or Catholicism than ordinary believers of other religions, then there is something seriously wrong with your logic. If you wanna know how popular the literal interpretation of the Quran is among Muslims, I encourage you to take a look at a couple of random polls such as this one:
[pewforum.org]

"affirmation that there is one God and Muhammad is His Prophet is nearly unanimous in most of the 39 countries included in the study. Only Muslims in sub-Saharan Africa were asked whether they view the Quran as the word of God or a book written by men; across most of the African nations polled, nine-in-ten or more Muslims say that the Quran is the word of God, including more than seven-in-ten who believe it should be taken literally, word for word".

I think this speaks for itself. And don't forget, those numbers only represent Muslims in Africa, not the Middle East (the birthplace of Islam) where the corresponding numbers are obviously much higher.

I think I made it pretty clear that I was criticizing Islam, not Mulsims. There is no question that the vast majority of Muslims are extremely peaceful people. Their peaceful nature, however, is not a reflection on Islam. If you claim that Quran is absent of barbaric teachings, then you obviously don't have the slightest fucking clue about what you're talking about. But if you agree that there are numerous passages in the Quran that support killing infidels, slavery, treating women as second-class citizens, bashing homosexuality, etc. and you combine it with the literal interpretation of the scripture by the vast majority of Muslims, then you will realize where this recipe for disaster is coming from. The problem does not stem from a few Muslims “misinterpreting” what their holy book states. It stems from some of them deciding to be consistent with their approach towards the Quran. They argue that why should we only accept the “good” parts if the Quran is the literal word of God? To better understand the situation of Muslims, I think you need to imagine a world consisting of one and a half billion Evangelical Christians plus the doctrine of Jihad. The important thing to remember is that the doctrine of Jihad is a central precept in the Islamic theology. In other words, it is not a cult within Islam that can be written off as being unrepresentative of a major tradition. Trying to get Muslims to discard such a precept is like trying to figure out how to get Christians to stop thinking Jesus is the son of God, which would be really hard. Now, some Christians have indeed stopped thinking that, but that doesn’t mean that those who are still clinging to this ideology are not “true” Christians. The same thing can also be said about Muslims who believe in the validity of the doctrine of Jihad and martyrdom. Again, I strongly believe that most Muslims are extremely peaceful people. But imagine what a destructive force would be generated if only 1% of them decided to be consistent with their approach towards the Quranic teachings, i.e. not cherry-picking only those that are compatible with their intrinsic moral values. That would mean we’d have about 10 million people who’d be ready to wage war against “infidels”. In other words, 10 million portable bombs ready to go off without us knowing when and where.

So, what can we do about this? One thing we can do, as usually has been the case, is to take the politically correct path, condemning the individuals who do such horrible deeds “in the name of their religion”. The other thing we can do is to take the politically incorrect (and to me the intellectually honest) approach, saying these actions are done as a direct consequence of scriptural authority. Of course, I’m not denying the other factors (political, economic, educational, etc.) that might be involved in the problem of Islamic terrorism, but to neglect the intra-Islamic role that it plays in ascribing a divine significance to it would be a big mistake.

Sorry for the long post!

@OwlInASack Wow! You're much more vacuous than I had originally suspected! Before acting as an unpaid employee of the "Atheistic Community of SJWs for Islam", try to learn to differentiate between criticizing the teachings of a religion and its followers. Learning to make sense of polls and statistics would also help you avoid future humiliation.

@Darius77 We get it, you're full of yourself. No need to elaborate.

@Druvius One quickly realizes whether someone is full of himself when he uses "we" to pretend that he speaks for everyone.

@OwlInASack No, I AM gonna apologize! I apologize that you lack basic logical skills to come up with the revelation that "9 out of 10 people" represents the vast majority. I also apologize that I have run out of things to say. After all, I have been giving you all these one-liner excuses for a response.

If being labeled a "right winger" offers me the luxury of avoiding inclusion in the same category of people like you, then I will embrace it with open arms!