t***@gmail.com
2014-12-16 08:10:46 UTC
I noted the Aussie PM stating that it would be wrong to associate the recently ended Sydney siege with any particular religious group (I consider it implicit in this statement that he intended that this view should be extended to all similar situations, at home and abroad, rather than having reason to believe that the Sydney siege was a special case). We've heard similar from our own politicians and from other foreign governments.
It seems to me that accepting such a statement is to deny the bloody obvious. There is very clearly a problem with a subset of followers of Islam that leads them to commit acts of terror to an extent that we just don't see with other religions. That is not to say that all or most of the followers of Islam are bad, or enemies, but there does appear to be something about Islam that provides a certain comfort and a perceived legitimacy to people who carry out dreadful actions in its name.
Is that fair enough, or am I racist/religionist/insert other thoughtcrime here?
Terry.
It seems to me that accepting such a statement is to deny the bloody obvious. There is very clearly a problem with a subset of followers of Islam that leads them to commit acts of terror to an extent that we just don't see with other religions. That is not to say that all or most of the followers of Islam are bad, or enemies, but there does appear to be something about Islam that provides a certain comfort and a perceived legitimacy to people who carry out dreadful actions in its name.
Is that fair enough, or am I racist/religionist/insert other thoughtcrime here?
Terry.