It was an islamic[sic] attack but if the article wants to concentrate on their loss over politics that's their right. OP is twisting the article to their personal crusade.
Terror in the name of any religion should be called out by name. Christianity has the Spanish Inquisition, and that was terror by the state. Religious zealotry with violence is just that, and should be called out as such.
NOTE: This presumes that it's being called out regardless of the religion. In other words, you can't play favorites.
> Terror in the name of any [group of millions] should be called out by name.
It doesn't seem right and I doubt it does anything but spread more hate around. If you're American (good odds, on this site) and a group of Americans do terrorist attacks in the name of America, we shouldn't blame "the Americans" but whatever subgroup actually agrees with doing this.
I am really sad to see that even on this site, where people generally try to be rational, my post was still downvoted so presumably people agree with spreading the hate.
For the record, I'm Dutch, have never gone beyond western Europe, am Christian by birth and atheist by choice... so none of the groups that would traditionally defend the Islam... other than that we are all human. People are taught values (in part) by their parents, possibly in the name of some religion, after which they often believe 'religiously' in those and identify as being of that religion. Attacking the religion is attacking them, whereas I'm sure >99% of them would never agree with this attack.
It's worth going through the exercise of finding the most particular category of people that the acts come from. So in the case of the recent waves of terrorist attacks in Europe, it seems more appropriate to call them fundamentalist sunni or salafi terrorism, rather than a blanket islam/muslim which disregards important differences within the (very large) community of muslim believers.
In the 190x it was also a quite singular group of anarchists, not all atheists or socialists.
It is if they claim it. And it is the responsibility of other Muslims to condemn it.
Likewise, if an American commits a similar atrocity in the name of America, it is upon other Americans to condemn it.
It is this act of allowing the condemnation of people with the same attribute that lets us see the terroists as what they are (as you pointed out in your post). When that _doesn't_ happen, then they are not extremists any more, but representative of said population.
And it is for that reason that I think it is important to call them out. To ignore just builds up frustration on all parties, and then worse things start to happen.
13 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 27.4 ms ] threadBlaming Islam doesn't seem right...
"Tom's Hardware Italy's Bruno Gulotta Victim Of Barcelona Terrorist Attack"
It was an islamic[sic] attack but if the article wants to concentrate on their loss over politics that's their right. OP is twisting the article to their personal crusade.
NOTE: This presumes that it's being called out regardless of the religion. In other words, you can't play favorites.
It doesn't seem right and I doubt it does anything but spread more hate around. If you're American (good odds, on this site) and a group of Americans do terrorist attacks in the name of America, we shouldn't blame "the Americans" but whatever subgroup actually agrees with doing this.
I am really sad to see that even on this site, where people generally try to be rational, my post was still downvoted so presumably people agree with spreading the hate.
For the record, I'm Dutch, have never gone beyond western Europe, am Christian by birth and atheist by choice... so none of the groups that would traditionally defend the Islam... other than that we are all human. People are taught values (in part) by their parents, possibly in the name of some religion, after which they often believe 'religiously' in those and identify as being of that religion. Attacking the religion is attacking them, whereas I'm sure >99% of them would never agree with this attack.
In the 190x it was also a quite singular group of anarchists, not all atheists or socialists.
Likewise, if an American commits a similar atrocity in the name of America, it is upon other Americans to condemn it.
It is this act of allowing the condemnation of people with the same attribute that lets us see the terroists as what they are (as you pointed out in your post). When that _doesn't_ happen, then they are not extremists any more, but representative of said population.
And it is for that reason that I think it is important to call them out. To ignore just builds up frustration on all parties, and then worse things start to happen.
Ignoring them is not an option.
"Tom's Hardware Italy editor killed in terrorist act claimed by organization created, funded and armed by the US and some of its puppet states."
I think it's more accurate too.