Why condemn a whole people if only a few do wrong?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So why Do you judge differently if a bad person come from a religious background?

One thing about religion specifically: religion gets all sorts of benefits - paid for by people like me - on the pretext that religions provide their adherents with a moral foundation.

If religious people behave no better than non-religious people, then this means that the promise implicit in that bargain has been broken.

Nobody is asking for garages to be tax-free like a church, or for people to be able to get a tax deduction for their car repair bills like they get for their tithes. Religions get special benefits and therefore ought to be held to a higher standard.

If you've personally done nothing wrong, great... but that's the bare minimum we expect of any member of society. If you or your religious organization are going to ask for special benefits, then I think it's reasonable for me to ask what you'll be doing above and beyond the minimum to justify those benefits.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

A very classical issue that occure not only in RF but in daily life on earth, is that people judge everyone from a group if one of them do wrong.

Example if one muslim do wrong, every muslim must be evil.

If one Christian do wrong Christianity must be evil?

How about if a car mechanic do an evil action, example murder or rape, does every car mechanics become evil human beings?

So why Do you judge differently if a bad person come from a religious background?

To be fair, are you suggesting Islam or Christianity hasn't ever judged unbelievers differently?
I think what you're railing against here is tribalism. Fair enough. But taking the side of the religious is (ironically) somewhat tribalistic.

Equally, me automatically taking the side of the non-religious, imho.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I think many muslims do try to reduce the bad of those terrorists. But media dont show it

I agree that many do.

 

[Colt]

A very classical issue that occure not only in RF but in daily life on earth, is that people judge everyone from a group if one of them do wrong.

Example if one muslim do wrong, every muslim must be evil.

If one Christian do wrong Christianity must be evil?

How about if a car mechanic do an evil action, example murder or rape, does every car mechanics become evil human beings?

So why Do you judge differently if a bad person come from a religious background?

The biggest problem for Sufis is other Muslims.

 

[exchemist]

You do have some good points here.
Unfortunatly a lot of non arabic speakers only have the Quran in arabic, so they reading/listen to a book they dont understand them self. And only base their belief out of what an imam tell them to believe.
Of course this will create wrongdoing and misunderstanding. And lead to suffering of others but muslims and non muslims

In the UK, I have read that one of the problems is that imams are often people imported from Pakistan, i.e 1st generation immigrants, who are not familiar with Western society, suffer from culture shock and react by preaching hostility to a society they have not had time to acclimatise to. What moderate islam needs, in my country, is to recruit more imams who are 2nd or 3rd generation, who understand and accept Western society and have adapted their faith to cope with it.

I feel sure moderate islam has a lot to offer in our society, if it can rid itself of cultural norms - which are not intrinsic to the faith - from thousands of miles away and several centuries ago.

 

[Twilight Hue]

A very classical issue that occure not only in RF but in daily life on earth, is that people judge everyone from a group if one of them do wrong.

Example if one muslim do wrong, every muslim must be evil.

If one Christian do wrong Christianity must be evil?

How about if a car mechanic do an evil action, example murder or rape, does every car mechanics become evil human beings?

So why Do you judge differently if a bad person come from a religious background?

Try multiplying that to a thousand people, a million people, entire governments. It tends to put things in a different perspective and light.

It can be a collective judgment where an individual might not be at fault, but the affiliation makes it inclusive nevertheless.

A lot of people still like the confederate flag for example. Does that make that person a racist?

It think it goes along similar lines in cases of Islam and Muslims.

 

[Vinayaka]

A very classical issue that occure not only in RF but in daily life on earth, is that people judge everyone from a group if one of them do wrong.

Example if one muslim do wrong, every muslim must be evil.

If one Christian do wrong Christianity must be evil?

How about if a car mechanic do an evil action, example murder or rape, does every car mechanics become evil human beings?

So why Do you judge differently if a bad person come from a religious background?

I think generalis

A very classical issue that occure not only in RF but in daily life on earth, is that people judge everyone from a group if one of them do wrong.

Example if one muslim do wrong, every muslim must be evil.

If one Christian do wrong Christianity must be evil?

How about if a car mechanic do an evil action, example murder or rape, does every car mechanics become evil human beings?

So why Do you judge differently if a bad person come from a religious background?

I see very few people, if any, who generalise in this way. Sure, in casual conversation, they might say it. but if pressed to think just a tad deeper, they'll withdraw the statement by using 'some' or a few' in front of whatever group they're generalising.

 

[viole]

if one muslim do wrong

one?

All the Muslims I know believe that the dead cartoonists who made fun of the prophet had it coming. They disapprove their killing, but cartoonists should really stop doing that, or they had it coming if they are killed again.

And that sort of attack to our freedom of expression, or the accuse of islamophobia every time we criticise some aspects of Islam, like the fact that they accept zero criticism, are also evil.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Spirit of Light]

Would you ever publicly condemn them and say that what they are doing is wrong, especially detailing how they are wrong?

Yes i already done it here in Norway

 

[stvdv]

A very classical issue that occure not only in RF but in daily life on earth, is that people judge everyone from a group if one of them do wrong.

Old habits die hard; usually if you see 'wrongs' in others, the 'wrong', is also in you

Reason why they do it, I don't know

BUT usually it starts when they forget to put the word "some" in the middle of "that people"

 

[Samael_Khan]

Yes i already done it here in Norway

Awesome! Great to hear!

 

[Spirit of Light]

one?

All the Muslims I know believe that the dead cartoonists who made fun of the prophet had it coming. They disapprove their killing, but cartoonists should really stop doing that, or they had it coming if they are killed again.

And that sort of attack to our freedom of expression, or the accuse of islamophobia every time we criticise some aspects of Islam, like the fact that they accept zero criticism, are also evil.

Ciao

- viole

I condem the killing of cartoonist and i am a muslim. There are other more friendly ways to say one disagree. As muslims er are not suppose to depict Allah or prophet's

 

[Samael_Khan]

one?

All the Muslims I know believe that the dead cartoonists who made fun of the prophet had it coming. They disapprove their killing, but cartoonists should really stop doing that, or they had it coming if they are killed again.

And that sort of attack to our freedom of expression, or the accuse of islamophobia every time we criticise some aspects of Islam, like the fact that they accept zero criticism, are also evil.

Ciao

- viole

I also came across that. It seems like doublespeak to me. Saying that you disprove of the killing while simultaneously saying that they had it coming is a contradiction. It seems to me like they actually approve of the killing but want to sugar coat their viewpoint.

 

[Spirit of Light]

To be fair, are you suggesting Islam or Christianity hasn't ever judged unbelievers differently?
I think what you're railing against here is tribalism. Fair enough. But taking the side of the religious is (ironically) somewhat tribalistic.

Equally, me automatically taking the side of the non-religious, imho.

I do not say religious groups are not doing judgment on others, it happens often when a educated religious person try to "defend" his or her religious belief and the right to speak up.

We should not judge other than our own behaviour, not others

 

[stvdv]

Here is an example of the actual problem from a persepective of an outsider looking in:

Ravi Zacharias has been revealed to be a sexual predator and a whole lot of christians condemn him for it.

If the same thing is revealed about a famous muslim how many muslims would condemn his actions?

It seems like (emphasis on SEEMS) muslims in general don't like to admit that their religion and its practitioners have flaws. That is a problem.

IMO:

Good point, this is a huge problem. The moment people believe that their Religion/Scripture/prophet is the best, these problems do arise

But I at least know one muslim who is genuine and he is a good friend of mine, but the majority of Sunni's I know have an arrogance about them that is offputting.

This arrogance again, indeed is the major problem. And I see this arrogance not only under Muslims, but all people who believe to know the best

 

[Samael_Khan]

This arrogance again, indeed is the major problem. And I see this arrogance not only under Muslims, but all people who believe to know the best

Definitely true. And I often find that these arrogant groups often times say they are humble as well. That is a contradiction.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I also came across that. It seems like doublespeak to me. Saying that you disprove of the killing while simultaneously saying that they had it coming is a contradiction. It seems to me like they actually approve of the killing but want to sugar coat their viewpoint.

Without knowing for sure, the answer can lay in that muslims are not suppose to depict Allah or prophet's, so many are afraid of Allah's view on them if they become to accepting toward what nok muslims do to the name 8f Allah or prophet Muhammad

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

A very classical issue that occure not only in RF but in daily life on earth, is that people judge everyone from a group if one of them do wrong. Example if one muslim do wrong, every muslim must be evil. If one Christian do wrong Christianity must be evil?

This is another straw man. Who's judging an entire religion based on a single act?

How about if a car mechanic do an evil action, example murder or rape, does every car mechanics become evil human beings? So why Do you judge differently if a bad person come from a religious background?

Not an apt analogy, since that's not happening with Christians and Muslims. Judgments of each religion are based in large numbers of data points, not a single mechanic.

Question: do all muslim scream Allahu akbar and then kill? No we dont. So it is wrong to judge every muslim for what a few do.

Actually, I judge Islam by the collection of things I have come to know and believe about it. The Muslims I have known have been aloof, and treat me like I cannot be trusted or confided in. Of course, they have been out of their element living in the States, which I know as an expat myself means you keep your negative opinions about what you see around you to yourself. I always got the impression from these Muslims that they disapproved of me and didn't want to know me, and have no reason to expect anything different in the future.

But if I do encounter any Muslims in my new country - they're rarer here than the States,a nd I haven't yet in 11+ years - I won't hate them or fear that they are terrorists, but I'll not pursue the same relationship with them that I would if they behaved more like the other Americans and Canadians around me, who embrace one another. If a Muslim ever approached me in that spirit, he would be welcomed into my life, and I would love to explore our differences.

But that never happens.

The muslims who do wrong have misunderstood the teaching.

Why would that matter to someone like me? They would say the same about you. From the outside, it doesn't matter what either group says about the other. I'm only interested in what people calling themselves Muslim (or Christian) are apt to do. If Islam leaves large numbers of its adherent in a state you don't consider orthodox, well, that's Islam, too. The No True Muslim argument is irrelevant. Of course they're true Muslims. They're actual Muslims, real Muslims in my world.

I think many muslims do try to reduce the bad of those terrorists. But media dont show it

The bad image that Islam has in the West has not affected my opinion of you one iota, which impression is based only on your words.

You've never been interested in my advice, but I'll give it here anyway. I would suggest focusing on how you are treated rather than how you imagine you are perceived. I haven't seen you receive much anti-Muslim pushback in these threads from anybody else - any, really, but maybe you have. I don't really know what you believe, and it doesn't matter if its not oppressive or violent.

 

[wellwisher]

A very classical issue that occure not only in RF but in daily life on earth, is that people judge everyone from a group if one of them do wrong.

Example if one muslim do wrong, every muslim must be evil.

If one Christian do wrong Christianity must be evil?

How about if a car mechanic do an evil action, example murder or rape, does every car mechanics become evil human beings?

So why Do you judge differently if a bad person come from a religious background?

The reparations for slavery scam uses the same type of dynamics. Everyone has to pay for the past, based on skin color, for the evil done by others with the same skin color, even if there is no proof of your direct involvement. If one Christian killed a witch, everyone, even those who never did anything, are now guilty. Both seem to plagiarize the Garden of Eden fall from grace; original sin schema. Maybe the leaders of these cons need to be brought to court for plagiarism.

There is a neurological explanation for why these plagiarism scams works so effectively on many people. When memory is created, emotional tags are added to memory when it is written to the cerebral matter. Our memory has both sensory content and emotional valance. This is useful for the natural animal, since if its memory is induced by similar situations, it can act on the attached feeling without having to think. If you see a strange fruit you once ate, and it was good, and your memory is induced, you will feel the good tag, and eat again.

This binary tagging of memory; content and feeling, allows us to approach memory from either side. We can approach memory from the feeling tag side or the content side. I can feel hungry at lunch and all types of food objects may appear in my mind. with hunger feeing tags. Or I can focus on the picture of pizza I saw; content side, and this will make me hungry; induced feeling tag.

These two approaches to memory are not equal and opposite. There are only a relatively small number of feelings, so the asme set of feelings are recycled and used for many similar memories. All the food we ever liked since childhood, will have a similar feeling tag. The sensory content side is much more diverse, since it involves details through all fives senses at point in space and time.

The content side is the direction science tries to go; content first. It also tries to repress the induced emotions, so these do not induce parallel memory. Western culture, via its control by Leftist media, favors feelings over thought. One is taught to approach memory from the feeling side; memories get lumped.

The brain has two hemispheres, left and right. The left is more about differential thinking; cause and affect, while the right brain is more integral and feeling orientated. The way memory is created, both sides of the brain will always act together, processing half of the binary memory, on each of its two sides. The left and right side break down of the brain is not as clear cut by brain scans since both act.

Depending on where your ego consciousness resides, will influence which of the two sides is more conscious. Feeling indoctrination shifts consciousness to the right, while science indoctrination shifts it to the left, with both sides active and the other side less conscious.

If you look at condemning all by the few, this is connected to right brain thinking; integrates everyone, based on feelings instead of thinking If anyone recalls, when Trump was elected president, he became Hitler, nuclear war and the KKK all wrapped into one. This was due to the feeling induction of hate, dragging up other hate memories, so appeared to be integrated. Progressives calls themselves modern, but their brain and memory approach is from antiquity. But with emotion first, this con cannot be seen. You will need to shift to the left and control your emotions.

In the ideal world, both the left and right brain are very useful, if they are both used for checks and balances. One needs to shift to the left to find differences, and then to the right to integrate this new data Then back to the left to test the improved theory, before making sweeping conclusions; reparations.

The feeling first indoctrination prevents reason from being used to differentiate each person, to make stereo types more just. Anger or fear will bring to mind all those memories that have anger and fear tags, even if unrelated, thereby clouding sensory reality. The best con artists appear to know how this works and do this on purpose to manipulate the feeling mob for personal gain.

Original sin used the feeling schema, but that was for ancient people, who first had to develop that side of the brain, before the age of reason would shift the ego more to the left. Progressive should be called Regressive, in terms of brain evolution using willpower. New paint on an old behavior; original sin, is still an antique.

 

[stvdv]

Definitely true. And I often find that these arrogant groups often times say they are humble as well. That is a contradiction.

True again

Contradiction I don't mind, but here is the real BIG issue: they are so much blinded by their arrogance, that they can't even see reality anymore