jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:
I made what is called a reductio ad absurdum. It is of course absurd to define Christianity by the Westboro Baptist Church. It is equally absurd to define Islam by ISIS. If you disagree with either of those statements, please explain why you disagree.
The Westboro church consists of 50 people in one town in Kansas. ISIS has at least 1 million followers spread over many countries with numerous scholars justifying its beliefs in the Koran. So I'd say that ISIS is a significant current in contemporary Islamic thought, whereas the Westboro church is an extreme fringe.
Regardless of the numbers (which I think you are greatly exaggerating), the principle is the same.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:WBC holds up hateful signs, especially in appropriate places. ISIS actually, you know, slaughters people.
But that's none of my business.
Criticize both groups, not the larger religions to which they claim to belong.
Anonymous wrote:WBC holds up hateful signs, especially in appropriate places. ISIS actually, you know, slaughters people.
But that's none of my business.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Parts of the religion are to be sure. Isis is not the only group that seeks justification. A lot of us find sharia law - commonly practiced in many communities - pretty unfair to women/overly harsh to criminals. We find many madrassas to spew poison. No one is criticizing the religion or Muslims as a while, but critique of try e loved practice in many communities can go beyond Isis.
The only thing about this post with which I disagree is that nobody is criticizing the religion as a whole. Many people are doing exactly that. Otherwise, I agree with you completely.
Anonymous wrote:Parts of the religion are to be sure. Isis is not the only group that seeks justification. A lot of us find sharia law - commonly practiced in many communities - pretty unfair to women/overly harsh to criminals. We find many madrassas to spew poison. No one is criticizing the religion or Muslims as a while, but critique of try e loved practice in many communities can go beyond Isis.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:too academic. The point is that comparing ISIS to Westboro given the difference the difference in their violent proclivities is not reductio ad absurdum, it's just absurdum.
Question to both of the two previous posters: Do you think the fact that IS claims religious justification for its actions means that the entire religion should be subject to criticism as a result of the group's actions?
Anonymous wrote:too academic. The point is that comparing ISIS to Westboro given the difference the difference in their violent proclivities is not reductio ad absurdum, it's just absurdum.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:
I made what is called a reductio ad absurdum. It is of course absurd to define Christianity by the Westboro Baptist Church. It is equally absurd to define Islam by ISIS. If you disagree with either of those statements, please explain why you disagree.
The Westboro church consists of 50 people in one town in Kansas. ISIS has at least 1 million followers spread over many countries with numerous scholars justifying its beliefs in the Koran. So I'd say that ISIS is a significant current in contemporary Islamic thought, whereas the Westboro church is an extreme fringe.
Nobody is "defining" Islam by ISIS. In terms of its size and influence ISIS within Islam is more comparable to say the Seventh day Adventists within Christianity. In terms of its justification of violence, ISIS has no comparison in contemporary Christianity.
Regardless of the numbers (which I think you are greatly exaggerating), the principle is the same. As you agree, IS does not represent Islam. My position has been that because IS does not represent Islam, it is unfair to criticize the entire religion based on its actions. There is another poster here who believes that IS can justify its behavior based on Islamic writings and therefore, such criticism is justified. Similarly, Westboro Baptist Church finds justification for its actions in Christian scriptures. I think that you would agree that, as a result, all of Christianity does not deserve criticism as a result of Westboro's actions? Or, to use your analogy, should all Christianity be judged by the actions of Seventh Day Adventists (a group about which I know nothing)?
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:
I made what is called a reductio ad absurdum. It is of course absurd to define Christianity by the Westboro Baptist Church. It is equally absurd to define Islam by ISIS. If you disagree with either of those statements, please explain why you disagree.
The Westboro church consists of 50 people in one town in Kansas. ISIS has at least 1 million followers spread over many countries with numerous scholars justifying its beliefs in the Koran. So I'd say that ISIS is a significant current in contemporary Islamic thought, whereas the Westboro church is an extreme fringe.
Nobody is "defining" Islam by ISIS. In terms of its size and influence ISIS within Islam is more comparable to say the Seventh day Adventists within Christianity. In terms of its justification of violence, ISIS has no comparison in contemporary Christianity.
Regardless of the numbers (which I think you are greatly exaggerating), the principle is the same. As you agree, IS does not represent Islam. My position has been that because IS does not represent Islam, it is unfair to criticize the entire religion based on its actions. There is another poster here who believes that IS can justify its behavior based on Islamic writings and therefore, such criticism is justified. Similarly, Westboro Baptist Church finds justification for its actions in Christian scriptures. I think that you would agree that, as a result, all of Christianity does not deserve criticism as a result of Westboro's actions? Or, to use your analogy, should all Christianity be judged by the actions of Seventh Day Adventists (a group about which I know nothing)?
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:
I made what is called a reductio ad absurdum. It is of course absurd to define Christianity by the Westboro Baptist Church. It is equally absurd to define Islam by ISIS. If you disagree with either of those statements, please explain why you disagree.
The Westboro church consists of 50 people in one town in Kansas. ISIS has at least 1 million followers spread over many countries with numerous scholars justifying its beliefs in the Koran. So I'd say that ISIS is a significant current in contemporary Islamic thought, whereas the Westboro church is an extreme fringe.
Nobody is "defining" Islam by ISIS. In terms of its size and influence ISIS within Islam is more comparable to say the Seventh day Adventists within Christianity. In terms of its justification of violence, ISIS has no comparison in contemporary Christianity.