Florida terrorist massacre

[KnightersRevenge]

Yep. Your living room. The pub with intellectual mates. An ASIO meeting room. Maybe even on here. But I reckon the tabloid media should be very careful in what they call a spade.

As you know, this is a ridiculously complex issue and many people have no interest in trying to understand it. They just want someone (or a newspaper) to make them emotional; given them an excuse to be angry with Muslims/immigrants OR with Australia/the West.

FWIW I don't doubt your assertion about a greater proportion of Muslims being involved in acts of violence, but I don't think the solution is to tell Muslim people that their religion is the problem. Part of the solution I think is to facilitate an environment where Islam can modernise. That requires baby steps and warmth, not lecturing, especially not from people as far removed from their world view as atheists.

[EDIT]
I am sure you are right about tabloids but I'm not sure you are right about who should and should not offer their thoughts. I thought Owen Jones storming off the set at Sky News because he thought only gay people could fully understand the pain and the personal nature of this attack (and that to talk about it in a more general societal sense was offensive) is an example of this idea. Only women should discuss feminism or only black people should discuss racism for instance. Living in a society has benefits and responsibilities. We take an unconscous (I wish it were more conscious) pact to be a good and funtioning member of a collective. That means that all ideas can be spoken but the collective has to decide whether what they say is useful and to the betterment of that society. That means that people who are "outside" of any clutch or group within the collective can speak their mind. In fact the whole society benefits when they do. Even if they say odious or dangerous things. Thoughts that are held close and not shared can not be of any benefit. Odious or noxious ramblings benefit us by making an example of where we don't want the society to go. At the moment Muslims are a group within a society that has many groups. We must all co-exist and that means that my thoughts as an atheist are just as valid as theirs. Especially if adherence to certain ideas within their culture has a detrimental affect on the society we share.

I do think the world would be better off without religion. I don't think that is very likely or that "lecturing" people is the best way to go about it. I do think that honest discourse has a place. Step change (sudden change) is very rare and frought with danger when you are talking about societies. Berlin was, almost accidentally, de-segregated in the 90's and that destabilised the region for a long time. The seeds of neo-naziism still fester.

So yes "baby steps" is the way to go. One such baby step is being attempted by reformed Islamic extremist Maajid Nawaz. A former recruiter for an Islamic Extremist group, jailed in Egypt for 5 years he began to question his ideology after his release and eventually co-founded Quilliam. A centre to help pull extremists back from the edge. He is a voice for the marginalised and silenced truly "moderate" Islam. His message is simply that Muslims can hold on to their culture and their faith without having to hold to the most dangerous ideas from within their religion. He holds out hope, to me at least, that it is possible to be a "non devout" Muslim. I believe there a millions of Muslims who probably fit that description but who would never utter it in front of their family or in wider society for fear of ostracisation or much much worse.

If we wait for this conversation to happen from within I think we risk many more years like the last decade. Their religion "is the problem". If it "needs to modernise" then it must have a problem. The more open and honest we are about the pitfalls (Saudi girls burning alive in their school because the religious police, physically obstructing their parents from saving them, would not let them leave unshrouded is worse than a pitfall really isn't it?) the sooner we can help those who are genuinely scared to be honest about their "faith" in the open and remove the fear

 

[Coburgtiger]

No doubt bro. But is there a place for calling a spade a spade? Is there room in the conversation to be honest about the disproportionate numbers of Muslims that are involved in acts of violence?

What are those 'disproportionate numbers'? Don't just make things up.

 

[Brodders17]

What are those 'disproportionate numbers'? Don't just make things up.

Muslims are certainly responsible for a higher proportion of high profile acts of violence around the world, but is that because they are actually more involved in violence or because the media reports it more.

example recently, the shooting in Germany, made news for 24 hours, but because the perp was not a muslim it wasn't a terrorist act and therefor did not stay in the news.
on the other hand there was a shooting in an African country committed by ISIS. that makes the news. not too many other acts of violence in Africa make news.
There have been some horrendous amount of mass killings (more than 4 deaths I think) in the US over the last few years. most do not make the news. unless the perp is muslim. then it is an act of terrorism.

 

[Coburgtiger]

Muslims are certainly responsible for a higher proportion of high profile acts of violence around the world, but is that because they are actually more involved in violence or because the media reports it more.

example recently, the shooting in Germany, made news for 24 hours, but because the perp was not a muslim it wasn't a terrorist act and therefor did not stay in the news.
on the other hand there was a shooting in an African country committed by ISIS. that makes the news. not too many other acts of violence in Africa make news.
There have been some horrendous amount of mass killings (more than 4 deaths I think) in the US over the last few years. most do not make the news. unless the perp is muslim. then it is an act of terrorism.

It just makes me mad when people spew nonsense like 'a disproportionate number of Muslims are involved in acts of violence' as fact.

It just further perpetuates a flawed stereotype. It is neither true to say that a bigger protein of Muslims are violent than non Muslims, or that most worldwide violence is conducted by Muslims. It is just an excuse to religiously vilify a section of the population when you say rubbish like that.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

It just makes me mad when people spew nonsense like 'a disproportionate number of Muslims are involved in acts of violence' as fact.

It just further perpetuates a flawed stereotype. It is neither true to say that a bigger protein of Muslims are violent than non Muslims, or that most worldwide violence is conducted by Muslims. It is just an excuse to religiously vilify a section of the population when you say rubbish like that.

Nope. I have no intention of vilifying anyone. If you don't think that including and since Sept. 11th 2001 there has been an increase in the number of deaths directly linked to Islam then fair enough. I do.

I didn't say that "most worldwide violence is conducted by Muslims". I simply said it was disproportionate. You could have asked me "to what" rather than leap to accuse me of vilifying people. Every time I hear about a bombing or a mass shooting (like the one in Orlando we are dicussing or the more recent Ataturk Airport) my mind does not immediately jump to those damned Amish, or radical Scientologists. And unfortunately that is because of the increase in the Islamist use of violence. If it were the 70's/80's and the bombings were in Ireland or London I wouldn't have been thinking, damned Muslims. Give it a name, I say.

I simply think the "Voldermort" effect, where we can never speak the name of the thing that demonstrably links these horrific events, does nothing to further the cause of moderate Muslims. It absolutely is part of the problem. Tarnishing any who says so with the biggot tag is not helpful.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Deleted