3 ms·

You may not be racist, but you're a bigot. No matter whether or not Muslims tend to bomb airplanes more than anyone else, preventing Muslims from flying is bot

You may not be racist, but you're a bigot. No matter whether or not Muslims tend to bomb airplanes more than anyone else, preventing Muslims from flying is both unethical and inconsistent with the principles of Western democracy.

jrockway 17y ago
But only Muslims commit terrorist attacks. Remember the Oklahoma City bomber? Muslim. Remember the Unabomber? Muslim. Oh wait... they were both Regular Old White Guys.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  "But only Muslims commit terrorist attacks." I sympathize with your outrage when confronted with blatant bigotry, but this isn't what was implied. If you take a random sample of a 1000 terrorist attacks in the world, I suspect you'd have well over 85 % of them committed by Muslims. Now, this in itself doesn't imply that you can (or should) discriminate against Muslims, because that is a very very small percentage of the total Muslim population, but there is some truth to the old saw "Most muslims are not terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim". I am not sure what the correct conclusion to draw is, but as a proto truth, perhaps just like Communism is a dangerous and suboptimal way to run a society, maybe a religion with millions of followers that advocates eternal war and subjugation of the Infidel should be carefully watched. In the Middle Ages this would be Christianity. In the 20th century, this would probably be Islam. I also submit we may never be able to have rational discussion of this topic, except among very close friends, because it would veer rapidly into divisive topics and useless hairsplitting - a prime example of "things you can't say" (or discuss rationally). Besides this is politics - something that should rarely be on HN in any case.
  - jrockway 17y ago
    100% of terrorist attacks are committed by terrorists. That sounds like a better filter than religious beliefs. You have to look at it the other way. 0.00% of Christians commit terrorist attacks. 0.00% of Muslims commit terrorist attacks. Therefore, it doesn't seem too valuable to discriminate in this way. a prime example of "things you can't say" You can say it, but legalized discrimination goes against every value a Free society has. Liberty is more important than a little bit of temporary safety. It's that simple.
    - plinkplonk 17y ago
      "You can say it, but legalized discrimination goes against every value a Free society has." I completely agree. I was careful to make the point that discrimination is NOT ok even if 100% of terrorist acts in the world were by Muslims because the number of people who are decent citizens far outweigh the terrorists, just as the number of decent communists far outweighed the Red- Terror-kill-all-capitalists folks and McCarthyism was not an acceptable solution either. I was reacting to your "But only Muslims commit terrorist attacks." That is an exaggeration of the claim made by those who would advocate legal discrimination. Mischaracterizing your opponents' arguments (no matter how distasteful their ideologies are) isn't the right way (imo) to refute their ideas. You do it again with " 0.00% of Christians commit terrorist attacks. 0.00% of Muslims commit terrorist attacks. " Most muslim terrorists are educated in madrassas where they study their religion for a long time. Saudi Arabia and Iran (and to a lesser extent, Pakistan), where much of Islamic terrorism originates are the terrorism originates are theocracies or hevaily theocratic. Their motivation, training, goals and methods are all influenced by religion are religious. To deny that there is a religious element to Islamic terrorism is an extreme position not justified by facts. You could argue that this isn't "True Islam", but that is a different argument. Again I completely agree with your idea that "Muslims must NOT be discriminated against" idea. Such discrimination is against everything Western Democracy (and human decency) stand for. I am still disturbed by Islam as a political and social ideology dictating how others should submit to the "true believers". I guess I just don't go to extremes in either direction. Some social visions are dangerous. All that said, I will now follow my own advice of keeping politics off HN! Peace!

jrockway 17y ago

But only Muslims commit terrorist attacks. Remember the Oklahoma City bomber? Muslim. Remember the Unabomber? Muslim. Oh wait... they were both Regular Old White Guys.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
plinkplonk 17y ago
"But only Muslims commit terrorist attacks." I sympathize with your outrage when confronted with blatant bigotry, but this isn't what was implied. If you take a random sample of a 1000 terrorist attacks in the world, I suspect you'd have well over 85 % of them committed by Muslims. Now, this in itself doesn't imply that you can (or should) discriminate against Muslims, because that is a very very small percentage of the total Muslim population, but there is some truth to the old saw "Most muslims are not terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim". I am not sure what the correct conclusion to draw is, but as a proto truth, perhaps just like Communism is a dangerous and suboptimal way to run a society, maybe a religion with millions of followers that advocates eternal war and subjugation of the Infidel should be carefully watched. In the Middle Ages this would be Christianity. In the 20th century, this would probably be Islam. I also submit we may never be able to have rational discussion of this topic, except among very close friends, because it would veer rapidly into divisive topics and useless hairsplitting - a prime example of "things you can't say" (or discuss rationally). Besides this is politics - something that should rarely be on HN in any case.
- jrockway 17y ago
  100% of terrorist attacks are committed by terrorists. That sounds like a better filter than religious beliefs. You have to look at it the other way. 0.00% of Christians commit terrorist attacks. 0.00% of Muslims commit terrorist attacks. Therefore, it doesn't seem too valuable to discriminate in this way. a prime example of "things you can't say" You can say it, but legalized discrimination goes against every value a Free society has. Liberty is more important than a little bit of temporary safety. It's that simple.
  - plinkplonk 17y ago
    "You can say it, but legalized discrimination goes against every value a Free society has." I completely agree. I was careful to make the point that discrimination is NOT ok even if 100% of terrorist acts in the world were by Muslims because the number of people who are decent citizens far outweigh the terrorists, just as the number of decent communists far outweighed the Red- Terror-kill-all-capitalists folks and McCarthyism was not an acceptable solution either. I was reacting to your "But only Muslims commit terrorist attacks." That is an exaggeration of the claim made by those who would advocate legal discrimination. Mischaracterizing your opponents' arguments (no matter how distasteful their ideologies are) isn't the right way (imo) to refute their ideas. You do it again with " 0.00% of Christians commit terrorist attacks. 0.00% of Muslims commit terrorist attacks. " Most muslim terrorists are educated in madrassas where they study their religion for a long time. Saudi Arabia and Iran (and to a lesser extent, Pakistan), where much of Islamic terrorism originates are the terrorism originates are theocracies or hevaily theocratic. Their motivation, training, goals and methods are all influenced by religion are religious. To deny that there is a religious element to Islamic terrorism is an extreme position not justified by facts. You could argue that this isn't "True Islam", but that is a different argument. Again I completely agree with your idea that "Muslims must NOT be discriminated against" idea. Such discrimination is against everything Western Democracy (and human decency) stand for. I am still disturbed by Islam as a political and social ideology dictating how others should submit to the "true believers". I guess I just don't go to extremes in either direction. Some social visions are dangerous. All that said, I will now follow my own advice of keeping politics off HN! Peace!