I apologize. I thought the discussion was focused on American Muslims since that was who the President was defending. I didn't realize that you were taking the discussion in another direction.
In these countries, I do not see them rising up for either side. I see them rising up where they are the majority, which happens to be the countries that have political agendas against the west.
And in those countries where they are the majority? How are the minorities treated? How about in those countries where they form a substantial minority, e.g., Israel and India? How do they act there?
The unmistakable conclusion, is that those in the western countries that you want to rise up, are doing nothing.
I'm glad we agree on this much.
For whatever reason. Not that they do or do not want to denounce.
Interesting. They seem to have no trouble denouncing what they want to. Yet you do not see the need to address the issue that they denounce only when their ox is gored... You know, when Baruch Goldstein killed some Arabs almost a decade ago, Jews all over the world rose up to denounce the act...even before they knew the facts of the case. In fact, the facts were irrelevant. The Arabs also denounced it. Yet, it is evidently part of their culture NOT to denounce violence committed by Muslims against others. You can choose to morally equate all cultures, but consider it bigoted for others to question that perspective. Is that correct?
Why do you feel it is necessary for others of different cultures/beliefs to act the way you want them to?
I don't feel it is "necessary", however I do feel that if your culture is murderous then it is a deliberate falsehood for anyone to declare otherwise. I don't accept the blanket statement that they are "peace-loving" when their co-religionists both in this country and others are committing violence, and they say and do nothing to counteract the image that their "brothers" are creating for them.
Perhaps it's not in the make-up of the majority of Muslims to act the way you think they should.
And perhaps it is the make-up of the majority of Muslims to be murderers....both of others and of themselves. There are sufficient historical examples of both. Now, I try very hard not to think that Muslims should act that way simply because I think they shouldn't. I really wish Muslims weren't murdering people all over the world because it's wrong. I stand up publicly and say it is wrong because that is what I believe. And if an American murders a Muslim, then I stand up and denounce that as well. Muslims can act however they want. But if they only denounce violence when it is committed against them but fail to denounce other Muslims committing violence , then I don't think it's bigoted or narrow minded to question when other non-Muslims vouch for their "morality".
I don't think it is valid to infer anything out of silence, other than it is silence, or to form assumptions out of the absence of something.
Agreed. So why make the assumption or inference that they are peace-loving?
The proof I see of some Muslims being 'peace loving', are the ones that are not committing terrorist acts.
Ah, so only the ones who commit terrorist acts are not "peace-loving". How about those who provide them logistical, material, financial or emotional support? Are they "peace-loving"? Do you know who these people are? How do you know? You are giving the majority the benefit of the doubt.
Of course, not all Germans were Nazis. But the Holocaust still occurred. It began in Germany and Austria and spread throughout Europe. There were many who cooperated with the Nazis. But not everyone. Some even fought the Nazis. The Muslims, of course, are not Germans or Nazis. At least some Germans fought/protested against the Nazis. We do not see a similar pattern with the Muslims.
You are correct in that I prefer to think the best of people, and you are the first person who has ever thought I was politically correct.
I did not say I thought you were politically correct. Your statement, however, was. If we are going to discuss this politely, I would appreciate it if you would be accurate. You are free to think the best of people without my classifying you as a Pollyanna. No doubt, you have some rationl or factual basis on which to base this perspective. Although you may find this impossible to believe, I do NOT think the best of people. My perspective is colored by historical and current facts, e.g., the number of people who are slaughtered in various places around the world. Recognizing the perpetrators of these heinous crimes as being members of a certain faith, and questioning the "peace-loving" nature of their co-religionists who are silent in the face of these crimes may make me a "narrow-minded bigot" in your opinion, but it will adversely impact the wonderful rapport we seem to have.
I have always voted repub, and I consider myself conservative in most things. What I try not to be is narrow-mindedly bigoted, like I see so much of throughout the world, regardless of race or creed.
Congratulations. If you are referring to me, please have the honesty to say so. I don't believe asking questions based on the conduct of "some" members of a particular faith, a faith whose major religious book demands its followers exterminate "Infidels", is being "narrow-minded" or bigoted. However, perhaps you do.