Islamophobia in Canada

[dialamah]

You might as well shout down a black hole as try to have a civilized, focused debate with people who cannot tolerate any view that they don't agree with.

They act like ISIS, insisting everyone 'convert' to their way of thinking or else shut the hell up!

I don't understand how you can say this. Are people being reasonable when they claim that pedophilia is a 'tradition' in Muslim, based on a custom that was practiced not just by Muslims, but all the world 700 years ago? Or that pedophilia wasn't a problem among Catholic clergy even within the last 50 years? Or that Christian-based religions don't still marry young girls to very old men - right here in beautiful BC! Or that "FGM" isn't done by Christians or Jews, as well as Muslims - despite the provable fact that it was and still is, in some more rural areas? There is this claim that somehow Christianity has moved beyond all that, and any time it's pointed out how untrue that is around the world, the response is "They aren't really Christians, because that's not what Christianity teaches".

At the same time, try to point out that the extremes of Daesh, or even Saudi are a pretty small minority of all Muslims worldwide, and that is completely disregarded - instead, we have non-Muslims proclaim their 'expertise' on the Koran because they've read it and insist that these horrifically extreme practices are "requirements" of Islam. Why are the true experts of Islam "wrong" when they say that the extremes are not part of Islam while a conservative (christian) white guy from a Western country insists he's right? That makes no sense, yet it gets repeated over and over and over. Who, exactly, can't even contemplate another point of view?

Muslims are people, first and foremost. Just as are Christians. Most people, Muslim or Christian, are quite happy to let other people live however they want, believe what they want.

Some people, Muslim or Christian, would like everyone to believe exactly as they do - and they take steps to make that happen. Sometimes the steps are relatively mild - JW or Mormons going from door-to-door, Muslims talking to non-believers about Islam.

Sometimes, they become a little more determined - like the guys who've attacked Muslim women in Canada, or people in Cairo pushing and shoving women who don't have their hair covered. One side is 'Christian', the other side is Islam - but both of them are expressing their absolute disdain for someone who believes differently than they do.

Violence comes next: An American man shooting up a Planned Parenthood office, and killing two people because abortions aren't "Christian"; a Muslim man raping a woman because "She's not Muslim".

And the extremism continues - Boko Haram on the Muslim side, killing, kidnapping, raping and enslaving; the Lord's Resistance Army on the Christian side, using the bible to support their kidnapping, killing, raping and enslaving.

Islam is not worse than Christianity. It's true Muslims are conservative, and most of them are no more or less conservative than Christians. We in Canada have laws against extreme actions such as rape, murder, enslavement, whether committed by a Muslim, Christian or someone who claims no religion.

In Canada, there are Christians who are just as interested in eliminating the rights of homosexuals or banning abortions as are Muslims, who like to blame women who dress skimpily for getting raped - these 'conservative' things that you don't like with Islam, but seem ok to accept from Christians. In Canada, it's really hard for a woman to prove she's been sexually assaulted, something like 97% of cases tried result in the man being acquitted. Yet, we think we're so much better than Islam because Islam requires the testimony of two women, but only the testimony of one man. Different practice, same outcome: women's words are 'lesser' than men's words.

You know, 30% of men say if they thought they'd not get caught, they'd rape. Around 10% of all men have forced a woman to have sex, even if it's something as mild as 'date rape'. Those statistics have inspired some women to accuse all men of being rapists, and men really resent this, and rightly so. They point out that MOST men don't rape - and it's true, most men don't and all men should not be defined by the actions of the minority.

You, and some others here, want to do the same thing to Muslims: use the minority to define the majority. It's not this side of the debate who is lacking in the ability to hold a civilized discussion, in my opinion, its the side who rejects fact, makes assumptions and blames an entire group of people for the actions of a few. This inability to see people as 'individuals', but instead define them as a 'group' is what makes things like genocide or holocausts and holy wars possible - instead of seeing people as individuals, they see a Jew or a Rwandan, or a 'non-believer' or a Muslim. Anything will suffice to make them different enough to 'attack'.

Edited November 28, 2015 by dialamah

[Argus]

I would hardly call the pope a lower level clergy, but I understand you want to do everything to protect your church.

I'm sorry that you find my explaining history gets in the way of your painfully strained narrative excusing Islamic violence.

[Argus]

You mean like Israel ? Look, nobody is stopping you from feeling superior to other people, but I have to point out that pride is a sin. My point stands...

You think the ability to exercise judgement is nothing but pride?

[Argus]

The exterminations were done at the hands of Catholics, high level ones at that. Navel gaze all you like but that is where the rubber hits the road.

They were done by Germans and their puppet government. That some of them happened to be Catholic is irrelevant. None of it was done at the behest of or sanctioned by the Catholic Church. Quite the contrary, in fact.

[On Guard for Thee]

I'm sorry that you find my explaining history gets in the way of your painfully strained narrative excusing Islamic violence.

Unfortunately your explanation is rather slanted.

[Argus]

Many high ranking Nazis were helped out of the country to SA after the war. Many through the Vatican. When they weren't running their own extermination camps, they were colluding and aiding others who did. There's more rubber hitting the road.

For some reason you don't like Catholics. That's fine. But you don't get to simply make up history because it appeals to your prejudice.

[Argus]

Unfortunately your explanation is rather slanted.

Towards historical fact, yes.

Again, sorry I don't hate Catholics like you do.

[On Guard for Thee]

For some reason you don't like Catholics. That's fine. But you don't get to simply make up history because it appeals to your prejudice.

I have nothing against Catholics, I'm not fond of any religion, but trying to deny what atrocities were born out of religion, whatever flavor, is to ignore facts, and in this case, it seems to be simply to tar a certain one that you don't happen to like.

[Guest]

I don't understand how you can say this. Are people being reasonable when they claim that pedophilia is a 'tradition' in Muslim, based on a custom that was practiced not just by Muslims, but all the world 700 years ago? Or that pedophilia wasn't a problem among Catholic clergy even within the last 50 years? Or that Christian-based religions don't still marry young girls to very old men - right here in beautiful BC! Or that "FGM" isn't done by Christians or Jews, as well as Muslims - despite the provable fact that it was and still is, in some more rural areas? There is this claim that somehow Christianity has moved beyond all that, and any time it's pointed out how untrue that is around the world, the response is "They aren't really Christians, because that's not what Christianity teaches".

I don't remember seeing any of this. Only someone with their heads in the sand would say that pedophilia hasn't been a problem among Roman Catholic clergy in the last 50 years. Same with FGM being cultural. It so happens it's more common among those cultures that have Islam as the predominant religion, but I'm certainly okay with calling FGM a barbaric "cultural" practice, and looking down on those cultures that practice it.

I've never heard anyone say this: "They aren't really Christians, because that's not what Christianity teaches". about an act that was inspired by Christian doctrine, unless those who said it were trying to excuse the religion in the same manner as many try to do for Islam. Still utter BS, regardless of the religion.

At the same time, try to point out that the extremes of Daesh, or even Saudi are a pretty small minority of all Muslims worldwide, and that is completely disregarded - instead, we have non-Muslims proclaim their 'expertise' on the Koran because they've read it and insist that these horrifically extreme practices are "requirements" of Islam. Why are the true experts of Islam "wrong" when they say that the extremes are not part of Islam while a conservative (christian) white guy from a Western country insists he's right? That makes no sense, yet it gets repeated over and over and over. Who, exactly, can't even contemplate another point of view?

No it's not. Everyone gets that. I've never heard it said that ISIS represent the majority of Muslims. And, it's not the conservative (christian) white guy from a Western country that says it's Islam. It's the Muslims who self identify who say it's Islam. They would know, being Islamic and all.

Sometimes, they become a little more determined - like the guys who've attacked Muslim women in Canada, or people in Cairo pushing and shoving women who don't have their hair covered. One side is 'Christian', the other side is Islam - but both of them are expressing their absolute disdain for someone who believes differently than they do.

Violence comes next: An American man shooting up a Planned Parenthood office, and killing two people because abortions aren't "Christian"; a Muslim man raping a woman because "She's not Muslim".

And the extremism continues - Boko Haram on the Muslim side, killing, kidnapping, raping and enslaving; the Lord's Resistance Army on the Christian side, using the bible to support their kidnapping, killing, raping and enslaving.

Sure, but do we consider numbers or ignore them? Is it just, the act exists on both sides, so both sides are equally bad?

Islam is not worse than Christianity. It's true Muslims are conservative, and most of them are no more or less conservative than Christians. We in Canada have laws against extreme actions such as rape, murder, enslavement, whether committed by a Muslim, Christian or someone who claims no religion.

Islam is not worse that Christianity because both are abstracts until Humans make them real. There are far more rotten Muslims in the world today that there are rotten Christians, though. Would you say that statement is innaccurate?

In Canada, there are Christians who are just as interested in eliminating the rights of homosexuals or banning abortions as are Muslims, who like to blame women who dress skimpily for getting raped - these 'conservative' things that you don't like with Islam, but seem ok to accept from Christians. In Canada, it's really hard for a woman to prove she's been sexually assaulted, something like 97% of cases tried result in the man being acquitted. Yet, we think we're so much better than Islam because Islam requires the testimony of two women, but only the testimony of one man. Different practice, same outcome: women's words are 'lesser' than men's words.

This is disingenuous. In Canada it's really hard for a woman to prove she's been sexually assaulted because in Canada we have the presumption of innocence. It is really hard to prove guilt when the only evidence are the words of the two people involved. If that means criminals get away with their crime that's a shame, but better than the alternative.

As to the restriction of the rights of homosexuals and those of access to abortion. Everyone has the right to their views. Act on them and it's against the law in Canada.

You know, 30% of men say if they thought they'd not get caught, they'd rape. Around 10% of all men have forced a woman to have sex, even if it's something as mild as 'date rape'. Those statistics have inspired some women to accuse all men of being rapists, and men really resent this, and rightly so. They point out that MOST men don't rape - and it's true, most men don't and all men should not be defined by the actions of the minority.

I don't think date rape is mild, and I don't believe the figures. But let's say they are true. I would be thoroughly disgusted to think that 30% of men think that rape is okay, even if that could be reasonably extrapolated from your post. What is your view of the Muslims who hold that their religion should provide the basis for law above any secular considerations? I don't know the percentage who do, but I would be willing to bet that it would be comparable, or greater.

You, and some others here, want to do the same thing to Muslims: use the minority to define the majority. It's not this side of the debate who is lacking in the ability to hold a civilized discussion, in my opinion, its the side who rejects fact, makes assumptions and blames an entire group of people for the actions of a few. This inability to see people as 'individuals', but instead define them as a 'group' is what makes things like genocide or holocausts and holy wars possible - instead of seeing people as individuals, they see a Jew or a Rwandan, or a 'non-believer' or a Muslim. Anything will suffice to make them different enough to 'attack'.

I don't want to speak for anyone else, but what I want to with Muslims is use the minority to define the minority. I want to be able to describe disgusting medieval attitudes without being told I am somehow referring to those who don't hold them. Why would I want to discuss those who don't? I might as well bring up Norwegians or New Zealanders. Who would want to argue about that?

Edited November 29, 2015 by bcsapper

[Argus]

I have nothing against Catholics, I'm not fond of any religion, but trying to deny what atrocities were born out of religion, whatever flavor, is to ignore facts, and in this case, it seems to be simply to tar a certain one that you don't happen to like.

You have presented precisely _zero_ evidence that the events you mention were inspired by religion, much less in the name of Catholicism, much less with the blessing of the Catholic Church. You are simply trying to dig out something - anything - to use as a shield to protect Islam from accusations regarding its inherent demonstrated, historical, and clearly consistent violence towards others.

[On Guard for Thee]

You have presented precisely _zero_ evidence that the events you mention were inspired by religion, much less in the name of Catholicism, much less with the blessing of the Catholic Church. You are simply trying to dig out something - anything - to use as a shield to protect Islam from accusations regarding its inherent demonstrated, historical, and clearly consistent violence towards others.

http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/yugoslavia_catholic_church.htm

[Argus]

http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/yugoslavia_catholic_church.htm

I don't know what kind of wierd site that is or what their agenda is. Their main complaint is against Archbishop Stepinac, calling him a 'nazi collaborator' of whom Wiki says.

During World War II, on 6 April 1941, Yugoslavia was invaded by Nazi Germany, who established the Ustaše-led NDH. As archbishop of the puppet state's capital, Stepinac had close associations with the Ustaše leaders during the Nazi occupation,[1] issued proclamations celebrating the NDH, and welcomed the Ustaše leaders.[2][Despite initially welcoming the Independent State of Croatia, Stepinac subsequently condemned the Nazi-aligned state's atrocities against Jews and Serbs.[3] He objected to the persecution of Jews and Nazi laws, helped Jews and others to escape and criticized Ustaše atrocities in front of Zagreb Cathedral in 1943.[4] Despite this, Stepinac never broke with the Ustaše regime and continued to attend public gatherings at their side.[5]

So it sounds to me like this guy did what he could in a very bad situation, in a country controlled by Nazi Germany and by German and Italian troops.

Your cite says the pope granted the new state 'defacto recognition', which is interesting since Wiki says he went there to gain recognition, but the pope refused.

Why you continue to push this little historical side note as if this can somehow defend Islam and it's tens of thousands of terrorist incidents against charges of violent religious intolerance is beyond me.

[On Guard for Thee]

I don't know what kind of wierd site that is or what their agenda is. Their main complaint is against Archbishop Stepinac, calling him a 'nazi collaborator' of whom Wiki says.

During World War II, on 6 April 1941, Yugoslavia was invaded by Nazi Germany, who established the Ustaše-led NDH. As archbishop of the puppet state's capital, Stepinac had close associations with the Ustaše leaders during the Nazi occupation,[1] issued proclamations celebrating the NDH, and welcomed the Ustaše leaders.[2][Despite initially welcoming the Independent State of Croatia, Stepinac subsequently condemned the Nazi-aligned state's atrocities against Jews and Serbs.[3] He objected to the persecution of Jews and Nazi laws, helped Jews and others to escape and criticized Ustaše atrocities in front of Zagreb Cathedral in 1943.[4] Despite this, Stepinac never broke with the Ustaše regime and continued to attend public gatherings at their side.[5]

So it sounds to me like this guy did what he could in a very bad situation, in a country controlled by Nazi Germany and by German and Italian troops.

Your cite says the pope granted the new state 'defacto recognition', which is interesting since Wiki says he went there to gain recognition, but the pope refused.

Why you continue to push this little historical side note as if this can somehow defend Islam and it's tens of thousands of terrorist incidents against charges of violent religious intolerance is beyond me.

Why you continue to attempt to continue to ignore it is beyond me. Well, actually, no it's quite understandable. It goes against what you would LIKE to believe.

Edited November 29, 2015 by On Guard for Thee

[notca]

I don't understand how you can say this. Are people being reasonable when they claim that pedophilia is a 'tradition' in Muslim, based on a custom that was practiced not just by Muslims, but all the world 700 years ago? Or that pedophilia wasn't a problem among Catholic clergy even within the last 50 years? Or that Christian-based religions don't still marry young girls to very old men - right here in beautiful BC! Or that "FGM" isn't done by Christians or Jews, as well as Muslims - despite the provable fact that it was and still is, in some more rural areas? There is this claim that somehow Christianity has moved beyond all that, and any time it's pointed out how untrue that is around the world, the response is "They aren't really Christians, because that's not what Christianity teaches".

At the same time, try to point out that the extremes of Daesh, or even Saudi are a pretty small minority of all Muslims worldwide, and that is completely disregarded - instead, we have non-Muslims proclaim their 'expertise' on the Koran because they've read it and insist that these horrifically extreme practices are "requirements" of Islam. Why are the true experts of Islam "wrong" when they say that the extremes are not part of Islam while a conservative (christian) white guy from a Western country insists he's right? That makes no sense, yet it gets repeated over and over and over. Who, exactly, can't even contemplate another point of view?

Muslims are people, first and foremost. Just as are Christians. Most people, Muslim or Christian, are quite happy to let other people live however they want, believe what they want.

Some people, Muslim or Christian, would like everyone to believe exactly as they do - and they take steps to make that happen. Sometimes the steps are relatively mild - JW or Mormons going from door-to-door, Muslims talking to non-believers about Islam.

Sometimes, they become a little more determined - like the guys who've attacked Muslim women in Canada, or people in Cairo pushing and shoving women who don't have their hair covered. One side is 'Christian', the other side is Islam - but both of them are expressing their absolute disdain for someone who believes differently than they do.

Violence comes next: An American man shooting up a Planned Parenthood office, and killing two people because abortions aren't "Christian"; a Muslim man raping a woman because "She's not Muslim".

And the extremism continues - Boko Haram on the Muslim side, killing, kidnapping, raping and enslaving; the Lord's Resistance Army on the Christian side, using the bible to support their kidnapping, killing, raping and enslaving.

Islam is not worse than Christianity. It's true Muslims are conservative, and most of them are no more or less conservative than Christians. We in Canada have laws against extreme actions such as rape, murder, enslavement, whether committed by a Muslim, Christian or someone who claims no religion.

In Canada, there are Christians who are just as interested in eliminating the rights of homosexuals or banning abortions as are Muslims, who like to blame women who dress skimpily for getting raped - these 'conservative' things that you don't like with Islam, but seem ok to accept from Christians. In Canada, it's really hard for a woman to prove she's been sexually assaulted, something like 97% of cases tried result in the man being acquitted. Yet, we think we're so much better than Islam because Islam requires the testimony of two women, but only the testimony of one man. Different practice, same outcome: women's words are 'lesser' than men's words.

You know, 30% of men say if they thought they'd not get caught, they'd rape. Around 10% of all men have forced a woman to have sex, even if it's something as mild as 'date rape'. Those statistics have inspired some women to accuse all men of being rapists, and men really resent this, and rightly so. They point out that MOST men don't rape - and it's true, most men don't and all men should not be defined by the actions of the minority.

You, and some others here, want to do the same thing to Muslims: use the minority to define the majority. It's not this side of the debate who is lacking in the ability to hold a civilized discussion, in my opinion, its the side who rejects fact, makes assumptions and blames an entire group of people for the actions of a few. This inability to see people as 'individuals', but instead define them as a 'group' is what makes things like genocide or holocausts and holy wars possible - instead of seeing people as individuals, they see a Jew or a Rwandan, or a 'non-believer' or a Muslim. Anything will suffice to make them different enough to 'attack'.

Many points you make are not relevant to the Muslim situation.

You seem to be saying that because Christians were savages centuries ago it is alright for Muslims to be savages now.

You say that there are Christians in our society who oppose gay marriage. Yes but they aren't killing them, are they?

Radicals of religions other than Muslims complain and oppose but they do not go outside the law over it.

The shooter in Colorado is a crazy person. We have crazy persons here who do these things, not a whole nation of them.

You talk about rapes committed here in this country. Again, it is against the law and punishable when the perpetrator is caught. In Muslim culture it is fine to rape. Women are not worthy of respect or protection.

People are not singling Muslims out from every other religion. They are simply noting the Muslim culture that is not compatible with our society and which they refuse to abandon in accordance with our laws. It is more likely this refusal to compromise and assimilate that makes things like the holocaust and genocide possible.

I do not hate Muslims. If they want to be Muslims that is their business - in their own countries. I just don't see how they will be good for Canada as long as they continue to bring their religion and their culture here. I love our laws and our freedoms and any influence that opposes those laws and freedoms is not something I will welcome.

You think we are ignorant and intolerant? We have researched, at least I have and I have found that throughout history Muslims have been troublemakers everywhere they go. Have you read any of the books written by Muslims who have immigrated to western countries and told of their lives under Islamic law? Those people are not lying. You don't see books published by Canadians who emigrate and write about how cruel and barbaric Canada is. People don't make up things like that.

So don't preach at me about 'facts'. Take a look at the facts yourself.

[Hal 9000]

Since I disagree with Dialamah on many things I am th frst to support him when I can as well and I concur with his comments on FGM.

Here is the point. No religion has a monopoly on righteousness. The issue somee of us have on this post is that certain people have no problem with criticizing Judaism or Christianity but if its done with Islam, then an donly then the politically correct try shut it down using words like Islamaphobia which to me is nothing more than a device used to censor freedom of speech to criticize.

Any religion is capable of being criticized. Save your b.s. Muslim card for someone else if you want to try shut me up for criticizing Islamic extremism or many of its doctrine.

Do not patronize me and do not attempt to label me. I am no more a Christianaphobe or a Jewaphobe then I am an Islamaphobe.

I criticize them all with the same standards. I only can speak for myself.

If someone has the integrity to go find one thread from me where I said I hated all Muslims, just one, I will apologize.

Good luck finding it.

I'm pretty sure Dialamah is a woman.

[drummindiver]

I have nothing against Catholics, I'm not fond of any religion, but trying to deny what atrocities were born out of religion, whatever flavor, is to ignore facts, and in this case, it seems to be simply to tar a certain one that you don't happen to like.

Yes atrocities are born out of religion.

The only religion involved in the holocaust is Judaism. On the receiving end, of course.

The fact that members of some religious parties partook does not mean they did it in the name of their respective religions. They did it cause they were assholes.

[Bob Macadoo]

Yes atrocities are born out of religion.

....

The fact that members of some religious parties partook does not mean they did it in the name of their respective religions. They did it cause they were assholes.

Things that make you go......hmmmm.

[drummindiver]

Things that make you go......hmmmm.

You comment makes me go...hmmmmm

Are you suggesting, like OGFT, the holocaust was done in the name of Catholicism?

Edited November 29, 2015 by drummindiver

[Bob Macadoo]

You comment makes me go...hmmmmm

Are you suggesting, like OGFT, the holocaust was done in the name of Catholicism?

No....could care less if slavic clerics were killing in the name of Jesus or not.....I just enjoyed your statement as it is apropos today even though you tried to use it solely for historical events.

[drummindiver]

lol

If you are referring to Islam, you are incorrect.

They are committing atrocities in the name of religion. Well, that's not totally accurate, is it? Islam is an ideology.

Allahu Ahkbar and all. PBUH.

Or was your reference against Israel's struggle.

Figure they're fighting for survival for religious reasons?

Sorry, your comment is very digressory.

[Bob Macadoo]

lol

If you are referring to Islam, you are incorrect.

They are committing atrocities in the name of religion. Well, that's not totally accurate, is it? Islam is an ideology.

Allahu Ahkbar and all. PBUH.

Or was your reference against Israel's struggle.

Figure they're fighting for survival for religious reasons?

Sorry, your comment is very digressory.

All of the above.

So you are saying that if parishioners say "Praise Jesus" when cooking people in ovens it's religious genocide but if an imam puts a bullet in the back of infidels without making a sermon he's just an a-hole? Interesting.

[drummindiver]

All of the above.

So you are saying that if parishioners say "Praise Jesus" when cooking people in ovens it's religious genocide but if an imam puts a bullet in the back of infidels without making a sermon he's just an a-hole? Interesting.

I'm not saying that at all. Please quote me ? You make bigger leaps than Superman over tall buildings.

If your argument though is that Muslims' are not waging jihad in the name of their ideology, then why are they waging it?

Conversely, if you believe the Nazis perpetuated the holocaust on some misguided mission from god, do you have anything to substantiate that?

[Army Guy]

At the same time, try to point out that the extremes of Daesh, or even Saudi are a pretty small minority of all Muslims worldwide, and that is completely disregarded - instead, we have non-Muslims proclaim their 'expertise' on the Koran because they've read it and insist that these horrifically extreme practices are "requirements" of Islam. Why are the true experts of Islam "wrong" when they say that the extremes are not part of Islam while a conservative (christian) white guy from a Western country insists he's right? That makes no sense, yet it gets repeated over and over and over. Who, exactly, can't even contemplate another point of view?

Here is an example of a EX muslim women, speaking out again'st Islam....Her name is Wafa Sultan, she is a Psychiatrist and ex Syrian....and the Author of a God that hates...

If you look there are many of other ex muslims speaking out on the topic of Islam....none of them white guys, all have studied Islam for many years....Is she preaching hate or discourse, not in my opinion , but then again i'm white....and a non muslim...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XUHXu0gC4s

[jacee]

If your argument though is that Muslims' are not waging jihad in the name of their ideology, then why are they waging it?

"Muslims" in general are not "waging jihad" at all.

They are living their lives, raising their families, praying and leading normal lives in their communities, just like Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists and agnostics.

Suicidal/homicidal extremist terrorists are waging war, mostly on peaceful mainstream Muslims who want nothing to do with such criminal extremism.

Criminal extremism and violence has nothing to do with religion.

Anybody can yell "Allahu akbar" "God is great" "Jesus is lord" "Jesus saves" "Nonbelievers must die" "Peanut butter is god's gift" "All hail the jelly bean" "I am the hand of god" or any other crazy thing, while murdering and committing heinous crimes.

It's a reflection of their mentally warped state of mind.

It is not a religious act.

Their demented crimes have nothing to do with all Muslims, all Christians or all peanut butter and jelly bean lovers.

.

Edited November 29, 2015 by jacee

[Argus]

Why you continue to attempt to continue to ignore it is beyond me. Well, actually, no it's quite understandable. It goes against what you would LIKE to believe.

I got no horse in this race. I'm simply looking at neutral sites which completely contradict what seems to be some sort of extremist site you've cited.